Explore

Impact Comparison

Prompt: Do a case study for a $10M/year commercial flooring contractor with a 14% win rate and $750k average project size. Calculate how many bids are needed per year, then compare the annual cost of bidding using: (1) third-party tools (24 hrs/project), (2) Measure Square + Bluebeam (20 hrs/project), and (3) SubHub AI (1.25 hrs/project). Assume $50/hr estimator cost. Show total bidding cost for each, then model how many bids, wins, and revenue capacity the company could achieve if it reinvested the same budget from third-party tools into SubHub AI.

⁠

Step 1: How much work must be bid to hit $10M revenue?

Win rate = 14% → need to bid 7.14× revenue target.

$10M ÷ 0.14 = $71.4M worth of bids/year.

At $750k average project size:

$71.4M ÷ $750k ≈ 95 projects bid per year.

Wins = 95 × 14% ≈ 13 projects won → $9.75M revenue (rounds up to target).

⁠

Step 2: Estimating labor hours per workflow

Third-party tools (Excel + Bluebeam + CAD): ~24 hrs/project.

Measure Square + Bluebeam: ~20 hrs/project.

SubHub AI: ~1.25 hrs/project.

⁠

Step 3: Annual bidding labor cost

Estimator cost assumed = $50/hr.

Third-Party Tools

95 projects × 24 hrs = 2,280 hrs/year.

2,280 × $50 = $114,000/year in bidding labor.

Measure Square + Bluebeam

95 projects × 20 hrs = 1,900 hrs/year.

1,900 × $50 = $95,000/year in bidding labor.

SubHub AI

95 projects × 1.25 hrs = 119 hrs/year.

119 × $50 = $5,950/year in bidding labor.

⁠

Step 4: Scaling impact if SubHub’s savings are reinvested

Current “budget” using third-party tools = $114,000/year.

Cost per bid with SubHub = $62.50 (1.25 hrs × $50).

$114,000 ÷ $62.50 = 1,824 projects could be bid with the same labor budget.

Wins at 14% = 255 projects won.

At $750k average project = $191.25M revenue capacity.

⁠

Case Study Summary

Third-party workflow (Excel + Bluebeam):

$114k/year bidding labor.

~95 bids → 13 wins → ~$10M revenue.

Measure Square + Bluebeam:

$95k/year bidding labor.

Same 95 bids → 13 wins → ~$10M revenue.

Some savings, but still heavy estimator load.

SubHub AI:

$5.95k/year bidding labor.

Same 95 bids → 13 wins → ~$10M revenue.

If reinvested, could bid 1,824 projects → ~255 wins → $191M revenue capacity.

⁠

⚖️ Takeaway: At a lower win rate and smaller contract size, the inefficiency of manual methods gets even more expensive — over $100k/year just to bid work. SubHub collapses that to under $6k/year, and if a company redirected the savings into more bidding, they could potentially scale from $10M to ~$190M in revenue capacity, without adding more estimators.

Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.

Try clicking the ⋯ next to your doc name or using a keyboard shortcut (

CtrlP

) instead.