What the paper says
Document roll-up
Current to 13 Oct 26All six documents were read: four final, two draft, none executed. Three proposals price Enterprise at £125k a year, but there is no order form, so no price or service level is contracted. Two final proposals share one file name and differ in detail.
Executed: No document for Etowah Lane Equipment Rental has a stored status of executed, and no order form is on file. Every executed term is therefore empty, and no price, term or service level is contracted.
Open items: Jordan Pike's two final proposals, dated 8 Sep 2026 and 15 Sep 2026, and his draft of 10 Sep 2026 each price the Enterprise subscription at £125k a year. Each is an offer, not a commitment.
The 8 Sep 2026 proposal, addressed to Laura Kessler and DeShawn Mitchell, itemises a £30k one-off implementation and payment thirty days from invoice. The 15 Sep 2026 proposal states a £155k total and says it is not an annual price.
The side-by-side evaluation plan of 2 Jun 2026 compares Enterprise with the group-wide analytics suite, and the customer scores every answer. It sets no price or terms.
Contradictions:
- The final proposals of 8 Sep 2026 and 15 Sep 2026 share one file name. Only the earlier one itemises the £30k implementation and the thirty-day payment terms.
- The draft proposal of 10 Sep 2026 is later than the final of 8 Sep 2026. It leaves payment terms open and does not state the implementation fee separately.
- The final security questionnaire of 22 May 2026 states a 30 minute P1 first response and Enterprise credits for availability and freshness. The later draft of 30 Jun 2026 defers those figures to the order form.
Commitments: None are live, because nothing is executed. The 30 minute P1 response in the 22 May 2026 questionnaire is a stated answer, and that document says it does not replace the order form.
Gaps: The evidence does not show a start date, a term length, a connector list, a signatory or the customer's response to either proposal. Open security points remain on Snowflake region, systems in scope, support hours and identity provider. The evidence does not show which proposal the customer holds as current.
Executed terms
Current to 9 Oct 26- Billingnot recorded
- Endnot recorded
- Pricenot recorded
- Service levels[]
- Startnot recorded
- Term monthsnot recorded
Documents
Updated 9 Oct 26- delivery
- presales
Folders and documents as a list
- Onboarding (1)
- Side-by-side evaluation plan issued · onboarding plan · 2 Jun 2026
- Proposals (3)
- Enterprise tier proposal issued · proposal · 8 Sep 2026
- Draft Enterprise proposal, new business draft · proposal · 10 Sep 2026
- Enterprise proposal under evaluation issued · proposal · 15 Sep 2026
- Security (2)
- Enterprise security review questionnaire issued · security questionnaire · 22 May 2026
- Draft security questionnaire answers draft · security questionnaire · 30 Jun 2026
Contradictions
Current to 9 Oct 26| Document | Against | What differs |
|---|---|---|
| Etowah Lane Equipment Rental - Proposal | Etowah Lane Equipment Rental - Proposal | Two final proposals share one file name; the 8 Sep 2026 copy itemises a £30,000 implementation and thirty-day payment terms, while the 15 Sep 2026 copy does not itemise implementation and states a £155,000 total. |
| Etowah Lane Equipment Rental - Proposal | Etowah Lane Equipment Rental - Proposal v1 | The draft of 10 Sep 2026 postdates the final of 8 Sep 2026 but leaves payment terms open and does not state the implementation fee separately. |
| Etowah Lane Equipment Rental - Security Questionnaire | Etowah Lane Equipment Rental - Security Questionnaire v1 | The final questionnaire of 22 May 2026 states a 30 minute P1 response and Enterprise credits; the later draft of 30 Jun 2026 defers availability and response figures to the order form. |