What has been checked here
All 50 line-item calculations, eight cluster totals, maturity factors, the 10% discount, and the $423,000 software subset reconcile with the supplied report. No numerical correction is required.
ImageFirm LLC → Ruz Bilişim A.Ş.
Value, evidenced.
Price, defensible.
A valuation and invoicing review of 50 deliverables. The arithmetic reconciles. The commercial entitlement, acceptance and tax treatment still need evidence.
Source report: 9 October 2026 · All amounts USD · Decision support, not an invoice or a legal opinion.
50priced deliverables · eight clusters
3,837estimated replacement hours
$200assumed blended hourly rate
18items in the software-only subset
The decision now: commission an evidence and pricing review, agree the scope with the other shareholder, and resolve the related-party approvals. The source report does not establish an invoice-ready amount. Existing tax or reporting deadlines must be checked immediately; this commercial review does not suspend them.
02 / Valuation logic
Keep the maths.
Challenge the assumptions.
File size measures stored output. It does not establish effort, usefulness, quality or what an independent buyer would pay. Price each accepted result against a comparable scope.
What has not been independently verified
The ruz.is server, source code, actual hours, tests, authorship, usage, acceptance, financial results and the parties’ tax status. Server observations below are attributed to the supplied report, not a new technical audit.
What the rate evidence supports
Promethean reports that 29% of surveyed agencies charge $175–199/hour. A $200 assumption is plausible as a broad agency reference; it is not a matched comparable for this mixed Turkish-buyer engagement. Source 1 ↗
- 3,837 estimated hours × $200
- $767,400
- Prototype and shared-benefit reductions
- −$24,660
- After maturity factors
- $742,740
- Programme discount · 10%
- −$74,274
- Proposed consideration
- $668,466
- Taxes, financing and support
- Excluded
Economics
A buyer has alternatives.
Compare Turkish, regional and US suppliers using the same specification, acceptance tests, warranty, source access and licence rights. Obtain three independent written quotes; do not average mismatched hourly rates.
Engineering
Reuse must lower duplicate charges.
Separate original engineering from adaptation. D8 is already priced below D6, but the same overlap review is needed across engines, portals, document versions and shared AI components.
Human incentives
Agreement precedes surprise.
At 50% ownership, pricing is also a trust decision. Show the partner deliverables, costs, alternatives and proposed payment terms before creating a large payable. A polished report cannot replace consent.
Full cluster reconciliation
| Cluster | Items | Est. hours | List | Adjusted | After discount |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A. Corporate platform & Melisa | 4 | 470 | $94,000 | $94,000 | $84,600 |
| B. Kentsel Dönüşüm suite | 8 | 820 | $164,000 | $159,200 | $143,280 |
| C. Subaylar Sitesi | 3 | 115 | $23,000 | $23,000 | $20,700 |
| D. Loft Valentine · Basın Ekspres · Nest Press | 13 | 850 | $170,000 | $170,000 | $153,000 |
| E. Hotel Block B | 5 | 780 | $156,000 | $149,600 | $134,640 |
| F. Nest Bakırköy | 7 | 240 | $48,000 | $48,000 | $43,200 |
| G. Operations & governance | 8 | 477 | $95,400 | $85,940 | $77,346 |
| H. Ruz Rent | 2 | 85 | $17,000 | $13,000 | $11,700 |
| Total | 50 | 3,837 | $767,400 | $742,740 | $668,466 |
A ±25% change to estimated hours, with everything else fixed, gives $501,349.50–$835,582.50. This is sensitivity arithmetic, not a statistical confidence interval. Prototype factors of 60%, a shared-benefit factor of 50%, and the 10% discount remain judgments.
03 / Deliverable register
Every item.
One visible basis.
Open a cluster to inspect its evidence and estimated hours. Values below retain the report’s $200 rate and 10% discount. Scenario controls do not overwrite this baseline.
50 deliverables · baseline after discount $668,466
ACorporate platform & Melisa4 items · 470 estimated hours$84,600after 10% discount
| Deliverable | Evidence described in the source | Est. hours | Factor | Adjusted | After discount |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 ruz.is bilingual corporate site (TR/EN)Reported delivered; acceptance unverified | Home and project pages, shared header and footer, two language files, 1,635 lines of CSS, PWA manifest, service worker, sitemap | 100 | 100% | $20,000 | $18,000 |
| A2 Melisa AI sales assistantReported delivered; acceptance unverified | Two chat back ends, API client, tool mapper, tool engine with 7 tools (appointment, availability, email, lead, mortgage, price, project), chat logging, rate limiting | 240 | 100% | $48,000 | $43,200 |
| A3 Melisa voice interfaceReported delivered; acceptance unverified | voice-chat.js (56 KB) and a voice-usage endpoint | 60 | 100% | $12,000 | $10,800 |
| A4 Lead registration and verificationReported delivered; acceptance unverified | 10 auth endpoints, lead auth class, verification mailer, chat history | 70 | 100% | $14,000 | $12,600 |
BKentsel Dönüşüm suite8 items · 820 estimated hours$143,280after 10% discount
| Deliverable | Evidence described in the source | Est. hours | Factor | Adjusted | After discount |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B1 Değerlendirme Motoru v1 → v2.1Reported delivered; acceptance unverified | Versions v1, v2 and v2.1; latest 156,000 characters, 37 inputs | 160 | 100% | $32,000 | $28,800 |
| B2 Maliyet Motoru v1 → v1.2Reported delivered; acceptance unverified | Latest 185,000 characters, 54 inputs | 150 | 100% | $30,000 | $27,000 |
| B3 Dönüşüm Masası v1Reported delivered; acceptance unverified | 125,000 characters, 23 inputs | 90 | 100% | $18,000 | $16,200 |
| B4 Sara assistant (RKD-AI-001)Reported delivered; acceptance unverified | sara.php, a 68 KB client block embedded in the three screens, görev tanımı, change note, end-to-end test script | 110 | 100% | $22,000 | $19,800 |
| B5 Kentsel dönüşüm landing pageReported delivered; acceptance unverified | Live kentsel-donusum.php (72 KB) and the Bahçelievler–Bakırköy version | 50 | 100% | $10,000 | $9,000 |
| B6 Owner guide libraryReported delivered; acceptance unverified | 18 guides, kits and templates of about 10,000 characters each, plus the Kütüphane Konsolu | 100 | 100% | $20,000 | $18,000 |
| B7 Stratejik İş Planı v1.0Reported delivered; acceptance unverified | 114,000-character plan with a PDF edition | 100 | 100% | $20,000 | $18,000 |
| B8 Dönüşüm desk app (prototype)Prototype / concept | TypeScript app with a calculation module and 7 desk components | 60 | 60% | $7,200 | $6,480 |
CSubaylar Sitesi3 items · 115 estimated hours$20,700after 10% discount
| Deliverable | Evidence described in the source | Est. hours | Factor | Adjusted | After discount |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 Kentsel dönüşüm teklifiReported delivered; acceptance unverified | 44,000-character proposal with PDF editions | 40 | 100% | $8,000 | $7,200 |
| C2 Malik Bilgilendirme KitiReported delivered; acceptance unverified | 44,000-character owner kit dated 14 September 2026 | 30 | 100% | $6,000 | $5,400 |
| C3 Visual packageReported delivered; acceptance unverified | 19 visuals: 2D and 3D plans for three unit types, five interior renders, facade, aerial cover, site plan | 45 | 100% | $9,000 | $8,100 |
DLoft Valentine · Basın Ekspres · Nest Press13 items · 850 estimated hours$153,000after 10% discount
| Deliverable | Evidence described in the source | Est. hours | Factor | Adjusted | After discount |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 Loft Valentine Blok A landing page, EN and TRReported delivered; acceptance unverified | Three iterations; latest 94,000 (EN) and 119,000 (TR) characters; brochure PDF | 70 | 100% | $14,000 | $12,600 |
| D2 Ruz Basın Ekspres pagesReported delivered; acceptance unverified | Project page and residents page, 73,000 and 88,000 characters | 50 | 100% | $10,000 | $9,000 |
| D3 Loft Valentine Board BriefingShareholder / management benefit review | Yönetim Kurulu Brifingi on the sales department, 65,000 characters | 45 | 100% | $9,000 | $8,100 |
| D4 Zemin Kat Ticari StratejiEsin AI rights confirmation | Esin AI-branded strategy, 72,000 characters | 40 | 100% | $8,000 | $7,200 |
| D5 Teslimat Karar Analizi, Blok 2Esin AI rights confirmation | Esin AI-branded decision analysis in several versions, 60,000 characters | 45 | 100% | $9,000 | $8,100 |
| D6 Business Class Fiyat ve Karar MotoruReported delivered; acceptance unverified | 123,000-character engine, unit data, sales log and report back end, smoke tests, 28 KB handover file | 140 | 100% | $28,000 | $25,200 |
| D7 Business Class contract packageReported delivered; acceptance unverified | Revised satış hizmet sözleşmesi (TR), contract revision memo (EN), fiyat esası workbook | 45 | 100% | $9,000 | $8,100 |
| D8 Ruz Basın Ekspres Fiyat ve Karar MotoruReported delivered; acceptance unverified | Adaptation of D6 for the renamed project, with a PDF | 25 | 100% | $5,000 | $4,500 |
| D9 Nest Basın Ekspres sales portalReported delivered; acceptance unverified | 10 PHP files (1,445 lines) with login, setup and an _ai.php module; Satış Kiti of 233,000 characters | 120 | 100% | $24,000 | $21,600 |
| D10 Cephe 3D and Cephe İncelemeReported delivered; acceptance unverified | 3D facade viewer (560,000 characters) and a review page with 21 elevation and 3D images | 70 | 100% | $14,000 | $12,600 |
| D11 Nest Press logo and brand guidelinesReported delivered; acceptance unverified | 6 MB guidelines PDF | 40 | 100% | $8,000 | $7,200 |
| D12 Blok A Tamamlama MotoruReported delivered; acceptance unverified | Two variants of 649,000 characters each with embedded quantities; PHP back end | 110 | 100% | $22,000 | $19,800 |
| D13 RUZ-LV-A-MLY-2026-001 packageReported delivered; acceptance unverified | Kullanım kılavuzu, Bölüm 14 revision, quantities workbook, Çelebioğlu teknik açıklama talebi | 50 | 100% | $10,000 | $9,000 |
EHotel Block B5 items · 780 estimated hours$134,640after 10% discount
| Deliverable | Evidence described in the source | Est. hours | Factor | Adjusted | After discount |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 Otel Şartname v2 (includes v1)Reported delivered; acceptance unverified | 62 PHP files (6,654 lines): cost, finance, konut and MI engines, TCMB exchange rates, auth, audit, share links, 6 migrations, 11 test files, documentation set | 300 | 100% | $60,000 | $54,000 |
| E2 Ruz Deal DeskReported delivered; acceptance unverified | 17 PHP files (1,283 lines) on SQLite, BOQ and specification data, CSV export, a grok.php endpoint; single-file precursor | 130 | 100% | $26,000 | $23,400 |
| E3 BinaB app (prototype)Prototype / concept | TypeScript app with keşif, şartname, karar and overview screens and BOQ data | 80 | 60% | $9,600 | $8,640 |
| E4 Hotel field project documentsThree source documents not inspected | Three documents of 3–8 MB each. Provisional: not opened because of their size | 90 | 100% | $18,000 | $16,200 |
| E5 P02 actual-plan review catalogueReported delivered; acceptance unverified | Interactive catalogue, 3 CAD drawings (DXF, SVG, PNG), 6 renders, technical and visual PDFs in TR and EN, quantities workbook, deployment package with SHA-256 checksums | 180 | 100% | $36,000 | $32,400 |
FNest Bakırköy7 items · 240 estimated hours$43,200after 10% discount
| Deliverable | Evidence described in the source | Est. hours | Factor | Adjusted | After discount |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 Maliyet Modeli, 38 unitsReported delivered; acceptance unverified | 44,000-character priced model, plus a procurement analysis | 50 | 100% | $10,000 | $9,000 |
| F2 İnce İşler Maliyet AnaliziReported delivered; acceptance unverified | 72,000-character ortak değerlendirme | 45 | 100% | $9,000 | $8,100 |
| F3 Devir Karar Notu v2 → v3Shareholder / management benefit review | Two decision notes of 18,000 characters each | 20 | 100% | $4,000 | $3,600 |
| F4 Gelir ve Finansman Özeti; Finansman AnaliziReported delivered; acceptance unverified | Summary plus an interactive kat karşılığı calculator | 30 | 100% | $6,000 | $5,400 |
| F5 A Sınıfı Müteahhit Ortaklık DavetiReported delivered; acceptance unverified | Two versions, 27,000 characters | 20 | 100% | $4,000 | $3,600 |
| F6 Vekâletname Yetki Analizi; Müteahhitlik Belgesi Karar NotuLegal scope and management benefit review | Two legal-regulatory analyses of 37,000 and 30,000 characters | 45 | 100% | $9,000 | $8,100 |
| F7 Bakırköy premium landing pageReported delivered; acceptance unverified | Two versions; latest 62,000 characters | 30 | 100% | $6,000 | $5,400 |
GOperations & governance8 items · 477 estimated hours$77,346after 10% discount
| Deliverable | Evidence described in the source | Est. hours | Factor | Adjusted | After discount |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| G1 Muhasebe Operasyon Panosu (RUZ-MUH-OPS-2026-001)Reported delivered; acceptance unverified | 1 MB dashboard with embedded data; PHP back end with login, admin and query endpoints | 110 | 100% | $22,000 | $19,800 |
| G2 Tedarikçi Teklif Formu (RUZ-TED-RFP-2026-001)Reported delivered; acceptance unverified | 55-field form; 6 PHP files (937 lines) for submission, auth and the defter ledger | 90 | 100% | $18,000 | $16,200 |
| G3 YZ Soru ve Öneri Hattı (RUZ-YZ-SORU-2026-001)Reported delivered; acceptance unverified | Staff form and a 649-line back end | 40 | 100% | $8,000 | $7,200 |
| G4 Sezer Arşivi Envanter ve Kontrol Panosu (LV-ARC-2026-001)Reported delivered; acceptance unverified | 377,000-character inventory dashboard | 60 | 100% | $12,000 | $10,800 |
| G5 Kadak ↔ Ruz Netleştirme Panosu (KDK-RUZ-MUT-2026-001)Shared-benefit allocation review | Two versions, 58,000 characters. Benefit shared with Kadak Group | 45 | 50% | $4,500 | $4,050 |
| G6 Three document library portalsReported delivered; acceptance unverified | lib, ruz-remax-lib and projects: index pages of 576 and 696 lines, upload and manifest scripts | 70 | 100% | $14,000 | $12,600 |
| G7 Mission Control and Araçlar ve Ajanlar index (concept)Prototype / concept | 111,000-character dashboard and a tool index | 50 | 60% | $6,000 | $5,400 |
| G8 Hakediş Kontrol Ajanı (concept)Prototype / concept | 20,000-character agent concept | 12 | 60% | $1,440 | $1,296 |
HRuz Rent2 items · 85 estimated hours$11,700after 10% discount
| Deliverable | Evidence described in the source | Est. hours | Factor | Adjusted | After discount |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1 rent.ruz.is demo v1 → v2 (prototype)Prototype / concept | 90,000-character interactive demo | 50 | 60% | $6,000 | $5,400 |
| H2 Ruz Rent Lansman ve Dominans PlanıReported delivered; acceptance unverified | 49,000-character launch plan | 35 | 100% | $7,000 | $6,300 |
No matching deliverables. Clear the search or select “All 50 items”.
“Reported delivered” is a source classification, not verified acceptance. E4 was priced without opening its three files. D4 and D5 need rights confirmation; branding alone does not establish legal ownership. D7 and F6 are drafting/analysis support and require licensed legal review.
Inventory boundary: what is excluded
The source reports 1,680 files, 336 folders and 438 MB, dated February–October 2026. It excludes 502 vendor files, 296 build/scaffolding files, about 30 client or third-party source documents, and esin-solarops.html. Roughly 850 work files, including backups and versions, become 50 priced items. The approximate file counts are not an exact reconciliation.
It reports 468 text files measured, 158 PHP files and about 25,800 PHP lines. Configuration files, third-party documents and files over 1.2 MB were not opened. Nine December 2024 photographs, Nest-Press-Ekspres-Statik-Raporu.pdf and 2D and 3D renders - Claude.pdf remain unpriced pending origin checks. No separate restructuring fee is included.
04 / Decision model
Change the assumption.
See the cash effect.
Compare scope, rate and effort. Then distinguish a gross contract price from a guaranteed net receipt. These are planning scenarios, not tax determinations.
50 items / Source proposal
$668,466
All source lines, including provisional, rights-dependent and management-related items.
43 items / Review exclusion
$613,116
Temporarily removes D3, D4, D5, E4, F3, F6 and G5: $55,350 after discount. Remaining items still require review.
18 items / Software subset
$380,700
The report’s $423,000 software base less 10%. Narrower scope does not establish an acceptable price.
Modelled proposal · before tax convention
$668,466.0050 items · 3,837 estimated hours · source factors retained- Gross contract amount
- $668,466.00
- Withheld for the tax authority
- $133,693.20
- Net receipt to ImageFirm
- $534,772.80
- Reverse-charge VAT cash
- $133,693.20
- Ruz initial cash requirement
- $802,159.20
Gross price = proposal. Receipt = gross × (1 − withholding). Initial cash = gross + VAT.
Illustrative USD cash model; assumes VAT on gross consideration. No foreign exchange, stamp tax, income tax, interest or instalment timing. VAT recovery is conditional and may occur later.
Interactive controls are omitted from print. The figures shown are the latest modelled results in this session; the source register remains unchanged.
Gross-up changes the negotiation: guaranteeing a $668,466 net receipt at an assumed 20% withholding requires a gross price of $835,582.50. With assumed 20% VAT, Ruz’s initial cash requirement becomes $1,002,699. Do not promise a net amount before agreeing who bears the tax.
Support retainer: price the obligations, then the monthly fee
Essential
$5,300 / month
Source scope: fixes, security and dependency updates, backup and uptime checks, monthly health report. Next-business-day response.
Standard · proposed
$7,050 / month
Essential plus minor enhancements and content/data updates. Same-business-day response. $84,600 a year.
Partner
$13,050 / month
Standard plus 30 hours of new development/advisory at $200/hour. $156,600 a year.
The source applies 15–20% annually to $423,000 of software. Exact Essential arithmetic is $5,287.50/month, rounded to $5,300. These are heuristics, not established support costs or an SLA.
Before signing: define supported systems, included capacity, service hours/timezone, severity levels, response versus resolution, warranty overlap, restore testing, RPO/RTO, third-party API spend, overages, termination and transition assistance. Hosting, domains and model usage remain separately approved pass-through costs. Set one explicit service start date; the source conflicts between signing-date commencement and 1 December. Do not backdate.
05 / Evidence & challenge
Make the invoice
survive a hard question.
Would an independent Ruz buy this service, on these terms, for this price? Establish delivery and business benefit first. Establish the price separately.
| Source assumption | Why it is insufficient | Required replacement |
|---|---|---|
| Market-equivalent hours support the invoice. | Hypothetical effort is not recorded work. AI may reduce production time; value pricing can still be valid, but needs its own support. | Actual cost/time records, scope-matched quotes and an explicitly selected transfer-pricing method. Never present estimates as worked hours. |
| Live software passes the benefit test easily. | Deployment does not prove use, usefulness, non-duplication, quality or price. | Named business owner, acceptance test, usage evidence, alternative cost and a measurable result for each item. |
| Keep the licence inside the service price. | A bundled label does not settle the legal or tax character of the underlying rights. | Identify background IP, developed IP, usage rights and any royalty element; obtain a written substance-based tax analysis. |
| Approve later and invoice everything in 2026. | Later corporate approval is not a cure for all tax, accounting or historical documentation problems. | Counsel checks authority, conflicts, validity and remediation. Accountant checks original service dates, accrual and invoice/reporting deadlines now. |
| Reverse-charge VAT is automatically deductible. | Payment, documentation, timing, taxable use and statutory restrictions matter; recovery is not immediate cash. | Written KDV treatment, payment and recovery schedule. Keep cash funding separate from eventual tax cost. Source 7 ↗ |
| Fallback documents can enter the forward retainer. | Already-delivered work and future support have different periods, scope and consideration. | Record historic exclusions, waivers or settlement explicitly. Price future work prospectively; do not hide old services in later support. |
Evidence pack / one folder per code
Show what was delivered and accepted.
- Request, business purpose and responsible Ruz owner.
- Versioned files, delivery date, checksum and acceptance record.
- Actual hours, AI/tool costs, contractors and reused components.
- Authorship, third-party licences and authority to grant the rights.
- Scope-matched alternatives, pricing method and allocation key.
- Usage, measured benefit, defects and remaining warranty obligations.
Reconstructed records must be labelled as reconstructed and tied to contemporaneous evidence. Do not invent timesheets or backdate signatures.
Inversion / how this fails
The document looks stronger than the evidence.
An investor sees $668,466 leaving Ruz; an inspector sees an owner-controlled supplier and no prior agreement; a user sees an untested dashboard. All three can reject the same valuation for different reasons.
The simplest robust path: review a small accepted software tranche first, resolve rights and tax classification, agree a supported price, then expand. No arrangement is failure-proof. Smaller, reversible commitments expose errors sooner.
A 10% discount does not cure a weak price basis. A shareholder’s approval does not establish arm’s-length value. A licence does not prove authorship.
Türkiye–US compliance: the questions advisers must resolve
| Question | Precise treatment | Owner |
|---|---|---|
| Corporate authority & conflict | TTK 395 restricts a board member transacting with the company without general-meeting permission. Counsel must assess this transaction, historical remediation, voting/conflict rules, representation and authorised signatories. Do not assume one person can sign both sides. Source 6 ↗ | Turkish counsel |
| Transfer pricing | Prepare a functional and comparability analysis and distinguish chargeable services from shareholder activity. Do not default to cost plus 5% for core software/AI work. The OECD’s June 2026 Chapter VII document is a consultation draft, not an enacted Turkish rule. Sources 2–3 ↗ | YMM / transfer-pricing adviser |
| LLC treaty eligibility | IRS guidance says a disregarded entity is not itself a treaty resident; qualifying benefits depend on the owner. Confirm entity election, owner residence, eligibility and acceptable residency documentation before relying on the US treaty. Source 4 ↗ | US CPA + Turkish adviser |
| Service versus royalty | For qualifying enterprises, treaty Article 14(2) addresses services performed in the other state, including a PE or more than 183 days in a continuous 12-month period; only attributable income is implicated. Article 12 has different royalty limits, including 10% and 5% categories. Classification and eligibility come first. Source 5 ↗ | Cross-border tax advisers |
| Turkish residence & domestic taxes | Confirm management location, work locations/dates, PE, KVK 13/30 treatment, applicable withholding, KDV base/recovery, stamp duty and expense versus capitalisation. No entity-specific rate is certified here; the calculator’s 20% is an assumption. | Turkish accountant / YMM |
| US reporting | Check whether foreign-owned disregarded-entity reporting, Form 5472 and pro-forma Form 1120 apply. The IRS states an initial $25,000 failure-to-file/records penalty; continued failures can add penalties. Related-party tests are not settled by the “50%” shorthand. Source 8 ↗ | US CPA |
| State / city nexus | Review Washington/Seattle registration, nexus, activity, sourcing, apportionment and exemptions from the actual facts. A US address alone does not quantify state or local tax. | US state/local tax adviser |
Ownership: protect Ruz’s continuity and ImageFirm’s reusable IP
| Asset | Proposed position | Contract detail |
|---|---|---|
| Ruz business data | Ruz retains control and ownership. | Purpose-limited processing; export, retention, deletion, security and subcontractor terms. |
| Project-specific content | Transfer available rights to Ruz on full payment. | List exceptions and third-party/AI rights limitations. Portfolio use only with written consent. |
| Reusable engines / frameworks | ImageFirm retains verified background IP; proposed perpetual internal-use licence to Ruz. | Define affiliates/projects, maintenance/modification by third parties, source delivery, transfer on restructuring and continued use after support ends. |
| Open-source and client inputs | Existing owners and licences remain relevant. | Provide licence inventory; separate client inputs from supplier-created work. |
Ruz should hold its own hosting/admin credentials, source copy, restore instructions and dependency inventory. A source copy alone is not the right to modify or appoint a replacement maintainer. Resolve those permissions. Price any İstanbul exclusivity separately after valuing its term, territory and opportunity cost.
External benchmark / standard of delivery
Learn from scale.
Charge for your own evidence.
Brand Finance’s 2026 IT-services brand-value ranking places Accenture, TCS and Infosys first, second and third. This is a defined leadership benchmark, not a ranking of boutique prices or software quality. Source 9 ↗
01 / Accenture · $42.3bn brand value
Connect work to business operations.
Its public offering spans advisory, engineering, delivery and operation. ImageFirm’s application: give each tool an accountable owner, acceptance criteria and a measurable operational result. Company source ↗
02 / TCS · $21.2bn brand value
Separate the platform from the project.
MasterCraft packages automation for development, modernisation and data. ImageFirm’s application: name the reusable engine, disclose reuse, and price project-specific adaptation distinctly. Company source ↗
03 / Infosys · $16.4bn brand value
Measure AI against a baseline.
Topaz case material reports process-level changes. ImageFirm’s application: track lead conversion, assessment time, procurement savings and defect rates before claiming ROI. Company source ↗
Infosys: quantify a specific workflow.
A published fashion-client case reports up to 80% effort savings in test generation and up to 30% shorter development cycles. These are supplier-reported maxima, not independent findings or forecasts for Ruz.
Apply here: sample equivalent tasks before and after deployment, record human review and rework, and count savings only when capacity is actually freed or output improves. Source 10 ↗
Hertz–Accenture: specifications need proof.
Hertz’s complaint alleged that a project costing more than $32 million failed requirements, including tablet responsiveness. These are allegations in a pleading, not a final finding of liability.
Apply here: attach device-level acceptance tests, security checks, source handover and defect remediation to the scope. Budget or supplier prestige is not proof of delivery. Source 11 ↗
Benefit ledger: measure the result that would justify the spend
| Cluster | Measure | Guard against |
|---|---|---|
| A · Platform / Melisa | Qualified appointments, signed sales and contribution margin attributable to the assistant. | Counting all inquiries as incremental sales. |
| B · Dönüşüm | Assessment time, error rate and signed project conversion. | Calling unused theoretical hours cash savings. |
| C · Subaylar | Proposal acceptance and expected contribution on signed work. | Using gross project value as created profit. |
| D · Basın Ekspres / Nest Press | Like-for-like realised pricing, commission cost and sales-cycle changes. | Attributing market price inflation to the tool. |
| E · Hotel B | Accepted contractor bids against the same quantities and specifications. | Claiming savings from reduced scope. |
| F · Bakırköy | Documented financing/transfer alternatives and decision consequences. | Presenting avoided loss as certain without a counterfactual. |
| G · Operations | Close time, reconciliation errors and comparable procurement savings. | Double-counting benefits already assigned elsewhere. |
| H · Rent | Validated demand, pilot economics and launch readiness. | Valuing an unlaunched concept as a revenue-producing business. |
Decision equation: attributable incremental contribution + realisable cost savings + evidence-based risk reduction − operating and transition costs. Calculate a discounted benefit stream for long-lived investments. No reliable ROI or payback can be computed from the source report alone.
06 / Execution plan
Resolve the gates.
Then settle the price.
Dates below carry forward the source report’s proposed timetable. They are planning targets, not statutory deadlines or evidence of approval.
Establish entity facts and inspect provisional work.
Confirm LLC classification, owner residency, work/management locations, tax periods and all E4 files. Check unpriced material and immediate compliance deadlines.
Owner: Uzay + US CPA + Turkish accountant · target 16 Oct 2026Build the evidence pack and confirm rights.
Reconstruct costs honestly; obtain acceptance and scope-matched quotes; review duplicated work; resolve Esin AI rights for D4/D5.
Owner: ImageFirm + Ruz business owners · target 23 Oct 2026Agree commercial scope with the partner.
Discuss accepted items, benchmark method, tax allocation, gross-up, cash capacity and payment milestones. Document exclusions separately.
Owner: Ruz shareholders · target 30 Oct 2026Complete corporate and contractual approvals.
Counsel handles the necessary corporate process and conflicts; authorised representatives sign a framework agreement, schedule, IP terms and defined support scope.
Owner: counsel + authorised signatories · targets 13 and 20 Nov 2026Issue only after the right checks, on legally correct dates.
Eight cluster invoices may aid review, but accountants must confirm timing, description, consideration and recognition. Agree a support start date and maintain monthly evidence.
Owner: ImageFirm finance + Ruz accountant · proposed invoice target 30 Nov; support target 1 Dec 2026
07 / Source discipline
Trace the claim
to its evidence.
Source document dated 9 October 2026. External sources reviewed 10 October 2026, İstanbul time. Legal material is a review basis; entity-specific conclusions require advisers.
Primary input: ImageFirm → Ruz Bilişim: Valuation and Invoicing Report, supplied Markdown, attributed to Uzay Kadak. Its observations are preserved as reported, its arithmetic is checked, and its judgments are labelled. No new server inspection was performed.
- Promethean · Digital Agency Industry ReportPrimary industry research; rate distribution and AI-related pricing pressure. Broad benchmark, not this engagement’s comparable.
- OECD · Transfer Pricing Guidelines, 2022General arm’s-length framework; not a substitute for Turkish law and a transaction-specific analysis.
- OECD · Chapter VII consultation, June 2026Draft guidance on intragroup services. Clearly distinguished from final guidance or binding domestic law.
- IRS · Form 8802 instructionsDisregarded entities and US treaty-residency certification.
- IRS · Türkiye–US income-tax treatyArticles 4, 7, 12, 14 and 22 require consideration together.
- Ministry of Trade · Turkish Commercial CodeOfficial-hosted text including Article 395; counsel must check current consolidated provisions and the actual transaction.
- TURKPA · VAT Law, Articles 29–30Payment and deduction conditions; also see GİB Article 30. No recovery timing is guaranteed here.
- IRS · Form 5472 instructionsFiling scope, related parties, recordkeeping and escalating penalties.
- Brand Finance · IT Services 202620 January 2026; Accenture, TCS and Infosys are the top three by this publisher’s brand-value measure.
- Infosys · GenAI development case studySupplier-reported fashion-client results; no independent verification claimed.
- Hertz v. Accenture · complaint, 19 April 2019Primary pleading, hosted copy; allegations, not a final judgment.
- McKinsey · public visual-identity accountPublic design reference. No proprietary McKinsey digital style guide was accessed.
- Templately · 2025 one-page design roundup22 April 2025 editorial inspiration list, not an objective top-ten ranking. The ten named examples reviewed are listed below.
- W3C · WCAG 2.2Accessibility reference for semantics, contrast, keyboard use, reflow and target size.
- web.dev · Interaction to Next PaintGood field INP is ≤200 ms at the 75th percentile. The requested <100 ms is a stricter engineering target, not a verified result.
Design research: ten 2025-roundup references and the patterns retained
These are editorial examples discussed in a 2025 roundup, not necessarily sites launched in 2025 or a verified global ranking. Reflect Studio is explicitly described there as not strictly single-page. Patterns below are this page’s design decisions, not a claim of copying a proprietary system.
| Reference | Pattern applied |
|---|---|
| HoneyBee | A restrained, consistent palette. |
| Bruno Simon | Active exploration through the scenario calculator. |
| Neverland | A clear narrative from decision to evidence. |
| Every Last Drop | Numbers explained through cause and effect. |
| Anton & Irene | Typography does the hierarchy work. |
| Melanie Daveid | Progressive disclosure for detail. |
| Orbital Systems | Visible comparison of alternatives. |
| Reflect Studio | Persistent section navigation. |
| ONCE · Writebook | Readable long-form explanation. |
| Artone Studio | Feature-to-benefit framing. |
McKinsey’s public identity material informed editorial restraint. The implemented system uses native fonts, clear source notes and exact tables. No animation, autoplay, WebGL or decorative loading sequence is needed for this decision.
Delivery notes: privacy, accessibility and performance
This is a self-contained HTML file with inline CSS and JavaScript, static readable content, no external runtime dependencies, no analytics and no network requests from its calculations. Search, filters and scenarios run locally. Nothing is approved, sent or persisted by the controls.
Semantic landmarks, skip navigation, native labels/details, visible focus, readable table overflow, reduced-motion support and print styles are included. Indexing is intentionally disabled because this contains private financial and ownership information. Server authentication remains necessary; a robots tag does not secure the page.
The interaction budget is under 100 ms. Arithmetic and structural checks are performed during creation; real-device browser rendering, assistive-technology review and field responsiveness have not been certified in this environment. Validate them before wider distribution.