Real engagements, real outcomes. Details are anonymized to protect client confidentiality. The commercial situations and results are accurate.
An independent software vendor was evaluating two OEM products to embed in their platform. Both vendors could do the job technically. The procurement team had run the feature comparison and felt ready to choose, but had not yet engaged commercially with either vendor.
They brought Thomas in before any pricing conversations started. That timing turned out to matter considerably.
The core issue wasn't that the team lacked negotiating ability. It was that they had never been in a room where these deals were built from the vendor side, and didn't know which levers existed or how much each vendor was likely to move.
We restructured the vendor engagement as a competitive negotiation rather than parallel independent conversations. Each vendor was made aware, professionally and without manufacturing urgency, that they were in a competitive evaluation with a defined commercial decision timeline.
We prioritized three commercial terms based on the client's actual business trajectory: upfront minimum commit, escalator structure, and redistribution rights. We used each vendor's relative flexibility on these terms as leverage against the other's preferred position.
"We had two vendors that could both do the job. Thomas used that to our advantage, played them against each other and got us a lower upfront commitment and better long-term economics. That's the kind of thing you don't think to do on your own."CEO, Independent Software Vendor
A CFO at a B2B software company was looking at their upcoming OEM renewal. The number the vendor had sent over didn't feel right. Pricing had stepped up meaningfully since the original deal, but the internal team couldn't pinpoint why or how to push back. They had no prior experience negotiating the agreement and had signed the original deal largely as presented.
The renewal window was approaching. They needed a strategy quickly.
We audited the current agreement against the client's actual usage pattern and built a counter-position around three specific commercial points: resetting the minimum commit to actual deployment, restructuring per-user pricing to reflect their current scale, and negotiating growth room into the new term so future expansion wouldn't trigger a separate price escalation.
The vendor's initial position was treated as the opening of a negotiation rather than a done deal. The client's usage data was the leverage.
"I brought Thomas in because the renewal number felt off. It was. He came back with a restructured deal, better per-user pricing, room to grow, no surprises. Should have called him sooner."CFO, B2B Software Company
Most OEM procurement situations fall into one of a handful of patterns. The details differ. The commercial dynamics rarely do.