vs. Board — Buyer's Toolbox

Retail Planning, Shipped — Not Modelled

Board is a capable planning and analytics platform, and retail is one of the things it's used for well. But a merchandise plan on Board is something you design and build. Buyer's Toolbox AP arrives with MFP, OTB, forecasting, allocation and replenishment already working, shaped by thirty years in retail environments. One path starts with a data model. The other starts with your plan.

The Cost That Isn't in the Quote

Independent assessments of Board are consistent on one point: the platform expects ongoing internal ownership. It typically needs a trained internal owner or continuing partner support, the learning curve is steep, and scope creep on the data model is the most commonly cited reason Year-1 cost exceeds the original estimate. Buyer's Toolbox is operated by the planners who use it. Ask both vendors who maintains the model in year two, and what that person costs.

Published Price. Free Proof. Independent Since 1992.

Buyer's Toolbox AP starts at $995 per month, published, on an annual agreement with no multi-year lock-in — and we build a working proof of concept on your data before you sign anything. Board is quote-based, with independent estimates placing all-in first-year cost at $150,000–$400,000+ for complex retail deployments. Board has been majority-owned by Nordic Capital since 2019. ANT USA has been profitable and independent since 1992.

“We saw the productivity gains immediately — without months of consulting or a model to maintain.”

A fashion retailer implemented Buyer's Toolbox AP in just weeks. Planners were running the plan themselves from day one, with no ongoing model-building project behind it.

Comparison Highlights

Aspect	Buyer's Toolbox	Board
Platform Purpose	Purpose-built merchandise planning — MFP, OTB, forecasting, allocation and replenishment natively connected.	Unified planning, reporting and analytics platform. Retail merchandise planning is built on it through modelling and configuration.
Who Operates It	Buyers and planners, directly.	Independent assessments report that Board models typically require a trained internal owner or ongoing partner support.
Post-Go-Live Changes	Planners adjust formulas, KPIs and forecasts in the UI. No code, no developer, no ticket.	Model changes are made by the platform owner or partner. Ask what a hierarchy change costs twelve months after go-live.
Most Common Cost Overrun	Fixed scope, published price, no multi-year lock-in.	Independent assessment identifies scope creep on the data model as the most common reason Year-1 cost exceeds the original quote.
Implementation Timeline	Documented go-lives in 6–10 weeks. Free POC on your data in 1–2 weeks.	Independent estimates: 3–5 months for standard planning and reporting; 6–12 months for complex supply-chain and retail planning.
First-Year Cost	From $995/month, published. Annual agreement, billed quarterly.	Quote-based. Independent estimates place all-in Year-1 at $150,000–$400,000+, with per-user licensing estimated at $1,250–$2,500 per user per year.
Proof Before Contract	Free proof of concept built on your own data, your hierarchy, your sales history.	Ask Board directly whether they will build a working model on your data before contract, and at what cost.
Wholesale Depth	Item-level orders, backorders, cancellations and returns, reserved stock, retailer accounts, availability-to-promise — reflowing into OTB.	Ask to see a cancelled wholesale order reflow into open-to-buy.
Deployment	Cloud, on-premise or hybrid. Your IT team decides.	Cloud and on-premise options available. Independent assessments note performance tuning is required on large or highly interdependent models.
Ownership	Profitable and independent since 1992. Pricing and roadmap set by the team that implements and supports your system.	Majority-owned by Nordic Capital since 2019; Grafton Capital retains a stake, with founders and management holding significant shares.

Common Questions

Answering your questions.

Board does planning, reporting and analytics on one platform. Isn't that better than a specialist tool?

If your requirement genuinely spans consolidation, statutory reporting and planning together, that unification is real and Board is good at it — we'd tell you to look hard at them. What we'd ask is what you're optimising for. A platform broad enough to do all three is a platform someone has to model for merchandise planning, then own and maintain. If the problem you're actually solving is open-to-buy, we'd rather hand you a system that already knows what a markdown is.

Board is used by large global brands. Aren't they the safer choice?

Board has an established enterprise customer base and a long track record — that's real, and we won't argue otherwise. But scale cuts both ways. Independent estimates put complex retail planning implementations on Board at six to twelve months and $150,000–$400,000+ all in. For a mid-market specialty retailer, safety looks like being live in weeks on a published price, with a working system built on your data before you commit. Different definitions of safe. Pick the one that fits your risk.

We already use Board for finance. Doesn't extending it make sense?

It might, and it's worth scoping — ask your Board team what a merchandise planning module would cost and how long it would take. Then ask a second question: who maintains it? A merchandise plan changes constantly through a season. Item, week and location granularity, attribute-aware hierarchies, buyers adjusting mid-season without raising a ticket. If your finance model owner has capacity for that, extending is a fair option. If not, that's the gap we fill.

How does Buyer's Toolbox cost so much less?

Because retail planning is the product rather than the project. Board is a platform, so a merchandise planning application has to be designed, built, and then maintained — and independent assessments identify data-model scope creep as the single most common reason those projects exceed their quote. We publish our price, deliver directly, and start with a free proof of concept on your data.

How should we compare the two fairly?

Three tests, given to both vendors. First, a proof of concept on your own data before any contract. Second, a three-year total cost covering licence, implementation, seats and support. Third — the one most buyers skip — a scripted change request: ask each vendor to price and schedule the same three changes twelve months after go-live. Add a hierarchy level. Add a custom KPI. Restate a formula. What comes back tells you who actually owns your planning system.

Is Your Planning Process Burning Out Your Best People?

Buyer's Toolbox AP vs. Board