Minoa vs spreadsheets & DIY

DIY works for one seller on one strategic deal. It breaks the moment you need customer collaboration, consistency across reps, CRM integration or organisational accountability. Minoa makes a quantified business case the default workflow in every deal, with the value data layer underneath it compounding across the org.

Only on the licence line. The real cost is RevOps, SE and manager time maintaining templates and repairing broken models, plus the deals lost because the case never got built. Across 4.2 million opportunities, Ebsta and Pavilion found 61% of lost deals were lost to indecision versus 14% to a named competitor.

The same six patterns, every time. A ChatGPT calculator that cannot be shared or iterated with the customer. A prototype the security team blocks. Excel to screenshot to PowerPoint. Twenty spreadsheets nobody reads. A calculator that cannot enforce adoption when value engineering touches only a quarter of deals. Internal tools that cannot keep up.

On a single strategic deal that justifies the manual effort, or when you are testing whether a quantified case changes the conversation at all. If you build one case a quarter, you do not need a value data layer to hold it.

Yes. Matched by deal size across roughly one million opportunities, $100k to $500k deals with a business case won 42% of the time versus 23% without. Above $500k it was 58% versus 26%. Across 818 closed deals, win rate rose from 39% with one buyer-side reader to 53% with two.

The models, yes. The workflow, no. Minoa is built to replace the spreadsheet as the place the case lives, because a static export cannot be co-edited by the buying group, cannot sync to the CRM, and cannot carry into the renewal. The calculation logic behind your spreadsheets is worth bringing across.