Marketfauna · Decision Briefs

Every seller claim beside the public record

A Decision Brief is an evidence packet on one small online-business listing: what the registry, the archive, the live site, and the platforms' own transfer rules confirm, what they cannot, and what to ask for first. It does not value the business and it does not tell you what to bid.

For buyers

Decision Brief

$79 per listing

You name a listing priced $25,000 to $250,000 on Flippa, Acquire, or a comparable marketplace (smaller listings on request). The packet arrives by email within 24 hours of agreed scope, in readable and machine-readable form.

Identity chain from listing ID to live site, each link marked verified, inferred, or unavailable
Claim ledger: every seller claim split into atomic statements and marked Agrees, Cannot check, or Unresolved against public evidence; bounds scored as bounds
Transferability notes read from the platforms' own pages (ad networks, email platforms, social accounts, registrars)
Ranked list of what to ask the seller, starting with what no public source can show

Request a brief

How payment works today: payment instructions are confirmed with you when scope is agreed, and the brief is invoiced by email at delivery. Card payment links follow once the business's payment account is open; that is estimated at about two weeks and depends on onboarding.

For sellers

Public-Record Check

$99 per listing

For listings priced $25,000 to $250,000. The same packet, run on your own listing before buyers do it to you, plus a one-page summary you can attach to the listing: what public records confirm, what they cannot, and the documents buyers will ask for. Delivered within 24 hours of agreed scope. It checks claims against public records only. It does not verify private financials and it certifies nothing.

Find the claims that will not survive diligence before a buyer does
Know exactly which statements and exports to have ready
Domain expiry, locks, and transfer rules flagged before they stall a close

Request a check

We say plainly what we could not check. A clean result, where every checkable claim agrees with the record, is a useful result: it tells a buyer which questions are already answered and which are not.

What a brief looks like

A real one, on a live listing, with identifying details kept as they appear publicly: 27 atomic claims, 9 agree, 17 cannot be checked from outside, 1 unresolved discrepancy (a platform badge whose scope conflicts with the platform's own help page), 0 disagree. The decision line was not a price. It was "request the missing evidence before valuation," with the exact export to ask for.

Section	What it contains
Identity chain	Listing ID, title, domain, registry record, archive history, live site, About page, seller profile: each link with its status and source
Claim ledger	One row per atomic claim with source, evidence, evidence URL, agreement, and what any platform badge covers for that field
Unresolved	Ranked by effect on valuation; each with the single next verification and who must supply it
Transfers	What moves at sale under each platform's published rules, marked read or typical
Substitutes	Where a marketplace's own report or a paid tool is better than this brief, stated honestly

Rules we hold ourselves to

A bound like "over 256 posts" is satisfied by 331 and is never scored against it. A compound claim is split before it is scored. A privacy-proxied registrant is "public ownership link unavailable," not adverse. Absence of an ad tag on one page is not proof of no ads. A domain's registration date is context for an establishment claim, not confirmation. Fewer findings with correct statuses beat many findings with false alarms.