Arcvue
Pricing—banded on revenue, and all of it is switched on
Everything is on from the first day. What changes as you grow is which parts you reach for.
Price is banded on your annual revenue, and there are four bands. The platform is the same in all four—so growing into the next thing you need is a Tuesday, not a purchase order.
| Band | Annual revenue | What is included |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Under $15M | All of it |
| 2 | $15M to $50M | All of it |
| 3 | $50M to $100M | All of it |
| 4 | $100M and above | All of it |
Published. Read this one row by row—four alternatives, not components of a total. The band sets what you pay. It does not set what you get, which is why the third column says the same thing four times.
Arcvue LLC
Price is banded on your revenue, and there are four bands.
You already know which one you are in.
Arcvue prices on annual revenue. The boundaries are in Exhibit 1, so you can place your firm before you speak to anybody.
There are no editions. No feature you have to buy back later, no capability held behind an upgrade, and no per-seat charge—users are unlimited in every band. A twelve-million-dollar contractor and a two-hundred-million-dollar one run the same software. What differs is what it costs, and it costs less when the business is smaller.
Why revenue and not seats or modules. Seats punish the thing this platform is for—the right person seeing the right view—so charging for it would be charging for the recommendation. And modules make you predict today which parts of your own business will matter in three years. Revenue is the one number that already tracks how much the software is worth to you, and you do not have to forecast it to answer it.
A contractor does not need the same things at twelve million that it needs at a hundred and twenty.
The order is fairly predictable, and it is worth naming, because a growing GovCon firm usually discovers the next tool it needs at the worst possible moment—in the middle of a proposal, a diligence request, or a recompete.
| Where the business is | The question on the desk | What it reaches for |
|---|---|---|
| Under $15M. Set-aside work, a handful of contracts, the owner still close to every number | Am I making money on this contract, and can I make payroll next month? | Statements off the live ledger, contract forecasting, indirect rates, cash position |
| $15M to $50M. Bidding full and open, first recompetes that genuinely matter | We now have to win work we used to be handed. What do we have to price it at? | Proposal pricing, pipeline coverage, scenario planning, past performance |
| $50M to $100M. Competing on price against firms several times the size, and becoming interesting to buyers | Where are we structurally uncompetitive, and is the answer to fix it or to buy it? | Competitor and incumbent intelligence, rate benchmarking, deal evaluation, debt and covenant analysis |
| $100M and above. More than one legal entity, and usually more than one ERP behind them | What does the consolidated picture actually look like, and what does the next deal do to it? | Multi-entity consolidation, multi-deal evaluation, and the exhibits a buyer or a lender asks for |
Published. A description of when firms typically reach for these things. This is not an entitlement table and it is worth being blunt about that. Every capability named in all four rows is switched on in all four bands. The column says when a firm usually starts using something, never when it becomes available. Read this one row by row. Four stages, not components of a total.
Which is the point of pricing this way. The firm that crosses fifty million in the middle of a bid does not raise a purchase order to find out what its wrap rate looks like against the market—it opens the page. The capability was already there, on the same data, the whole time. The only thing that changes when you grow is the invoice.
All twenty-seven, in every band.
This is the whole inventory. There is no column to read across, because there is nothing to compare—every row below is on for every customer.
| Capability | Included |
|---|---|
| Financial visibility — 7 | |
| P&L and financial statements | ✓ |
| Cash flow statement | ✓ |
| Contract forecasting—five methods | ✓ |
| Indirect rate computation | ✓ |
| Contract waterfall | ✓ |
| Role-based reporting | ✓ |
| Multi-entity consolidation | ✓ |
| Analytics and modeling — 7 | |
| Scenario planning | ✓ |
| Covenant monitoring and stress testing | ✓ |
| Pipeline coverage analysis | ✓ |
| EBITDA adjustments tracking | ✓ |
| Debt financing analysis | ✓ |
| M&A deal evaluation | ✓ |
| Multi-deal M&A evaluation | ✓ |
| Pricing and intelligence — 8 | |
| Proposal pricing—six vehicle types | ✓ |
| Past performance management | ✓ |
| GSA CALC+ benchmarking | ✓ |
| Competitor intelligence and LCAT crosswalk | ✓ |
| Incumbent intelligence | ✓ |
| Bid history and win-rate analysis | ✓ |
| Pricing audit and attestation | ✓ |
| AI assistant | ✓ |
| Infrastructure — 5 | |
| Nightly ERP sync | ✓ |
| Dedicated database | ✓ |
| AES-256 encryption | ✓ |
| Multi-factor authentication | ✓ |
| Onboarding and implementation | ✓ |
Published. The capability inventory. Counted, not asserted. Seven, seven, eight and five is twenty-seven, which is the figure in the heading above. ERP connectors are a count rather than a tick and are therefore not a row here. There is no cap on them in any band—a holding company running two systems connects both, and the consolidation page explains why neither has to move.
Four things are in the smallest band because they should never be a line item.
A dedicated database, encryption at rest, multi-factor authentication, and the nightly sync are there for a twelve-million-dollar contractor on day one. None of them is an upgrade—and a vendor who sells single tenancy or MFA separately is telling you what the cheaper option does without, which is a thing worth knowing about any vendor.
Onboarding is included in every band, and so are users—unlimited, everywhere. Charging per seat on a platform whose entire argument is that the right person should see the right view would be charging for the thing being recommended.