NORTHBRIDGE: A SUPPLIER DECISION PRESENTATION Recorded Syaxis example Created and revised: 31 October 2026 WHAT THIS EXAMPLE SHOWS A complete eight-slide presentation created in Syaxis from a short brief and the inputs below. Syaxis handled the research or source reading, writing and slide design. The operator answered its setup questions and used the same chat for the revisions recorded here. All slide creation and edits were made in Syaxis; the exported deck was not rebuilt or manually redrawn elsewhere. This is a selected, reviewed and revised product demonstration, not a first-pass accuracy benchmark. The final PDF, PowerPoint export and preview come from the same approved presentation. INPUTS vendor-procurement-brief.docx and vendor-proposals-and-clarifications.docx SETUP ANSWERS Summary of the selected answers to Syaxis questions, not a verbatim chat transcript: 8 slides, executive overview; costs/commercial terms, technical fit, delivery/implementation/timeline, compliance/risks/assumptions. ACTUAL SUBMITTED PROMPTS Initial brief Help our leadership team choose a supplier from these files. A bold industrial look and a visual cost comparison would be useful. Revision 1 Strengthen the industrial cover and closing visual. Mark this synthetic. Remove “undefined” on slide 5; 18,000 tickets is workload, not a verified plan allowance. Revision 2 On slide 3, use plain standalone text for the Subscription and Implementation legend labels, without colored text backgrounds. Keep everything else unchanged. OUTPUT AND REVIEW Eight slides. The final native slide images were visually reviewed, and the actual PowerPoint export was rendered in LibreOffice and checked. Source review used AI-assisted checks against the sources below. The example was selected for this showcase after visual review. PowerPoint includes editable text and supported shapes alongside raster visuals. These files do not contain native PowerPoint chart or table objects. Speaker notes contain slide numbers, not a bibliography or substantive presenter notes. Microsoft PowerPoint application editing was not tested. Use the PDF for the closest representation of the reviewed slide design, and this record for detailed source provenance. vendor-decision.pdf SHA-256: 345ec4f49ed63b7dd26455286dc1cce20e36c4e1cbfd35dafc2cb5795e4c76e6 vendor-decision.pptx SHA-256: 09f6dc8bd03b5cca7a5d3e4e1b82b065ffa594770b00841ddc04db8ad16778e4 SOURCES AND EVIDENCE Northbridge procurement evidence and source notes This companion holds the detailed commercial comparison outside the eight-slide presentation. Northbridge Components, Alder, Birch, Cedar and all people and proposals are fictional. This is a synthetic procurement demonstration, not a real award or vendor-performance benchmark. Source documents - 01_procurement_rfp_and_stakeholder_notes.docx: “Support platform procurement brief,” RFP NC 26 014, issued 19 October 2026; stakeholder meeting 20 October. - 02_vendor_proposals_and_dated_clarifications.docx: “Vendor proposal extracts and clarifications,” updated 28 October 2026. All quotes remain unexecuted. The presentation's 31 October preparation date does not add new evidence to those documents. Mandatory requirements 200 named seats; an operating baseline of 18,000 tickets per month; year-one subscription plus implementation no more than $180,000 USD; production migration within 12 weeks of signature; EU hosting available at signature; production SSO. Future hosting roadmaps do not satisfy the gate. Email, portal, history, customer records and attachments are in scope. The attachment inventory is incomplete. Commercial detail Option Subscription Implementation Expedite Year one Cap position Alder $110,000 $35,000 none $145,000 $35,000 under Birch $95,000 $65,000 none $160,000 $20,000 under Cedar standard $130,000 $30,000 none $160,000 $20,000 under Cedar expedited $130,000 $30,000 $25,000 $185,000 $5,000 over Year-two recurring subscription only: Alder $110,000; Birch $95,000; Cedar $130,000 on either route. Renewal changes have not been agreed. One-time implementation and expedited fees are not recurring subscriptions. Alder's 27 October written quote AL NC 1027 supersedes the $30,000 implementation fee in AL NC 1016 dated 16 October with $35,000. The old amount is not an available discount. The year-one comparison uses the correction. Taxes and usage overages are excluded. Included usage at 18,000 monthly tickets, storage growth and exit costs need validation. Quoted subtotals are not all-in total cost of ownership. There is no verified ROI, payback or productivity baseline. Estimates are not commitments - Alder: 10-week estimate, subject to ready source data, mapping decisions within five business days and one rehearsal. The displayed two weeks of nominal headroom is 12 minus the 10-week estimate, not a guaranteed contingency buffer. EU hosting and SSO are stated capabilities pending IT validation. Records use an export API; attachment export is a customer-admin manual workflow. Automated bulk attachment export is not included. - Birch: eight-week estimate for the currently offered non-EU configuration. Its 26 October clarification gives no committed EU production date. It fits the quoted budget and time limits but fails the mandatory hosting requirement. It is not an eight-week path to compliant EU deployment. - Cedar standard: 14-week estimate fails the schedule requirement. - Cedar expedited: 11-week estimate requires the expedited team, same-week mapping sign-off and a named customer test lead. Its $185,000 subtotal exceeds the cap. No surcharge waiver or discount is agreed. Cedar's EU hosting and SSO assertions also await IT validation. Neither Alder nor Cedar has demonstrated end-to-end attachment export. No supplier has a mutually signed migration milestone schedule. Security, ERP integration, reconciliation, acceptance criteria and customer staffing remain to be resolved; do not turn missing evidence into comparative performance scores. Decision boundary Advancing Alder is a conditional recommendation for diligence, not an award or a source-prescribed winner. Before award, validate migration and portability, hosting and SSO, security and ERP tests, usage and complete pricing, and a signed schedule within 12 weeks. If the conditions fail, return to steering. No automatic fallback, requirement waiver, extra funding or security approval is authorized by this packet.