Ariba’s supplier fee model and the killer anomalies.

Ariba’s supplier fee model and the killer anomalies.

Posted by Pete Loughlin in AP Automation, e-invoicing 15 May 2013

I don’t write much about Ariba. We don’t say much about SAP or Oracle either. They’re old news and there isn’t much to say that hasn’t been said before. Besides, there are better analysts like Jason Busch who understand the intricacies of the functionality of procurement software to a much greater extent than I do. But there is one aspect about Ariba that really intrigues me and that’s their pricing model.

Unlike many other commentators, I don’t have an issue with Ariba’s supplier pricing model – in principle at least. There’s a price and there’s the value that’s added and you can’t look at one without the other. A high price is perfectly appropriate when there’s proportionate value added. But in my view, there’s something very wrong with the model that Ariba has chosen to adopt especially when you look at it as it relates to e-invoicing.

e-invoicing supplier pricing models

Purchasing Insight logoIn basic terms, there are three models for charging suppliers to join an e-invoicing network. First is the model that organizations like OB10 and Basware use. It’s a combination of a network membership subscription and a fixed transaction fee. Secondly, there’s the free to supplier model offered by companies like Tradeshift and Taulia. And then there’s the value based transaction fee model that Ariba use. Like OB10 and Basware, they charge suppliers to join the network but the transaction fees are based on the value of the invoices.

The value based fee model isn’t a new concept. It’s how purchasing card merchant fees are calculated and unlike merchant fees, the percentage that Ariba charges is very low. In addition to that, the charges are capped and for very low volumes of invoices, suppliers aren’t charged at all. You can get all of the details of the Ariba charges on their website here. It’s explained very clearly.

So if the percentage is low and charges capped and for many suppliers there’s no fees at all, what’s the problem? And why is it especially a problem for e-invoicing?

Here’s the thing. Transaction charges based on the value of the transaction are appropriate in a purchasing transaction because, generally, the margin made by a supplier is proportional to the size of the transaction. The supplier makes a 10% margin normally and a merchant fee of 1.5% brings that down to 8.5%. It’s a cost of course, but there’s value added in terms of convenience and immediacy of payment. It’s not like that with an invoice. The cost of issuing an invoice has nothing whatever to do with the numbers on it. It costs the same for a $1 invoice as it does for a $million invoice. There’s no logic to charging a percentage of the value.

But the percentage charges are very low and capped, so again, what’s the issue? To really see the issue with a value based supplier fee structure you have to see how the supplier fees impact the whole of the supply base and to illustrate it we’ve developed a value based supplier fee modeler.

Supplier Network Fee Modeler

Based on a very limited amount of information, supplier spend and number of invoices, the supplier network fee modeller makes some high level assumptions about how spend is distributed across the supplier base and calculates what the supplier costs might look like. Have a go. (For anyone wishing to model a real situation, there is an advanced option that makes no assumptions.)

This modeler is based on the structure that Ariba uses and also uses their current published pricing but it is a generic model intended only to give an indication of what the implications of a value based supplier fee model might be.

Get Adobe Flash player

Naturally, the results vary according to the supplier profile but the modeler is very useful in illustrating the stark reality of this type of model.

In a real life e-invoicing program, low volume suppliers are low priority. For the buyer there’s little process benefit to be had from them and the effort required to on-board them is inordinate. The real benefit comes from the high volume suppliers and these tend to be strategic. This model is fine if your strategic suppliers send you high volumes of low value invoices but if not, this supplier fee model could put you in a position of charging significant sums of money to your most important suppliers simply for the privilege of sending you an invoice.

Charging suppliers to send invoices to their customers is a feasible model. There is value added if only in terms of reduced stationery and mail cost but the value add is small and it’s fixed. A value based fee model may actually cost many suppliers no more than the alternative fixed transaction fee but the problem is not the total cost to suppliers, it’s the anomalies that it produces and for some organizations, these anomalies are a killer.

Important Disclaimer

The Supplier Network Fee Modeller attempts to be as accurate as possible based on information and content available via websites in the public domain, and the data provided is for information purposes only.  This site is provided by Purchasing Insight on an “as is” basis, and Purchasing Insight makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation of this site or the information, content, materials, or products included on this site. You expressly agree that your use of this site is at your sole risk and the results of the calculations are presented here for you to draw your own conclusions.  Purchasing Insight reserves the right to modify at any time without prior notice these statements and the information contained on the site.

  • interested observer... May 16, 2013 at 9:27 am /

    good article – i would argue that the cost/value trade-off for suppliers under their network fee model that you mention isn’t really a true and objective exercise, as users of the Ariba network are treated more like ‘prisoners’ of the network rather than ‘customers’ – view Ariba’s lack of interest in supporting the interoperability agreements that form the fundamental philosophy of fairness for most other leading networks (and in itself adds additional value re ensuring the reach of network users is maximised re buyer/supplier connectivity).. this is naked profiteering.. short term.. it may be working initially, but the momentum behind other networks who are already offering rapid and fairly priced solutions to immediately capture ALL invoices across an enterprise (rather than the limited number of indirect-spend-related PO-invoices that Ariba is able to claim) is proving that SAP have an issue that’s about to hit them.. i.e. how to move from naked profiteering to more balanced, competitive pricing models without killing the cash cow.. let’s see what happens..

  • Roger December 30, 2013 at 6:19 pm /

    Ariba is pretty sketchy. They just start charging you based on other companies placing orders for your product through them, even if you don’t have a hosted catalog, and nothing to do with invoicing efficiency (those are options as well). They then threaten to shut you off unless you pay the fee, even though it was the customer who is using them, not you.

  • mike peterson September 12, 2014 at 7:38 pm /

    One of our customers started using the Ariba Network to process their invoices. All invoices that we normally submit to them for payment of services we provide them now must go through this Ariba Network. As a result, we have to pay a quarterly fee to Ariba based on the dollar amount of these invoices for the privilege of being paid. If both our customer and our company are paying a fee to Ariba then this seems a bit unethical. Even though we have explained to Ariba that we are not a customer of theirs they say nothing can be done, you have to pay to get paid. Getting paid is another matter, that can take a very long time.

  • Mary Colston June 16, 2015 at 6:50 pm /

    When a customer of mine first forced me into using the Ariba Network to process their invoices, I really couldn’t believe what I was reading! I would NEVER ask a vendor of mine to PAY to invoice me. No matter how large my company becomes! This started 3 months ago. Ariba and my customer are having trouble with their “electronic coordination” so none of my invoices have been processed. I’ve been asked by Ariba to resubmit them, which I did. However, they charged me for BOTH sets of invoices and, of course, double the revenue! Ariba and my customer are still working on the problem, I’ve reverted to submitted my invoices through the previous method (thank goodness) but I still keep getting the outrageous bill from Ariba. Needless to say, it has not been paid. Ariba contents I DO owe for the original invoices and agree their invoice will need to be adjusted. I say, I don’t owe for any of it. I keep getting invoices from them with no adjustment. So goes the battle. I will NEVER recommend Ariba or any other company that operates like this. This is ridiculous!

  • John July 30, 2015 at 7:54 pm /

    Electronic invoicing is of clear benefit to the client who requests it. They are able to set the format to integrate with their internal accounting system. We submit e-invoices for several dozen clients who request it. The issue for us is that each client has their own required format and/or a different third party provider. The initial set-up is therefore somewhat painful but the ongoing submission is usually smooth. Our “normal” standard invoicing, where we control the output is still the best. Uniformity always wins out when you have a process.
    We have one large client who demand the use of Ariba – paying for the privilege of submitting e-invoices drives me up a wall (quarterly). One of our billing line items is a pass-thru of cost we incur on the client’s behalf. Taking a haircut on that is very frustrating. I’ve taken this up with Ariba to no avail.

  • Ed June 30, 2017 at 11:59 pm /

    TOTAL SCAM ARTISTS – Prisoner, not customer. SAP practices extortion & fraud, they should be wearing masks. These folks arbitrarily raised their, “Catalog Subscription” and later referred to as an “Integrated Package” fee from $495/yr. to $5,500/yr. An 11X or 1,000% hike for absolutely nothing in return. Plus they take a piece of every transaction on top of this ridiculous fee. This is criminal like Martin Shkreli, SAP needs charged with fraud and brought to trial. If we don’t pay, we lose our customer. That’s blackmail, we never asked for nor wanted a contract with Ariba, it was foisted on us.

  • Phil July 26, 2017 at 4:19 pm /

    As a supplier of goods we have been asked to participate in our customer’s request to order and invoice via Ariba. We are fully aware of the charges that will apply to us. Does anyone know what costs the customer has to pay as I can’t find this anywhere. It appears to me that the supplier bears all the costs and somehow Ariba have basically succeeded in persuading a load of companies they are essential as a middle man. I can’t use my works e-mail address for obvious reasons!

  • Tony Lowes November 6, 2017 at 5:38 pm /

    SAP Ariba sucks I mean really sucks. As a small business just trying to submit the information they require takes up an extraordinary amount of time. I have lost count of the times we have submitted the forms for us to get an error message stating “we are sorry a system error occurred”. We are a small company with a unique product offering that one of our customers who uses SAP Ariba cannot now purchase. The customer loses, we the supplier loses. A lose lose situation that once was a win win situation. SAP Ariba what a nightmare!. If we ever do manage to get registered we will charge any customer using SAP Ariba a 10% premium on our normal costs just for the pleasure of using this purchasing method.

  • Alice Boee March 28, 2018 at 7:59 pm /

    Ariba is right up there with ISNETWORLD. SAP= Stops ALL Production. If you really want to screw up your suppliers, force them to do business with Ariba.
    I would urge ANY and ALL suppliers who are notified by ANY of their customers who request that they do business through Ariba, to do their homework and do a simeple search. Just google “Ariba complaints” and start reading. There is literally NOTHING positive to say about Ariba. For those who are “forced” to do business through Ariba, start charging an Ariba transaction fee for each invoice to help offset the time and expense that you will have when dealing with Ariba invoices. I swear, I sometimes think that these large companies who sign on with Ariba must have nothing better to do that to sit around and hink of ways that they can F-UP their supply chain. Ariba is the ultimate tool to do just that.

  • Betty W. June 12, 2018 at 5:03 pm /

    SAP Ariba is basically an extortion racket. I’m genuinely surprised they’re allowed to do what they do. My main client decided to use them for invoicing, and now my little barely-staying-afloat business has to pay Ariba a huge chunk of money just so I can submit invoices to get paid for my work (something that was not previously one of my business expenses, because I would simply create my own invoices and email them). What’s worse is the sketchy way that they decide where you belong in their fee model structure–they have some very “creative” ways of doing the math to make it seem like your business is a raging success when it’s not. And God help you if, like me, you have to separately invoice for a lot of relatively small amounts of money because of how your client does their budgeting – Ariba really dings you on every purchase order and invoice that’s drawn up in their system.

  • Jonathan April 5, 2019 at 6:02 pm /

    I second Alice’s comment. If you are forced to do business with your client using Ariba, add an Ariba overhead fee to each invoice. Supplier have their own systems, and adding Ariba into the mix, EVEN IF THE BUYERS PAY FOR IT, costs you time do deal with the pain of using this awful system.

Post a comment