Article

Why the final offer can differ from the estimate

By TrustPast

Published October 31, 2026 · Updated November 1, 2026

Our estimate gives you a range in two minutes from five answers. micro1’s offer comes later, out of its own discovery and pricing step, and the payment only after it has reviewed and approved the records you transfer. The two numbers are made from different information, so they can differ, sometimes by a lot. This page sets out what each one sees, what micro1 publishes about how it sets its figure, and where the gap usually comes from.

The short answer

Our estimate is a calculator. It reads headcount, years, the number of systems, whether the company is operating and where it’s based. It never sees a single file.

micro1’s offer is a price. micro1 says it tailors an offer “based on the nature, scale, and value of your data.” It then reviews what you transfer and approves it before paying. Neither of those steps can happen in a browser form.

So the estimate tells you which published band a company like yours sits in. The offer tells you what micro1 will pay for the records you actually have, on the terms you actually agree. When the two differ, the offer is the one that counts. That’s not a hedge. It’s the order of things.

Apply & License Your Data

What our estimate actually does

The estimate asks five questions. Is the company operating or closed, and is it in the US? How many people work there, now and at peak? How many years of records does it keep, from one to “25 or more”? Which systems hold the work, from email and chat to the CRM, the accounting package and the support desk? Which industry is it in?

Headcount and location pick the buyer. A company with 30 or more people, operating or closed, or any company outside the US, is pointed at micro1. Then the answers move a range inside micro1’s published band.

The weights are simple. Years of records count most: every five years adds 0.4 to the score, while all eight systems together add 0.3, and so does every 50 people at the larger of the two headcounts. The industry is asked, but it doesn’t move the number. The low end of the range never drops below $100,000, the bottom of micro1’s referral band, and never goes above $200,000 (indicative, not an offer). The high end is about four times the low end, and both are rounded to the nearest $5,000, so the lowest range is $100,000 to $400,000 and the highest $200,000 to $800,000 (indicative, not an offer). The cap at micro1’s $2 million ceiling (indicative, not an offer) never comes into play.

Under the range, the page says it plainly: “Indicative range, not an offer. micro1 prices each company after its own review; only the buyer makes offers.” The answers stay in your browser. We don’t receive them, and neither does micro1.

Our page on what our estimate measures goes through each input and why it’s there. This page is about the other side: what the estimate can’t see.

What micro1 publishes about its ranges

micro1 publishes several ranges, on three pages, and they don’t all read the same.

The header of its data partnerships page says “We’re paying out $200k-2M+ for the data your business already generates” (indicative, not an offer). Its payout page carries the same header.

Lower down, the data partnerships page lists three tiers under the line “Compensation is based on the quality, uniqueness, and value of the data provided.” They are $100K-500K, $500K-2M and $2M+ (indicative, not an offer).

$100K-500K (indicative, not an offer): “Qualified Enterprise Data Partnerships.”
$500K-2M (indicative, not an offer): “Large-scale operational datasets or ongoing participation across multiple teams and business functions.”
$2M+ (indicative, not an offer): “Highly unique, proprietary operational data.”

Its fourth step, payment, adds another line: “We pay in full within 30 days of acceptance, with payments typically ranging from $150K to over $2M” (indicative, not an offer).

The referral page lists company compensation as “$100K-$2M+ for approved data packages” (indicative, not an offer), for both its operating and its closed-company programme.

Read together, the header starts higher than the lowest tier, and the payment step’s “typically” starts between the two. micro1 doesn’t explain the difference, and we won’t guess at it. What all four agree on is the top: no published ceiling, only a plus sign. Our page on what a company’s records are worth goes through where a company lands in those tiers.

What micro1 says decides the price

micro1 publishes two lists, and neither is a formula.

On its data partnerships page: “Compensation is determined based on the characteristics and value of the data being contributed. Factors considered include dataset size and volume, workflow complexity, data quality, domain expertise represented, and the uniqueness of the operational knowledge contained within the dataset.”

On its payout page, under its own estimator: “Indicative estimate only. Final payout is determined based on data sources, volume, quality, access terms, and due diligence.”

And one sentence that settles who decides: “Each partnership is evaluated individually, and compensation is aligned with the overall value and relevance of the data provided.”

Put those next to our five questions. Volume and data sources are the only two our estimate gets near, through years and systems. Quality, workflow complexity, domain expertise, uniqueness, access terms and due diligence are invisible to a form. Our page on what decides the price takes each factor in turn.

What the estimate cannot see

Here’s the list, in the order an owner usually runs into it.

What’s inside the files. Two companies can both tick “CRM or job software” and “Shared files.” One has every estimate with three revisions and a note on why the number moved. The other has final invoices and nothing behind them. micro1 says it’s looking for “data that reflects how work is actually performed within an organization.” The estimate counts the systems. It can’t read them.

Whether the years are really there. The slider asks how many years of records the company keeps. The honest answer is often shorter than the company’s age. The estimating program might start in 2011. The email might stop at the last server move. micro1 says it evaluates “the historical depth, breadth, quality, and relevance of the available data.” Depth with gaps isn’t the same depth. Our page on how many years of records count shows how to date an archive.

Whether old systems can still be opened. A retired estimating program you can’t export from is still a system you used. Until someone can get the data out, it’s worth less. The estimate takes your tick at face value.

The judgment in the work. micro1’s October announcement says real business operations “involve incomplete information, competing priorities and exceptions that require judgment.” A change order with the back-and-forth that settled it carries that. A clean summary doesn’t. No form question can tell the two apart.

How unusual the work is. micro1’s top tier is for “highly unique, proprietary operational data.” Uniqueness is a factor on its list. Our estimate doesn’t move with industry at all, let alone with how rare a company’s niche is.

Access terms. micro1’s payout page names “access terms” as a factor. It doesn’t publish which terms or how they’re weighed. Our page on whether this is a licence or a sale sets out the terms worth reading in a draft. The estimate assumes nothing about them.

Due diligence. That’s micro1’s word, and it comes after the form. Whatever micro1 checks in that step, our estimate has already finished.

The discovery-and-pricing step

micro1’s process has four steps. The first is “Discovery & pricing,” described this way: “We identify licensable datasets across your business and tailor an offer based on the nature, scale, and value of your data.”

That’s the step where an estimate turns into a price. Before it, micro1 has your profile and data manifest. Its referral page says the company “completes data manifest,” the team “reviews the application,” and “Qualified companies are invited to connect with a Data Partnership Manager to discuss their data, licensing terms, and next steps.”

Three words in micro1’s first step are worth reading slowly. “Licensable” means some of your records may not be. “Tailor” means the offer is built for your company, not read off a table. “Value” means the figure follows what’s in the records, not how many people signed the payroll.

micro1 doesn’t publish when in that sequence a figure is first named, or whether it’s named on the call. Our page on what happens on the discovery call has the questions worth asking there.

Records that drop out of scope

The estimate assumes everything you ticked counts. The offer covers what’s licensed and approved.

micro1’s wording shows the narrowing at each step. Discovery identifies “licensable datasets.” The referral page says that if there’s a fit, “the company transfers approved data.” Compensation is “for approved data packages.” Delivery ends with “We review the data for completeness.”

In a trade company, the most common reasons a record drops out are ones you can see coming. A client’s drawings under a confidentiality clause. A general contractor’s plans marked confidential. Files from a system nobody can open. Folders with no work in them, only payroll or bank statements. Our page on client-owned work and NDAs covers the first two.

micro1 doesn’t publish how a narrower scope changes the figure. In our reading, it would be odd if volume counted on the way in and not on the way out, but that’s a question for micro1, not a published term. Ask it on the call: “If these forty projects come out, what happens to the offer?”

Review and approval: the 30 days

After contracting, the company transfers the records. micro1’s third step reads: “You securely transfer your data through our APIs or other approved methods. We review the data for completeness.”

The clock is published. “Once your company transfers its data, micro1 has 30 days to review and approve it.”

This is the second place an estimate and a final figure can part ways. The offer is made on what was described. Approval is given on what arrived. If the job files arrive without the change orders, or the email export stops two years short, the package micro1 reviews isn’t the one it priced.

micro1 doesn’t publish what happens when a delivery falls short: whether it asks for more, narrows the package or adjusts the payment. Ask before you sign. Our page on whether you can review the data before it’s used covers the separate check that’s yours to make.

Payment terms

micro1 publishes two lines on payment, and they use different starting points.

The fourth step: “We pay in full within 30 days of acceptance.” The FAQ: “After the data is approved, we’ll ask your company to submit an invoice, and payment will be made within 30 days of invoicing.”

In our reading, the two fit together if the invoice follows approval straight away. They don’t say how quickly micro1 asks for the invoice. Ask which clock your agreement will use, and write the date into your own calendar.

“In full” is the other phrase worth noting. As published, the basic case is a single payment once the data is accepted. micro1’s middle tier mentions “ongoing participation across multiple teams and business functions,” so some arrangements may run longer. Our page on whether it’s a one-off or a recurring payment goes through what micro1 does and doesn’t say.

The estimate shows a range. It says nothing about when money arrives, because there’s nothing to arrive until a contract exists.

De-identification, and why it doesn’t lower the figure

Owners sometimes assume the price drops once names come out. micro1’s pages don’t say that, and the logic runs the other way.

micro1 says “Personal and identifying information is removed or transformed before your data is shared with third parties.” It says “certain datasets may undergo synthetic rewrites that preserve workflow structure while reducing direct ties to original records.” And asked whether a company needs to anonymize its data before transferring it: “No, micro1 has processes for de-identifying and transforming sensitive information.”

Customer names and payments were never what’s wanted. What’s wanted is how the work was done: how an estimate became a job, how a change order was settled, how a repair was diagnosed. Our cornerstone page on what data buyers want from a trade business sorts a contractor’s files that way.

There’s one practical point. Don’t scrub records by hand before transfer to “protect” the price. Hand-scrubbing tends to strip the context that gives a record its value. micro1 says it does the de-identifying. Our page on how de-identification works shows what each approach does to a record.

What this means for a mechanical contractor

Take a hypothetical mechanical contractor with 45 people. It’s our own example, not a case micro1 has published. It’s been trading for 24 years and keeps email, shared files, a job management system and accounting.

On the estimate, the owner answers “operating,” 45 now and 60 at peak, the slider at 24 years, four systems. The range lands inside micro1’s band and says it’s indicative.

Then the office manager starts the data manifest, and the real picture takes shape. The estimating program goes back to 2013, not 2002; the earlier bids are paper. The job management system starts in 2017. Email goes back to 2010. Three hospital projects sit under confidentiality terms and stay out.

What’s left is still a lot. A decade of bids with every revision. Change orders for the duct run that had to move, with the emails that settled the price. Service tickets where the first visit replaced a part and the second found the real fault. That’s the judgment micro1 says it wants.

The offer, when it comes, prices those records, not the slider. It might sit near the estimate. It might not. Either way, the reason is in the files.

What is never included

micro1 doesn’t publish a fixed list of records it excludes. Its pages say personal and identifying information is removed or transformed before sharing, and that data is “de-identified before sharing.”

Customer names, card numbers and account balances aren’t the point and don’t add to a price. What we’d expect to stay out, as our own advice and not micro1’s terms: payroll and HR files, health information, payment-card and bank details, Social Security numbers, attorney-client privileged files, and work a client owns under contract. Raise anything near those lines on the call. Our page on what is never included goes through each one, and how it’s safe covers handling from start to finish.

Where we fit

We, TrustPast, built the estimate so an owner can see the published band before spending an afternoon on a manifest. We never see your files, your manifest, your offer or your agreement. micro1 pays us a referral fee if a deal completes. You pay us nothing. Our page on what TrustPast does, and what it doesn’t lists the rest of our part.

The estimate is a starting point. The offer is micro1’s, made after its review. If you’d like to see the range first, the estimate takes two minutes. Ready to find out what the records themselves are worth?

TrustPast

Questions and answers

Is the range on TrustPast's estimate an offer?

No. The range under the calculator reads “Indicative range, not an offer.” micro1 prices each company after its own review, and only micro1 makes offers. micro1's own estimator says the same of its figures: “Indicative estimate only.”

What does micro1 say decides the final figure?

Two published lists. Its data partnerships page: “Factors considered include dataset size and volume, workflow complexity, data quality, domain expertise represented, and the uniqueness of the operational knowledge contained within the dataset.” Its payout page: “Final payout is determined based on data sources, volume, quality, access terms, and due diligence.”

What ranges does micro1 publish?

Its data partnerships page header says “We're paying out $200k-2M+”, its tiers are $100K-500K, $500K-2M and $2M+, and its payment step says payments typically range “from $150K to over $2M” (indicative, not an offer). Its referral page lists “$100K-$2M+ for approved data packages” (indicative, not an offer). It publishes no formula.

When does micro1 pay, and how long does its review take?

micro1 says: “Once your company transfers its data, micro1 has 30 days to review and approve it. After the data is approved, we'll ask your company to submit an invoice, and payment will be made within 30 days of invoicing.” Its payment step reads: “We pay in full within 30 days of acceptance.”

Do we have to strip out customer names first?

No. Asked whether a company needs to anonymize its data before transferring it, micro1 answers: “No, micro1 has processes for de-identifying and transforming sensitive information.” It also says personal and identifying information “is removed or transformed before your data is shared with third parties.”

Can some of our records drop out before payment?

micro1's own words point that way. Its first step identifies “licensable datasets”, its referral page says the company “transfers approved data”, and its compensation is “for approved data packages.” micro1 doesn't publish how a record that drops out changes the figure. Ask on the call.