Playtech against EveryMatrix: the suite and the stack

One sells a platform with its own content inside it; the other sells four products an operator can buy one at a time. The difference decides who owns the integration work. Both companies will quote for the same job — run an operator's player accounts, fill the lobby, take the money — and they answer it from opposite ends. Playtech sells a suite. Player account management, its own studios, live casino and the compliance tooling arrive as one commercial relationship, and the integration between the parts is the vendor's problem rather than the buyer's. What an operator gives up is the ability to replace one piece without reopening the whole contract. EveryMatrix sells modules. The platform, the aggregation layer, the sportsbook and the payment product are separate products with separate names, and an operator can take one and keep whatever it already runs. That flexibility is real, and so is the coordination cost: four products bought separately is four upgrade cycles to keep in step. Neither is the better answer in the abstract. The question underneath is whether an operator wants one supplier accountable for the whole stack, or wants the freedom to change its mind about any single layer — and that is a question about the operator's own engineering capacity, not about either vendor.