At $61 per answered call, a $299 seat needs about 40 subscribers, so which pricing model breaks first?

Your $1,200 per lead is doing all the work in this post, and it is not a stable number. 21 handoffs from 412 answers is a 5% conversion off answered, which is fine, but 412 answers from 3,050 dials is 13.5% and that is the line that decides everything. If the list is fresh, phone match is good and callers are consistent, 13.5% is defensible. If it drifts to 9% because the good records in three counties have already been burned, cost per lead goes to $1,800 and no seat price saves it. So before picking a model, lay out the answer rate by month for the last four months and by county. If it is declining in the oldest county, this is a depleting resource, and subscription pricing will hurt worst because that is the model where volume was promised.

I've bought from three products that looked like your subscription version. All three, the leads were fine for two months and then repetitive, same records recycled with a new date on them. That's what made me cancel, not the price.

Which makes me think your real constraint isn't 40 seats, it's how many seats three counties can support before I'm bidding against four other subscribers on the same house. Have you worked out what that number is? Because if three counties support 12 buyers, $299 never gets you there and you need county number four before you need a pricing page.

The back end fee idea is how I got burned on something unrelated. Guy took my work for free for five months, closed two, and then had a very creative view of what counted as attributable. Unless you can see the closing yourself you're trusting a spreadsheet you don't control.

@samantha_ruiz's saturation point is the question to chase first. Three counties and 4,100 scored records a month produce 21 that talk. Even if you triple the calling that's maybe 60 real leads a month. Spread across 40 subscribers that's a lead and a half each, and nobody renews at $299 for a lead and a half. Spread across 10 subscribers it's six each, which might hold, and that means your price has to be closer to $1,200 a seat and you're selling to a much smaller group of people who can absorb it.

What stands out is that you have two businesses tangled together. The scoring model on 240,000 records is one. The calling operation is the other. The calling is what costs $61 an answer, and it is also the part that does not scale without hiring. What happens if you sell the scored list only, no calls, at a low seat price, and let buyers do their own dialing? You would find out fast whether the scoring is actually worth anything, which right now you do not know because it is buried under a human being making phone calls.

Six pilot users and zero paying is the number I'd worry about more than the $1,200. Two said they'd pay. In my experience saying and paying are unrelated. Can you put an invoice in front of those two this week at $299 and see what happens? Everything else in this post is theory until one of them pays.

On the closed deal fee, the mechanics are harder than they sound. You need a definition of an originated lead, a time window, a duty to report closings, and some way to audit. Plenty of agreements like that carry a reporting obligation that is one sentence long and completely unenforceable in practice. If you go that route get it drafted properly by an attorney, and understand that the collection problem is yours forever. Separately, check what the counties' terms actually permit on redistribution. That varies by state and even by county office, and some publish bulk data with restrictions attached.

I'd pay $299 for six real motivated sellers a month, no question. I'd cancel by month three if two of them were the same guy who told your caller no in February. Dedup across time is the whole thing and it's boring work.

Naive question, when you say 96 who would talk about price and 21 you'd hand off, what disqualifies the other 75? I'm trying to understand where a lead stops being a lead.

@renee_dubois's math is the version worth taking seriously. A small pool of buyers paying a real price for a tightly defined geography. The 40 seats at $299 shape reads like it came from wanting a round number to hit rather than from what three counties can produce. And @jordan_ellis2 is right that you should try to collect money this week. Seven months of building with nobody paying is how people talk themselves into another seven months.