Which technologies do you consult on?

All of the major location, identification and IoT technologies: RTLS (UWB, BLE, Wi-Fi), RFID (passive, active and RAIN UHF), industrial IoT and sensors, GPS and GNSS, AGV and AMR robot fleets, and hybrid stacks that combine them. We recommend the right mix for each zone and use case, not a single technology.

Are you really vendor-neutral?

Yes. We do not sell hardware or a software platform of our own, and we take no resale commissions, so our technology and vendor recommendations serve your outcome rather than a product we need to move.

Do you work outside the UK?

We are UK-based and work across Europe and internationally, delivering in English, German and French. Engagements can be remote or on-site depending on the work.

What does a consulting engagement include?

Typically discovery and requirements, vendor-neutral technology selection, vendor evaluation and RFP support, ROI and business case, solution architecture, and an implementation roadmap. We scope each engagement to where you are.

Can you help after the decision is made?

Yes. We work across the full lifecycle - we can also deploy, integrate, and operate the system, so you can keep one independent team from business case through to live operation.

How do we get started?

Usually with a short call or a fixed-fee discovery to scope the problem, followed by a proposal with clear deliverables, timeline and fees. There is no obligation and no platform pitch.

Is the TCO model really vendor-neutral?

Yes — it's structured to expose costs regardless of vendor. Vendors who price aggressively in year 1 and recover in years 2–5 (the most common pattern) get caught by the model. Vendors who price transparently across 5 years usually look favourable.

How accurate are the benchmark ranges?

Anchored on real deployments, ±30% typical accuracy at the early-budget stage. Site-specific variables (asset density, environmental complexity, integration scope) drive the variance. We tighten to ±10% during stage 1 of /method.

Does the model handle hybrid stacks?

Yes — separate sheets for UWB, BLE-AoA, RFID and combined hybrid deployments. Most large-site TCO models we build are hybrid.

What about cloud vs on-premise?

Both are modelled. Cloud (SaaS-style) usually wins on year-1 cash-flow; on-premise can win on year-5 TCO for large deployments, but adds operational overhead. We model both options for clients deciding.

Can we share the model with our finance team?

Yes — designed for that. The spreadsheet is annotated with assumption explanations and is structured to be CFO-readable. Many clients use it as the procurement-business-case input directly.

INKOOPSJABLOON

RTLS TCO-model — 5 jaar, eerlijk gezegd.

Most RTLS deals are budgeted as year-1 capex and discover the real cost in years 2–5. This TCO model fixes that.

It's the spreadsheet we use with clients to build a 5-year cost picture across hardware, software, integration, support, tag replacement and change orders — vendor-neutral, fully editable, exposing the assumptions you'd otherwise miss.

Boek een scoping-gesprek van 30 minuten

Wat het model bevat

The spreadsheet covers 5 years, broken into capex and opex. Hardware capex: anchors / readers / locators / gateways, tags (initial batch), supporting infrastructure (cabling, mounting, switches).

Software and platform: licences, subscriptions, hosting. Integration capex: enterprise-system integration (WMS / ERP / EMR / MES), often 30–50% of year-1 hardware capex.

Year-1 services: site survey, design, commissioning, validation. Annual opex: support, maintenance, platform subscription, tag replacement (~10–15% of fleet per year typical), connectivity. Change orders: site expansion, additional use cases, version upgrades.

De aannames die cliënten meestal missen

Four cost categories regularly absent from vendor quotes. Integratie: a vendor quotes the RTLS platform; integration to your WMS / EMR / MES is your problem (it shouldn't be — see /integrations).

Tag replacement: 10–15% of fleet per year typical for active tags, lower for passive.

Multiplies dramatically at hospital or warehouse scale. Change orders: vendor pricing for additional sites or use cases varies 2–5×; the model forces you to ask up front. Internal labour: clinical engineering, IT, integration partner time. Often 0.5–2 FTE equivalent.

Capex versus opex — de structurele keuze

Most RTLS deployments are now offered in both capex (you own the hardware and licence it) and opex (success-based / subscription / RTLS-as-a-service). The model handles both.

Opex usually has higher year-5 total but cleaner cash-flow and faster expansion. Capex is cheaper TCO at steady state but locks capital and has slower expansion. We model both during stage 1 — see /method.

Ingebouwde gevoeligheidsanalyse

The model includes sensitivity sliders on six key assumptions: tag count growth (sites expand), tag replacement rate (battery life vs duty cycle), platform-subscription escalation, integration scope creep, support response (premium tiers), and change-order pricing.

A small change in any of these can swing 5-year TCO by 30–50%. Most vendor quotes ignore these entirely.

Benchmarks van echte implementaties

We maintain anonymised benchmarks from 40+ enterprise RTLS deployments we've advised on. Typical ranges (per-site, mid-size, 5-year): UWB manufacturing 400 k–1.2 M Euro; BLE-AoA hospital 600 k–1.5 M Euro; RAIN RFID warehouse 250 k–700 k Euro; AGV/AMR fleet 1.5–5 M Euro.

These are reality-check anchors, not quotes — every site is different. We refine for your specific environment in stage 1.

Wat je hierna kunt doen

Download the TCO model, populate your specific environment, and use it to challenge vendor quotes during the RFP.

If you want us to validate the model against benchmark data or to run TCO assessment as part of independent procurement advisory, book a 30-minute scoping call. The model is shipped after a short qualification email; sign up to the procurement-toolkit list.

FAQ

Veelgestelde vragen

Is het TCO-model echt leveranciersneutraal?

Ja — het is zo gestructureerd dat kosten zichtbaar zijn, ongeacht de leverancier. Verkopers die in jaar 1 agressief prijzen en in jaar 2–5 (het meest voorkomende patroon) terugwinnen, worden door het model betrapt. Verkopers die transparant prijzen over 5 jaar uitbrengen, zien er meestal gunstig uit.

Hoe nauwkeurig zijn de benchmarkbereik?

Gebaseerd op echte inzet, ±30% typische nauwkeurigheid in de vroege budgetfase. Site-specifieke variabelen (activadichtheid, omgevingscomplexiteit, integratiescope) bepalen de variatie. We spannen aan naar ±10% tijdens fase 1 van /methode.

Verwerkt het model hybride stacks?

Ja — aparte sheets voor UWB, BLE - AoA, RFID en gecombineerde hybride implementaties. De meeste grootschalige TCO-modellen die we bouwen zijn hybride.

Hoe zit het met cloud versus on-premise?

Beide zijn gemodelleerd. Cloud (SaaS-stijl) wint meestal op cashflow van het eerste jaar; On-premise kan winnen op de TCO van jaar 5 voor grote inzet, maar voegt operationele overhead toe. Wij modelleren beide opties voor klanten die willen beslissen.

Kunnen we het model delen met ons financiële team?

Ja — daarvoor is het ontworpen. De spreadsheet is voorzien van aannameverklaringen en is zo gestructureerd dat het CFO-leesbaar is. Veel klanten gebruiken het direct als input voor de inkoop en businesscase.

Laatst bijgewerkt: 26 mei 2026