Grocer-Affiliated Debit Program
Operating domain: Payments · Capability: Affiliated debit / tender migration and program economics
- Value at Issue
- Approved
- Confidence-Adjusted Value Opportunity
- Approved
- Projected Net First-Year Benefit
- Projected
- Verified Net Value Retained
- Finance-Verified
- Executive owner
- M. Chen (simulated)
- Working owner
- J. Whitcombe — Value Case Lead (simulated)
- Confidence
- High
- Data completeness
- 96%
- Next required decision
- Review fee statement
- Decision owner · required by
- D. Alvarez (simulated) · Aug 15, 2027
- Reporting period
- Calendar year · Q2 2027
- Scenario
- Approved base case
- Approved baseline
- Payments Value Case Template v3 · version 7
- Data as of
- Jul 18, 2027
What is happening in the grocer's current payment flow, where are the economic gaps, and what causes them?
What do we know?
The observed operating gaps, the workflows they occur in and the loss areas they create for this Value Case.
Why does it matter financially?
Avoidable Value Loss is the ceiling of everything that can later be claimed as recoverable. Nothing downstream can exceed what is evidenced here.
What must happen next?
Accept the diagnosis and the primary root cause so quantification can begin from an agreed cause.
Observed acceptance economics by tender and channel
Credit and third-party debit are never blended, and POS is never blended with ecommerce. Every figure is observed from processor statements for the baseline period.
| Segment | Volume | Transactions | Avg ticket | Effective rate | Acceptance cost | Identity match | Addressable portion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Credit / POS Observed94% complete | $700.00M | 14,000,000 | $50.00 | 1.990% | $13,930,000 | 74% | Addressable — migration modelled |
Credit / Ecommerce Observed99% complete | $60.00M | 1,000,000 | $60.00 | 1.950% | $1,170,000 | 96% | Addressable — migration modelled |
Third-party debit / POS Observed82% complete | $780.00M | 26,000,000 | $30.00 | 0.380% | $2,964,000 | 69% | Partially addressable — thin margin over regulated debit |
Third-party debit / Ecommerce Observed97% complete | $24.00M | 500,000 | $48.00 | 1.400% | $336,000 | 95% | Not addressable — negative unit economics |
| Segmented total | $1.56B | 41,500,000 | $18,400,000 |
Fee-component classification
A total statement amount can be observed while its component classification remains incomplete. Unknown detail is shown as evidence required, never as zero.
| Segment | Components | Fixed | Variable |
|---|---|---|---|
| Credit / POS 4 classified · 1 evidence required |
| $940,000 | $12,990,000 |
| Credit / Ecommerce 5 classified · 0 evidence required |
| $119,000 | $1,051,000 |
| Third-party debit / POS 3 classified · 2 evidence required |
| $534,000 | $2,430,000 |
| Third-party debit / Ecommerce 5 classified · 0 evidence required |
| $81,000 | $255,000 |
Decision Brief
Gate: Do we accept the current-state payment flow, addressable gaps, primary causes and evidence boundaries as the basis for quantification?Do we accept the current-state payment flow, addressable gaps, primary causes and evidence boundaries as the basis for quantification?
- Owner
- J. Whitcombe — Value Case Lead (simulated)
- Due by
- Aug 15, 2027
- Gate action
- Review fee statement
- Open provider-credit dispute
- Cross-case overlap review pending finance