Internal Document
Aronlight v3 — Pricing + Strategy Discussion
For Giuseppe + Raffaello only. Companion to Aronlight_AI_Proposal_v3.html
Product
What We Are Building
Two AI-powered workflow modules, both connected to Aronlight's Odoo ERP via a single integration built once and shared between them.
Current problem
Back-office / commercial team handles ~700 proposals/week manually: look up product in Odoo, copy pricing, format reply, send. ~120 requests/day. No automation, no review queue.
❓ OPEN — VERIFY WITH MANEL How does a request arrive today? We know distributors send requests and back-office generates proposals. But we don't know: does the distributor message back-office directly (WhatsApp → back-office)? Or does a salesperson receive it first and then ask back-office to generate the proposal? This changes who the user of A2 is and how the handoff is designed. Call notes say "Manual, likely Odoo" — no detail confirmed. Ask: "Walk me through one request from a distributor today, step by step."
What it does
Receives distributor product requests via a messaging channel, matches to Odoo catalogue, generates and sends a formatted proposal automatically. Complex cases route to back-office with a pre-filled draft.
Input channel
TBD with Manel — WhatsApp, Telegram, or another channel they already use. We are channel-agnostic. For Phase 1 fallback: back-office can paste requests manually into a simple form (no channel integration needed to demo the core logic).
Output
Auto-sent proposal OR pre-filled draft for back-office review
Odoo connector
❓ OPEN QUESTION Do we need the full Odoo API connector for the MVP, or can we start with a CSV export? The MVP could work with Manel exporting the catalogue as a weekly CSV file — no API access, no IT dependency, faster to ship. The full REST connector is needed for real-time pricing and eventually for A5 stock write-back. This is a delivery decision to confirm with Raffaello and Manel before we scope Phase 1. Also: Is Odoo at Aronlight already stable and configured enough for API access? Or is it still being rolled out / customised? If Odoo is not production-ready on their side, the API connector could block us regardless. See Architecture Decision section.
Complexity
Medium (6–8 weeks production)
Repeatability
MEDIUM — meaning we see this same problem in 2–3 other clients in our current pipeline (MAGG: 3,000+ distributors; Eurostar: likely receives quote requests; AutoalDia: adjacent WhatsApp dynamic). Once the core architecture is built for Aronlight, the catalogue lookup engine and proposal template engine are reusable across future clients with minimal rework. This is why we can price it below a dev shop — we amortize the build.
Full product specs
To be built after scope confirmed. See module-registry.md > A2 for current definition.
Current problem
Returns managed via Excel + WhatsApp + phone calls. No system of record. No workflow. The person responsible just left — there is currently no owner. Each case risks being lost, delayed, or misrouted.
❓ OPEN — VERIFY WITH MANEL How many returns per week/month? The Excel (Global_Controlo_Incidencias.xlsx) tracks 100+ incidents since 2021 across Aronlight + Contera, but Contera is now out of scope. We don't know the Aronlight-only monthly average. This is essential for the value framing (urgency story vs volume story). Add to Manel call agenda.
What it does
Replaces Excel + WhatsApp + phone returns handling with a structured digital flow. Customer submits return via guided form. Back-office processes through defined 10-step workflow. All resolutions and stock movements tracked.
Input channel
Customer-facing web form (Phase 1 — simpler). WhatsApp intake could be Phase 2. TBD with Manel.
Output
Case management + resolution workflow + director dashboard
Odoo connector
Reuses the connector built for A2 — no second connector needed. However: A5 requires write-back to Odoo (stock movements for credit notes, resends, repairs). This means the full REST connector must be in place before A5 goes live. The static CSV workaround (Option 1) is NOT sufficient for A5 production. ❓ Confirm with Raffaello: how much of A5's write-back actually needs live API vs. can be deferred to Phase 2.
Complexity
Medium (5–7 weeks, connector reused from A2)
Source material
Manel provided: fluxo_devolucoes_rma_completo.pdf (7-step customer flow + 10-step back-office) + Global_Controlo_Incidencias.xlsx (current tracking spreadsheet)
Full product specs
To be built after scope confirmed. See module-registry.md > A5 for current definition.
Product specs gap: We have high-level definitions in the module registry but no full product spec documents for A2 (revised scope) or A5 yet. These should be built once scope is confirmed in the next call with Manel. Assign to: Raffaello (A5 — he has prior RMA experience) + Giuseppe (A2).
Architecture Decision
Odoo Connector — Must-Have or Workaround?
The full solution requires a live Odoo API integration for real-time catalogue lookup and stock movement write-back. But this is also the longest and riskiest part of Phase 1. Three options for getting to an MVP faster:
Fastest MVP
Option 1 — Static Catalogue Export (no API)
Manel exports catalogue + pricing from Odoo as a CSV/Excel weekly. Our system reads the file. No API needed. WhatsApp bot works against the static catalogue.
Gets to demo in: 2–3 weeks instead of 4–5.
Trade-off: Pricing and stock not real-time. Good enough for Phase 1 pilot. Upgrade to live API in Phase 2. Risk: if catalogue changes frequently, out-of-date proposals could be sent.
Middle Path
Option 2 — Odoo Webhook (event-driven, not full connector)
Configure Odoo to fire a webhook on new order / price update. Our system listens and updates its internal catalogue cache. Simpler than a full bidirectional connector.
Gets to demo in: 3–4 weeks. Still faster than full connector.
Trade-off: Write-back (needed for RMA stock movements) still requires full connector later. Fine for A2 alone, not sufficient for A5 in production.
Full Production
Option 3 — Full Odoo REST API Connector (original plan)
Full bidirectional integration. Real-time catalogue, pricing, stock. Supports both A2 and A5 (including RMA stock write-back). Built once, reused across all future Aronlight modules.
Gets to demo in: 4–6 weeks. Required for full A5 scope.
Trade-off: Longer upfront. Requires Odoo API documentation and IT cooperation. But this is the foundation — every future module runs on it.
Working assumption (not final): Start with Option 1 (static export) to get a working demo of A2 in front of Manel quickly. But this is TBD — the right path depends on answers to the questions below.
Open questions that determine the connector decision
Catalogue
How often does the Aronlight catalogue change? If pricing and products update daily, a static weekly CSV export will send incorrect proposals. If the catalogue is relatively stable (weekly or monthly updates), Option 1 is fine for the pilot.
Changes the trade-off of Option 1 significantly. Ask Manel: "How often do you add new products or change prices in Odoo?"
Odoo ready?
Is Odoo at Aronlight production-ready for an API integration? Is it fully live, stable, and configured? Or is it still being rolled out / customised? If their Odoo instance is in flux, an API connector is risky regardless of our preference.
If Odoo is not stable, Option 1 (CSV) is the only viable MVP path. If it's stable and IT is cooperative, Option 3 is faster long-term.
IT access
Who manages Odoo at Aronlight? Do we need IT to grant API access, or can Manel/back-office export the catalogue themselves? Is there a technical contact we can speak to directly?
API connector requires someone on their side to provide credentials and documentation. If there's no IT contact, Option 1 is the only path until one is identified.
Factor 1
Build Cost
Both modules are Medium complexity. Shared Odoo connector built once in A2 Phase 1. A5 reuses it, saving 2–3 weeks.
Rates: Partners (Giuseppe + Raffaello combined) = $200/h | Dev (LatAm standard) = $60/h
A2 — Automated Quote Generation
A2 Phase 1 — Odoo Connector + Channel Integration + Catalogue Lookup (3–4 weeks)
After Phase 1 the product can: Receive a distributor request on any confirmed channel, look it up in Odoo, and return a formatted proposal automatically. Back-office can approve/send. Basic volume tracking visible.
Optimistic
Partners 20h × $200 + Dev 60h × $60
$7,600
Realistic
Partners 25h × $200 + Dev 75h × $60
$9,500
A2 Phase 2 — Review Queue + Proposal Templates + Dashboard (3–4 weeks)
After Phase 2 the product can: Handle ambiguous requests by routing to a review queue with a pre-filled draft. Branded proposal templates per client. Director sees a volume dashboard (requests/day, auto-sent vs. reviewed, avg response time). The product is fully operational at this point.
Optimistic
Partners 25h × $200 + Dev 65h × $60
$8,900
Realistic
Partners 30h × $200 + Dev 80h × $60
$10,800
A5 — Returns Merchandise Authorization (RMA) — Connector reused from A2
A5 Phase 1 — Customer Intake + Back-Office Case Workflow (3–4 weeks)
After Phase 1 the product can: A customer submits a return via a simple web form (select order, reason, desired resolution). Back-office sees all open cases in a structured list, can approve/reject/assign. Cases no longer live in WhatsApp threads. Excel tracking replaced. Urgency gap filled.
Optimistic
Partners 20h × $200 + Dev 55h × $60
$7,300
Realistic
Partners 25h × $200 + Dev 70h × $60
$9,200
A5 Phase 2 — Resolution Workflows + Odoo Write-back + Director Dashboard (2–3 weeks — connector already live)
After Phase 2 the product can: Each resolved case automatically triggers the correct Odoo stock movement (credit note, resend, repair). Director sees live dashboard: open cases, resolution rate, cost per incident, complaint type breakdown. Carrier claims tracked and recoverable. Aronlight fully replaces Global_Controlo_Incidencias.xlsx.
Optimistic
Partners 20h × $200 + Dev 55h × $60
$7,300
Realistic
Partners 25h × $200 + Dev 70h × $60
$9,200
A2 build (optimistic)€14,200
A2 build (realistic)€17,500
A5 build (optimistic, connector reused)€12,600
A5 build (realistic)€15,900
Combined total (optimistic)€26,800
Combined total (realistic)€33,400
Team + Tooling
Who Builds This — Team Profile + Tools
Likely dev team composition
| Role | Count | Profile | Used for |
|---|
| Backend dev | 1 | Python (primary). FastAPI or Flask for API layer. REST API integration experience (Odoo a plus). LatAm or Eastern Europe for cost efficiency. | Odoo connector, message parser, catalogue lookup, quote engine, RMA workflow logic |
| Frontend dev | 1 | React or Vue. Can be the same person as backend if fullstack. Simple UI — back-office review queue and director dashboard are not complex. | Back-office review queue UI, director dashboard, customer-facing RMA intake form |
| Partner (Raffaello) | 0.5 | Scoping, client-side QA, A5 domain expertise (prior RMA experience). Not writing code. | A5 scoping call, back-office workflow design, testing against real cases |
| Partner (Giuseppe) | 0.5 | Client management, A2 architecture decisions, proposal templates, delivery coordination. | A2 logic design, channel integration decisions, Manel communication |
Could one fullstack dev handle both? Probably yes for the optimistic scenario. For the realistic scenario (more back-and-forth on Odoo connector, more UI iterations), two devs in parallel would compress the timeline significantly. Recommend: one primary backend dev + one frontend dev, both part-time if budget is tight.
Expected tools + stack
| Tool / Layer | What it does | Impact on time/cost |
|---|
| Python | Backend logic, Odoo API calls, message parsing, quote generation | Standard. Most LatAm devs know it. |
| Odoo REST API (or CSV fallback) | Catalogue data, pricing, stock levels, write-back for A5 | If API: 2–3 weeks to build. If CSV: 3–5 days. See connector decision section. |
| Claude API | NLP for parsing free-text product requests (e.g. "I need the 50W warm-white recessed light for outdoor"). Extracts intent and maps to SKUs. Also useful for summarising RMA case context. | Reduces dev time significantly. Without Claude: custom NLP logic = 2–3 extra weeks. With Claude: parsing layer = 2–3 days. Partners spend less time on edge-case logic. Recommend using Claude API for the message parser from day 1. |
| WhatsApp Business API (or Telegram / other) | Receiving and sending messages. Channel integration layer. | Adds 3–7 days depending on which channel and whether API access is already approved. WhatsApp Business API requires Meta approval (~1–2 weeks if not already active). |
| React / Vue (frontend) | Back-office review queue, director dashboard, RMA customer form | Standard. Could use a lightweight admin template to save 1–2 weeks of frontend work. |
| PostgreSQL / Supabase | Store cases, proposals, logs, audit trail | Simple. A few tables. Not a complexity driver. |
Claude API = lever on partner + dev time. Using Claude API for the message parsing layer (free-text → SKU extraction) removes the hardest NLP problem from our dev scope. This reduces both partner hours (less edge-case design) and dev hours (less custom logic). Rough estimate: saves 10–15 partner hours and 20–30 dev hours. At our rates: ~€2,800–4,300 in cost reduction, or equivalent as timeline compression. We should price this in as an API cost (~€45–175/mo depending on volume) and flag it to Manel as part of the infrastructure.
Factor 2
Client Value
A2 — Hidden labor cost (120 requests/day)
| Variable | Estimate | Source |
|---|
| Routine proposals/week | 600 | From discovery: 700 total, ~600 routine catalogue items. From v2 proposal + pain section. |
| Requests/day (catalogue) | 120/day | 600/week ÷ 5 working days. |
| Time per proposal | 15 min | Look up in Odoo, format, send. Catalogue-only = straightforward. |
| Total hours/day | 30h/day | 120 × 15min / 60. Requires 3–4 back-office staff full time. |
| Total hours/month | ~600h/mo | 30h/day × 20 working days |
| Back-office salary (Portugal) | ~€2,500/mo | Including employer taxes + benefits. Gross salary alone is ~€1,800–2,000 but total employer cost is ~€2,500. Verify with Raffaello. |
| Hourly cost | €15.60/h | €2,500 ÷ 160h |
| Hidden monthly labor cost | ~€9,375/mo | 600h × €15.60 |
| Hidden annual labor cost | ~€112,500/yr | ~€107,000/yr (conversion note: original €112,500 EUR base). Implied: ~3–4 FTEs at 100% dedication, OR 6–8 people spending ~50% of their time on proposals. ❓ Unconfirmed — ask Manel how many people generate proposals and roughly what % of their day it takes. |
ROI math (updated with corrected salary). At €107K/yr hidden cost and our price of ~€27.6K/yr: ROI = (€107K − €27.6K) / €27.6K = 2.9x. Comfortably above the 1.5x target. And this is only the labor cost side — revenue upside from faster proposals (avg order value unknown) could push this to 5x+.
Unconfirmed — revenue upside (ask Manel). Faster proposals = higher distributor conversion. Even a 3% uplift on 120 requests/day at an unknown average order value could be worth far more than labor savings. We need avg order value to calculate this. See "Questions to Ask Manel" section.
A5 — Returns Merchandise Authorization (RMA) value
| Value driver | Estimate | Note |
|---|
| Direct labor (RMA handling) | ~€2,600/yr | ~10 cases/mo × 90min × $15.60/h × 12. Low on its own — the urgency story is stronger than the volume story. |
| Business continuity premium | €12,900–17,200/yr | Replaces 0.25 FTE that just left. They need a system NOW regardless of volume. |
| Carrier claim recovery | ~€3,400/yr | If 20% of cases are carrier responsibility at avg €200 claim × 10 cases/mo × 12. Currently untracked. |
| Distributor relationship risk | €8,600–43,000/yr | 1–2 distributor relationships at risk if returns are mishandled. LTV of a mid-size distributor likely €10K–50K. Unquantifiable without data. |
A2 hidden labor cost (incl. employer taxes)~€107,000/yr
A5 combined value (conservative)~€19,000–23,300/yr
Combined client value (conservative)~€104,000–109,000/yr
ROI at Option B midpoint (€27.6K/yr)~2.9x (A2 only) — passes 1.5x target
If revenue upside confirmedPotentially 5x+ (depends on avg order value)
Our P&L
When Do We Break Even?
Prepay model: cash at signing = 6-month prepay (subscription for months 1–6, paid upfront at signature). Monthly subscription starts from month 7. Support cost runs from go-live.
Founder salary assumption (not in standard P&L): Partner hours during build ($200/hr) are factored into the build cost — that is the design partner rate. But we need to decide on a monthly draw:
— Months 0–6 (build + pilot): We pay ourselves nothing from this engagement. The prepay covers dev + partner time at project rates.
— Month 7+ (subscription running): We can start taking a modest draw. Proposal: €860–1,300/mo each (Giuseppe + Raffaello) from month 7. At €2,200/mo total draw, net margin from Option B realistic (€2,775/mo) drops to ~€600/mo until breakeven at month 11, then grows. Still positive from day one.
Adjust this assumption together before the signing conversation. The numbers below do NOT include founder draw — add €1,700–2,600/mo to cost out from month 7 if we pay ourselves.
Option B — Optimistic scenario (€2,375/mo, no founder draw)
| Period | Cash in | Cost out (total) | of which dev | of which partners | Cumulative |
|---|
| Month 0 (signing) | +€14,200 | — | | | -€12,600 |
| Months 1–6 (build + pilot) | — | €26,800 | €12,200 | €14,700 | -€12,600 (prepay covers it) |
| ↑ Prepay of $16.5K absorbed into $31.1K build. Gap = $14.6K carried forward. | |
| Month 7+ (subscription) | +€2,375/mo | €670/mo support | | | +€1,700/mo net |
| Breakeven | $14,600 ÷ $1,970 = ~7.4 months from month 7 | Month 14 from signing |
Option B — Realistic scenario (€3,450/mo, no founder draw)
| Period | Cash in | Cost out (total) | of which dev | of which partners | Cumulative |
|---|
| Month 0 (signing) | +€20,700 | — | | | -€12,700 |
| Months 1–6 (build + pilot) | — | €33,400 | €15,300 | €18,100 | -€12,700 (prepay covers it) |
| ↑ Prepay of $24K absorbed into $38.7K build. Gap = $14.7K carried forward. | |
| Month 7+ (subscription) | +€3,450/mo | €670/mo support | | | +€2,775/mo net |
| Breakeven | $14,700 ÷ $3,220 = ~4.6 months from month 7 | Month 11 from signing |
Year 1 net (realistic €3,450/mo, no draw)
+€8,500
€20,700 prepay at signing + 6mo × €2,775 net = €37,350 in - €33,400 build - €4,020 support = +€8,500 approx. With €2,200/mo draw from month 7: Year 1 ~+€4,300.
Year 2 net (realistic €3,450/mo, no draw)
+€33,300
12 × €2,775/mo net. With €2,200/mo draw: Year 2 net = +€7,500. Much better than previous pricing.
Bottom line: With revised Option B pricing (€2,375–3,450/mo), this engagement is no longer a Year 1 loss — at the high end it's a small positive even in Year 1. From month 7 we can start modest draws (~€600/mo net after draw at realistic). Real acceleration comes when the second client signs at €3,500–4,300/mo with zero extra build cost.
Factor 3
Replicability — Do Other Clients Have This Problem?
A2 — Quote Generation: other clients in our pipeline
| Client | Similar pain? | Stage |
|---|
| Aronlight | Confirmed — WhatsApp quote bot, 700 proposals/week | Active — this proposal |
| MAGG | Likely — 3,000+ distributors, must receive quote requests. Not yet confirmed on call. | Proposal sent |
| AutoalDia | Adjacent — A4 (WhatsApp lead capture) is not quote gen but same channel + same back-office dynamic | In progress |
| Lamosa | Different — A1 is about discount approval, not quote generation. Different workflow. | In progress |
| Eurostar | Possible — machinery distributor, likely gets quote requests. Not explored yet. | Pre-prop sent |
Mercura (YC W25, $2.1M raised) — are they building A2?
Yes, partially. Mercura automates inbound B2B quote requests (RFQ — Request for Quotation) for distributors, integrated with ERPs. This is the same workflow as A2 but from a SaaS product angle. Their raise validates the market.
How we differ: (1) We integrate directly with Aronlight's Odoo instance — Mercura is a standalone product that may or may not connect cleanly. (2) We add RMA (A5) which Mercura does not offer. (3) We are boutique — we configure for their exact workflow, not a generic template. (4) We are cheaper for a single company than a Mercura SaaS subscription at €26,000–86,000/yr.
Risk: If Manel finds Mercura before signing, he may compare. Our positioning: same outcome, better fit, plus the RMA gap which Mercura does not solve.
A5 — Returns Merchandise Authorization (RMA): other clients
| Client | Similar pain? | Stage |
|---|
| Aronlight | Confirmed — urgent, dedicated person just left | Active — this proposal |
| Eurostar | Adjacent — B4 (After-Sales Case Management) is similar but focused on machine repair cases, not product returns. Could evolve into RMA. | Pre-prop sent |
| MAGG | ❓ Not yet checked. 1,500+ SKUs, 3,000+ distributors — almost certainly has product returns. Nobody has asked. Raffaello: add to next MAGG call agenda. | Proposal sent |
| Lamosa / AutoalDia | Unlikely — different product/channel profile. Not a priority. | — |
Action for Raffaello — MAGG: Check whether A2 (quote automation) and A5 (RMA) are applicable to MAGG before their next call. They have 3,000+ distributors, a large catalogue, and a proposal already sent. If they have the same quote generation and returns problems, we should be building toward a reusable architecture that works for both Aronlight and MAGG from the start — not building Aronlight-specific code we'll have to rewrite.
A2 replicability ratingMEDIUM — 1 confirmed, 2–3 pipeline candidates, Mercura validates market
A5 replicability ratingMEDIUM — 1 confirmed (urgent), 2 pipeline adjacents, universal workflow
TogetherPotential "Distributor Ops Suite" product for mid-market distributors LatAm + EMEA
Outputs
Price Points — How We Got Here
Why is Option A (M1 only) not much cheaper than Option B (M1+M2)?
| Option A (M1 only) | Option B (M1+M2) | Difference |
|---|
| Monthly rate | €1,700–2,400 | €2,400–3,500 | €650–1,050/mo |
| Cash at signing = 6-month prepay | €10,200–14,400 | €14,400–21,000 | €3,900–6,200 |
| Annual ongoing | €20,400–28,800 | €28,800–42,000 | €7,800–12,400/yr |
The gap is intentionally narrow for two reasons:
- A5 reuses the Odoo connector — built for A2, costing only an incremental €12,600 (optimistic) instead of a full new module build. This lower incremental cost lets us price A5 as a small uplift, not a second full engagement.
- We want Option B to win — the RMA urgency is real (person just left), and both modules together make a much stronger reference case than one alone. Pricing Option B close to Option A removes the reason to delay.
Talking point for Raffaello: If Manel asks "why would I pay for RMA when Option A is almost the same price?" — the answer is: "The RMA system is cheaper to add now because we're already connecting to Odoo for Module 1. If you add it later as a standalone engagement, it costs significantly more. And you have a gap right now with no owner — every week that passes without a system is a risk."
Recommended ranges (what we sent to client)
| Option | Monthly | Cash at signing | Annual ongoing | Lead with? |
|---|
| A — M1 only | €1,700–2,400 | €10,200–14,400 | €20,400–28,800 | Fallback if B is rejected |
| B — M1+M2 | €2,400–3,500 | €14,400–21,000 | €28,800–42,000 | Lead with this |
| C — Module 1 + Fractional AI | Module 1 (Quote Bot) built and running, plus an ongoing fractional AI consulting layer: Giuseppe or Raffaello embedded 1–2 days/week to identify and map additional AI opportunities across Aronlight, run internal workshops, and guide the roadmap. Priced as Module 1 subscription + fractional retainer on top. TBD on structure. | If Manel wants a hands-on AI partner, not just a product |
What Manel sees — exact pricing cards in v3 proposal
Client-facing view (from Aronlight_AI_Proposal_v3.html)
Option A
Module 1 only (Quote Bot)
€1,700–2,400/mo
$12K–16.8K at signing (6-mo prepay)
Option B RECOMMENDED
Module 1 + Module 2 (Quote Bot + RMA)
€2,400–3,500/mo
$16.5K–24K at signing (6-mo prepay)
Option C
Module 1 + Fractional AI consulting
Let's talk
Module 1 built + ongoing AI consulting layer on top
Internal note (not visible to Manel): The range narrows after a 2h scoping session. Cash at signing = 6-month prepay, subscription continues monthly from month 7. Our floor on Option A = €10,200 at signing. Don't go below.
What Manel pays — now vs ongoing (make this clear on the call)
| Option A (M1 only) | Option B (M1+M2) — lead with |
|---|
| At signing | €10,200–14,400 | €14,400–21,000 |
| What this covers | 6 months of subscription, paid upfront. Covers the build period + first months of live use. No separate implementation fee. |
| From month 7 onward | €1,700–2,400/mo | €2,400–3,500/mo |
| What this covers | Ongoing subscription: support, maintenance, updates. Monthly, no lock-in beyond initial prepay commitment. |
| Year 1 total | €20,400–28,800 | €28,800–42,000 |
Sales Talking Points
Why Both Modules vs One — Arguments for Manel
This section is a sales pitch to Aronlight. These are talking points for the conversation with Manel — specifically for when he asks "why should I do both now instead of just Module 1 first?" Use these arguments. They are also true from our side (connector reuse, reference case) but the framing below is client-facing.
Five reasons why building A2 + A5 together is better for Aronlight than A2 alone — none of them revenue:
| # | Reason | Why it matters |
|---|
| 1 |
Shared Odoo connector |
Building A5 while the Odoo connector is fresh (team has context, API keys are set up, Aronlight IT is engaged) takes 4–5 days of integration instead of 2–3 weeks if we return 6 months later and start cold. |
| 2 |
One discovery process |
The scoping sessions with the back-office team cover both modules. Come back later and you pay for a second full discovery, re-establish the relationship with the team, and relearn the Odoo setup. |
| 3 |
Operational completeness |
Automating quote generation (A2) without handling returns (A5) is half the flow. When a quote leads to an order that leads to a return, that return falls back into manual chaos. The back-office experience is only improved end-to-end if both are running. |
| 4 |
Single team adoption |
Both modules affect the same back-office team. Training once, with both modules in scope, is less disruptive than two separate rollouts with different timelines. |
| 5 |
Reference value |
A client using A2 + A5 is a much stronger case study than A2 alone. "We automated their quote generation AND their returns management, on the same Odoo integration" is a full story. One module is a feature; two modules is a platform. |
Platform
Can We Resell These Modules?
Short answer: yes, and A2 in particular is one of the most resellable modules we have. A5 (RMA) is universally applicable but triggered by a crisis rather than ongoing pain, which affects pipeline velocity.
Together as a bundle"Distributor Ops Suite" — Quote Automation + Returns Management on one Odoo connector
Target segmentMid-market distributors, $10M–$500M, LatAm + EMEA, Odoo or SAP, WhatsApp-heavy sales
Pipeline candidates alreadyMAGG (A2 likely), Eurostar (A5 adjacent), AutoalDia (A2 adjacent)
Second client price€3,500–4,700/mo (market rate, no design partner discount)
Long-term goal: SaaS like Mercura. We are starting as a boutique implementation shop (one client, configured for their exact setup). But the ambition is to productize — turn A2 + A5 into a configurable SaaS that any distributor can activate without a full custom build. Mercura raised $2.1M doing exactly this for the inbound RFQ side. Our differentiation: Odoo-first, RMA included, LatAm/EMEA distribution segment. Every Aronlight build decision should ask: "Can this be made configurable for the next client, or are we hardcoding something Aronlight-specific?" Build for reuse from day one.
Strategy
Deal Strategy — Notes for Raffaello
Decisions made — and why
Lead with
Option B (bundle) — RMA urgency is real and the incremental cost is low. Two modules = stronger reference.
Entry point
€2,400–3,500/mo, €14.4K–21K upfront. Below market rate (design partner). Second client pays €3,500–4,300/mo.
Design partner trade
Lower price in exchange for: reference case, testimonial, feedback during build, case study. Must be made explicit to Manel.
Walk-away floor
€10,200 cash at signing (Option A floor). Below this we don't cover A2 build cost.
If price pushback
Don't discount silently. Four structures that work depending on what the objection is:
Structure 1 — Scope reduction (most likely). Start with Option A (A2 only, €10.2K–14.4K signing). Add A5 as a standalone expansion at month 4–6 once A2 is running. Trade-off: A5 costs more to add later because it's a separate engagement — say this clearly.
Structure 2 — Extended prepay, lower monthly. If the monthly rate feels high, offer: same cash at signing, but spread over 9 months instead of 6. Lower monthly = more comfortable. Same total cash — we just extend the commitment period.
Structure 3 — Milestone payments. If upfront cash is the issue: €6K at signing (demo working), €6K at pilot go-live (team using it), €6K at 60-day mark (confirmed value). No ongoing subscription until milestone 3. This is high-risk for us but signals strong confidence in delivery.
Structure 4 — Revenue share (if avg order value known). Take a lower fixed fee + a small % of measurable revenue uplift from faster proposals (e.g. 0.5% of monthly quote volume). Requires knowing their numbers — get avg order value first. Don't offer this unless he gives us a specific "I can't afford it" signal.
Floor: Never go below €10,200 cash at signing (Option A floor). Below this we don't cover A2 build cost.
A3 (spec matching)
Deferred by Manel. In the client proposal as Module 3 roadmap item. Revisit after A2 + A5 are running.
Contera
Out of scope. Manel confirmed. Do not bring up.
Raffaello on A5
He has prior RMA experience from a previous company. He should lead the scoping call for A5. This is a differentiator in the sales conversation.
Manel's signal
Personal relationship with Giuseppe. Price-checking before committing — not a budget objection. 🟡 Warm. Needs one more nudge to close.
Next Call Prep
Questions to Ask Manel
These are open. They affect pricing, scope, and the revenue upside argument. Prioritized by impact.
Revenue
What is the average order value for a catalogue quote? (e.g. avg invoice size for a routine distributor order)
Critical for revenue upside calculation. Could shift the ROI story from 2x to 10x+.
A2
Walk me through one request from a distributor, step by step. Who does the distributor contact first — a salesperson or back-office directly? What happens between the request arriving and the proposal being sent?
We don't know the current handoff. This determines who the user of A2 is (salesperson forwarding? or back-office receiving directly?) and how the system fits in.
A2
How often does the catalogue change? How frequently are new products added or prices updated in Odoo?
Determines whether a weekly CSV export is safe (stable catalogue) or whether we need real-time API access from day 1 (frequently changing catalogue).
A2
Is Odoo fully live and stable at Aronlight, or is it still being configured/rolled out? Is there a technical contact (IT or Odoo admin) we can speak with?
If Odoo is unstable or in rollout, the API connector path is blocked regardless. We need to know this before pricing the build.
A2
Are inbound requests structured product codes or free-text descriptions?
Structured codes = simpler parsing. Free-text = NLP layer needed, adds complexity and cost.
A2
How many SKUs are in the Odoo catalogue?
Affects catalogue lookup complexity and Phase 1 scope.
A2
What format does the proposal need to be in? WhatsApp reply, PDF, or Odoo document?
Affects template engine design. PDF = more work. WhatsApp reply = simpler.
A2
Is Odoo the single source for pricing, or is there a separate price list?
Affects integration design. Multiple sources = more complexity.
A5
How many RMA cases per week/month, Aronlight only? (The Excel tracks 100+ since 2021 but covers Aronlight + Contera combined. Contera is out of scope. What is the Aronlight-only volume?)
Low volume = urgency/continuity story. Higher volume = changes value framing to cost savings. Either way, we need the number.
A5
Who is taking ownership of RMA now that the previous person left?
Need a champion for A5 kickoff. Without a named owner on their side, scoping cannot start.
A5
Odoo stock movement write-back: do they need it in Phase 1, or can it be Phase 2?
Phase 1 write-back adds 1–2 weeks and requires full API connector from day one (no static export workaround).
A5
Customer intake: web form or WhatsApp bot?
WhatsApp intake adds complexity and cost to A5 Phase 1. Web form is simpler.
Budget
Is there a budget range in mind? (Ask softly if he hesitates on pricing)
If he gives a number below our floor, better to know now than after full proposal negotiation.
Actions
Open To-Dos — Before Next Call
Immediate (before Manel call)
Rafa
Confirm: does A5 (RMA) require the full REST connector for Phase 1, or can stock write-back be Phase 2 with a simpler intake flow first?
Affects whether we can demo A5 Phase 1 without the full connector. Changes timeline and risk.
Rafa
Check MAGG: do they have a quote generation problem (A2) and/or a returns problem (A5)? If yes, flag for shared architecture from the start.
If MAGG confirms both, we should build Aronlight with reusability in mind from day 1 — not Aronlight-specific code.
A2
Confirm with Manel: what messaging channel do their distributors use to send requests today?
Determines Phase 1 integration. If unclear, propose starting with Excel/form fallback and adding channel after demo.
Giuseppe
Decide on founder draw structure. Align with Raffaello before signing.
Go to P&L section ↓Affects real personal P&L from month 7 onward. Need agreement before committing to delivery timeline.
Medium-term (parallel to Aronlight build)
Giuseppe
Understand AdapttoAI product fit for AutoalDía (a.k.a. Aldea?). Confirm: is "Aldea" the same as AutoalDía? If yes: think through what A2 (quote bot for service requests) and A5 (returns / case management) would mean for their context. They have 300+ leads/month via WhatsApp + no CRM. What workflows overlap with the Aronlight scope?
Opens a potential second client conversation on the same modules. Could compress the time to the second deal significantly.
Both
Confirm with MAGG: are they going to use Returns Merchandise Authorization (A5)? Add to their next call agenda explicitly.
If MAGG confirms A5, it validates the module as a pipeline product, not just an Aronlight emergency fix.
A2
Get avg order value from Manel (catalogue routine order). Even a rough number unlocks the revenue upside calculation and can shift ROI from 2x to 5x+.
Most impactful question for the commercial case. If avg order is high, the revenue upside dwarfs the labor savings story.