I hesitated about trying one of these "sapphic retellings" for a long time, because I worried it wouldn't feel sufficiently… feminine, for lack of a better way to put it. The Algorithm Gods kept insisting that I should definitely try them, though, and I finally gave in. Would that I'd held my nerve.
The Contract is just full of little things that feel like vestiges of the original maledom version, e.g., on pg. 70, Jamie worried "that [Ms. Coleman] would want to get it in her as quickly as possible." What is "it" when there's no penis? Sure, penetration is a thing in lesbian sex, but it hardly holds the same primacy. This story relies very heavily on strapons in ways that feel like shortcuts to avoid having to do a more thorough rewrite. e.g., Etta evidently wore a strapon under her suit to dinner. Later, during foreplay, "Knowing that a woman like Etta Coleman almost burst through her trousers to get her to her lover was one hot thought." What?
If this story had been written from scratch, it feels like Etta would've been the focal character instead of Jamie, because it seems like the sex is more about her grappling with some gender identity issues than it is about Jamie grappling with the D/s dynamics. As it is, we don't get any window into what's going on with Etta, really, but whatever it is, it makes the sex scenes—of which there are loads; they're are a substantial fraction of the book—not really feel like a work of sapphic erotica. It seems pretty clear that this was conceived in some fashion more superficial than a true "retelling". I just couldn't shake the impression that it was hastily edited from The Billion Dollar Contract, changing only the bare minimum to give it a veneer of sapphic erotica without bothering to rework the scenes sufficiently deeply to feel like they authentically involve two women.
There's definitely some potential in The Contract, but I just couldn't get past how un-sapphic it all felt. I'd guess it would probably appeal more to bi or pan readers, but I'm not in a position to speak to that.
Beyond that, there are a number of more pedantic issues with the writing and editing.
There are a number of instances where the hyphen is missing from end-of-line syllabification.
There's some inconsistency about Ms. Coleman's pronouns. Usually she's she/her—and she's also "a woman" and "a lady" and "Madam"—but occasionally she's they/them for no discernible reason. And this inconsistency isn't strictly limited to Ms. Coleman, either, although most instances seem to be with her. I don't have a copy of The Billion Dollar Contract to compare, but I'm guessing Ms. Coleman isn't the only character who's been reworked from male to female, and it comes up with any of them; e.g., on pg. 108, apropos of Jacqueline Love, we get, "If they had a hat, Jamie did not doubt that she would tip it at her before leaving."
There are little discontinuities in the writing, e.g., on pg. 44, Jamie dons a "silk red Queen Anne dress" (adjective order violation also original; more on that below), but then later that night on pg. 62, we're told a sapphire "matches the color of [her] dress perfectly," before on pg. 68, the dress is explicitly confirmed to be blue. I doubt Jamie changed dresses during dinner.
Surprisingly, the authors violate the rules of adjective order multiple times, e.g., on pg. 123, Jamie is wearing a "silk white pencil skirt". This is a sort of error that non-native speakers often struggle mightily with, but most native speakers never err with this, so I'm not sure where this is coming from. (opinion, size, age, shape, colour, origin, material, purpose)