CRM property management software (4 sources)

Every row is a verbatim sentence read from the named source's own page through our fetch service on the date shown, hash-pinned to the stored read (the sha of the page's visible text; the raw page is mirrored to R2).

6 of the 27 named sources that could be read published a usable figure; 21 published none and are recorded as not published, never filled in; 0 could not be read (blocked, dead or unreachable) and count nowhere.

The headline figures (median, minimum, maximum, quartiles) are over ONE figure per source in USD (a source's median where its page yielded several accepted sentences), so N counts sources, never sentences; 68 candidate sentence(s) were refused by a reviewer with the reason recorded.

The fuller derivation this dataset is chartered to grow into (not yet what the figures above are; they are each source's own published figure as read): one row per vendor per plan: the published entry price, the per-unit or per-seat basis, the unit or user minimum, the setup fee and what the plan gates; the board then computes the price of the SAME portfolio - 50, 200 and 1,000 units for management software, one and five seats for appraisal software - across every vendor on whatever basis it quotes, which is the comparison the buyer needs and which no vendor publishes; the share of vendors that publish nothing; the split between the management-CRM segment and the development-appraisal segment, which no category page separates; repriced-since.

68 candidate sentences on these pages were refused by a reviewer; each refusal and its reason is recorded in the review ledger.