Three vendor proposals. Each one 40 to 80 pages, formatted to make their product look perfect. One prompt normalizes them all, exposes hidden costs, and surfaces the questions they hoped you would not ask.
You receive three vendor proposals for a critical system. CRM, ERP, cloud migration, pick your poison. Each proposal is 40 to 80 pages, structured to make their product look like the obvious choice. You need to decide in two weeks.
Your team compares apples to oranges because every vendor structures their proposal differently. Vendor A leads with a 30-page feature list. Vendor B leads with case studies. Vendor C buries the implementation timeline in Appendix D. Key concerns get buried because that is where they belong from the vendor's perspective. The real cost sits behind "contact us for pricing" or is scattered across footnotes that nobody reads.
You end up choosing based on the best presentation, not the best fit. Three weeks later, the implementation cost you did not catch is now a contract clause you cannot escape.
A normalized comparison that strips away vendor formatting tricks, exposes hidden costs, and gives you 15 tough questions to ask before signing. Instead of spending 2 to 3 days reading proposals side by side, you get a structured evaluation in one afternoon.
Vendors deliberately structure proposals differently. Vendor A leads with features because features are their strength. Vendor B leads with case studies because their client list is impressive. Vendor C leads with pricing because it is their strongest point. Every structural choice is a sales decision, not a communication decision.
The prompt forces every vendor into the same grid. When you see all three side by side with identical row labels, the gaps become obvious. A vendor with 12 rows of feature detail but two lines on implementation support is telling you something. A vendor who mentions "enterprise-grade security" in three places but never names a specific certification is also telling you something.
The "Questions They Hope You Won't Ask" section exists because every proposal has strategic omissions. A vendor who does not mention their implementation failure rate probably has a bad one. A vendor who says "flexible pricing" without defining what triggers a price increase is leaving themselves room to surprise you after signing. The AI reads the gaps, not just the text, and turns them into questions you can take into your next call.
4 major vendor decisions per year × 2 days saved per evaluation = 8 days per year
Plus: you ask better questions, catch hidden costs before signing, and the losing vendors cannot blame a biased process because you used the same framework for everyone.
One trick per week. Five minutes to read. Zero cost to implement.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime. No spam, ever.