AI buyers pay most for a firm's whole record set, linked across systems: the email, chat, tickets and documents around each job, claim, case or design, joined to the specialist system where the work is recorded, over several unbroken years. As of 13 November 2026, three buyers publish staff floors between 20 and 40, a fourth asks for several teams across several systems, and the ranges micro1 and Handshake AI publish run from $100K to $4M; those are ceilings set by the buyers, not offers. The links, not the volume, set the price, because they show why each decision was made.
- Buyers value relationships between records: a chat thread, the ticket it raised and the fix that closed it. Separate exports with no common keys are worth much less.
- Unbroken history on the same systems matters. Several years on one email, chat and ticketing setup lets a buyer follow work from start to finish.
- Size floors are published: micro1 30+ full-time staff, Handshake AI 20+ staff and 3+ years, Scale AI 40+ employees preferred. A specialist firm of about 50 people clears all of them.
- Client-owned files, privileged material, tax returns, health and card data, and recordings without consent stay out. Checking that before anything moves is the work.
Who this guide is for
Owners and managers of specialist firms with roughly 50 or more staff: repair stations, manufacturers, contractors, claims operations, lenders, physician groups and billing companies, design firms and labs. A firm of this size usually runs its work through the same handful of systems for years, and that is what buyers look for.
Smaller firms can still license records, but most published programmes set a floor between 20 and 40 staff. If you are under it, the guide to what company data is worth explains the other routes.
Why the whole linked record set is worth more than any one system
Buyers say directly that the connections are the value. Mercor writes that the value depends on "uniqueness, historical depth, volume, and the relationships between records across systems", and that "A history that links, for example, a Slack thread to a ticket to the code change shows why a certain decision was made" (Mercor). micro1 says that "Companies with several years of records across multiple business systems are generally a stronger fit" (micro1). AfterQuery prices "By depth, breadth and uniqueness: years of history, number of connected systems" (AfterQuery).
The reason is what the records are used for. Buyers build training and test environments in which AI agents do real work; micro1 says this "requires environments that preserve the context behind how businesses work" (micro1). A support ticket alone shows a question and an answer. The same ticket linked to the chat where staff argued about it, the email to the customer and the change in the specialist system shows how the firm actually solved it. That is the part a model cannot learn from the public web.
De-identification has to keep those links. Mercor describes the method: "when the same customer appears across an email, support ticket, and CRM record, consistent replacement can preserve the connection between those interactions" (Mercor). Names are replaced with the same pseudonym everywhere, so the thread survives without the identity.
What the evidence says, graded
Most figures for company operating records are what buyers publish about themselves. They are labelled as company claims; the one court-recorded price is still pending. See the editorial policy for the grades.
| Evidence | What it says | Grade |
|---|---|---|
| Spirit Airlines archive | Google was the successful bidder at $10.0M for the airline's de-identified emails, chats, documents and maintenance data; the sale is contested and not approved, with the approval hearing on 17 November 2026 (Chapter 11 Cases) | Court record (docket summary) |
| micro1 commitment | "commitment to spend $1B on enterprise data acquisition over the next 12 months" (micro1) | Company claim (a commitment, not spend) |
| Mercor payments | "Mercor has paid over $50 million for it" (Mercor) | Company claim |
| Handshake AI range | "Qualified partnerships typically range from $100K to $4M depending on the data" (Handshake AI) | Company claim (published band) |
| micro1 range | "payments typically ranging from $100K to over $3M" (micro1) | Company claim (published band) |
Published ranges are what buyers say they may pay, not offers. Treat the top of any range as a ceiling.
Size and history floors buyers publish
Each buyer below was read on its own page on 13 November 2026.
| Buyer | Published floor | Source |
|---|---|---|
| micro1 | "established companies with 30+ full-time employees" | micro1 |
| Handshake AI | "20+ full time employees & 3+ years in operation" | Handshake AI |
| Scale AI | "40+ employees is our preferred starting point" | Scale AI |
| AfterQuery | "several teams working across several systems, and a few years of history" | AfterQuery |
Why unbroken history sets the price
A buyer follows work from the first message to the outcome. That only works when the records sit on the same systems long enough to hold whole jobs, claims or projects, and when the keys that join them (a job number, a claim number, a ticket ID, a customer account) stay the same.
Migrations break the chain. If the firm moved from one ticketing tool or email host to another, keep the old exports and the mapping between old and new IDs; without them, years of history become two unconnected halves. A gap in retention (a chat tool set to delete after 90 days, say) does the same.
Check three things before anything else: how many years each system holds, whether the same IDs appear across systems, and whether anything was deleted or migrated in between.
What to inventory first
List each system, the years it covers and the key that joins it to the others. Counts and dates are enough at this stage; no files leave the company. The data inventory template has columns for all of this.
| System | What to note | Key that links it |
|---|---|---|
| Email (Google Workspace, Microsoft 365) | Years held, mailboxes in scope, whether an archive or Vault export exists | Customer, job or case references in subjects and bodies |
| Chat (Slack, Teams) | Years held, retention settings, channels by team | Ticket or job IDs pasted in threads |
| Tickets and work tracking (Jira, Zendesk, ServiceNow) | Ticket count by year, status history kept or not | Ticket ID, customer account |
| CRM and billing | Accounts, deals, invoices by year | Customer account, contract number |
| Documents (Drive, SharePoint) | Folders by client, project or year; versions kept | Project or job number in folder names |
| Sector system: Aviation and MRO | Maintenance tracking (TRAX, AMOS, CAMP, Corridor): work cards, non-routine findings, deferrals | Job, claim, case or part number; see aviation and mro |
| Sector system: Manufacturers (CAD) | PDM or PLM vault and QMS: CAD with revisions, change orders, NCRs and CAPA | Job, claim, case or part number; see manufacturers (cad) |
| Sector system: Construction | Project management and job cost (Procore, Autodesk Construction Cloud, Sage 300 CRE): RFIs, submittals, change orders | Job, claim, case or part number; see construction |
| Sector system: Insurance claims | Claims system (Guidewire, Duck Creek, Origami Risk): notes, reserves, payments, outcomes | Job, claim, case or part number; see insurance claims |
| Sector system: Non-bank lenders | Loan origination and servicing (Encompass, MeridianLink): conditions, QC findings, performance | Job, claim, case or part number; see non-bank lenders |
| Sector system: Healthcare billing | Practice management, billing and clearinghouse: claims, remittances, denials, appeals, prior authorizations | Job, claim, case or part number; see healthcare billing |
| Sector system: Chip design | Version control, regression and bug tracking: RTL history, testbenches, coverage, ECOs | Job, claim, case or part number; see chip design |
| Sector system: Biotech and CROs | ELN and LIMS (Benchling, IDBS, Dotmatics): protocols, assay results, failed runs | Job, claim, case or part number; see biotech and cros |
What stays out
Linked records are only worth something if the firm owns them and can share them. Before any sample, take out: files that belong to clients under your contracts; privileged legal material; tax returns and return information (see Section 7216); health information unless a covered entity signs and it is de-identified to HIPAA's standard; payment card data; call and meeting recordings made without consent to this use; and credentials. AfterQuery, for example, says "sensitive categories such as payroll, privileged legal material and credentials are never used" (AfterQuery).
Each sector adds its own limits: export-controlled designs, foundry and IP vendor files, aircraft owners' logbooks, borrower identities and SAR files, sponsor-owned study data. The sector guides below list them.
Audit before transfer, and who signs
The company that owns the records signs the licence: usually the CEO or owners, with the privacy or compliance lead. In a wind-down, a board, an assignee or a trustee signs instead; see how a debtor's records are sold in a 363 sale.
Ask to review a de-identified sample before delivery, limit the licence to named uses, and avoid perpetual, sublicensable grants where you can. Origin's part is the audit before anything moves: which systems link, what has to come out, and which buyers have asked for this sector's records. See how it works.
Sector guides
The specialist half of the record set differs by sector: aviation repair station and MRO records for AI; manufacturer CAD and quality records for AI; construction project records for AI; insurance claims files: who can license them; non-bank lender loan files for AI; healthcare claims, denials and prior authorizations; chip design and verification data for AI; biotech, CRO and lab assay data for AI.
Agent traces join the linked record set
If your firm runs AI agents on its own systems, each trace links a task to the tickets, ledger entries or logs the agent read and the outcome it reached. See licensing agent traces from production.
Guides for each valuable record type
The record types AI buyers rank highest, each with the guide that covers it:
| Record type | Guide |
|---|---|
| CAD and PLM files with revision history | CAD and engineering data |
| Manufacturing quality records and inspection images | Manufacturing quality records |
| Patient records, imaging and pathology | Patient records and imaging |
| Claims, denials and prior authorizations | Healthcare billing records |
| Construction closeout sets | Construction project records |
| Chip and electronics design data | Chip design firm data |
| Lab notebooks and assay results | Biotech, CRO and lab data |
| Insurance claims files | Insurance claims files |
| Aviation maintenance records | Aviation repair station data |
| Security incident and SOC cases | Cybersecurity incident data |
| Loan files and deal records | Loan files and deal data |
| Legal matter files | Law firm data and the ethics rules |
| Industrial maintenance and sensor data | Industrial maintenance records |
| Factory and job-site work for robot data | Skilled work demonstrations |
| AI agent traces from production | Agent traces |
| Evaluation sets, tasks, corrections, staff time and refreshes | Beyond the archive |
What happens next
Describe your systems, years and headcount; no files or system access are needed. Origin replies with what a buyer would ask about the linked set, what has to stay out, and whether it is worth a sample. See what your data is worth.
Origin Data Partners works with companies that own data and helps get it bought. We are independent of the services on this page, and a buyer may pay us when a deal closes (how Origin is paid). See what your data is worth.
Common questions
Why do AI buyers pay more for linked company records?
Because the links show how work was done and why. Mercor says value depends on uniqueness, historical depth, volume and the relationships between records across systems; a Slack thread linked to a ticket and the change that closed it shows a decision from start to finish, which separate exports cannot.
How big does a company need to be to license its records to AI buyers?
Published floors as of 13 November 2026: micro1 30+ full-time employees, Handshake AI 20+ employees and 3+ years in operation, Scale AI 40+ employees preferred, and AfterQuery several teams across several systems with a few years of history.
How many years of records do AI buyers want?
Several years on the same systems. micro1 says companies with several years of records across multiple business systems are generally a stronger fit; Handshake AI asks for 3+ years in operation.
What records cannot be included?
Client-owned files, privileged legal material, tax return information, health information without a covered entity signing and proper de-identification, payment card data, recordings without consent and credentials, plus sector limits such as export-controlled designs.
Sources and further reading
- Mercor: Your company is sitting on a new asset (12 Nov 2026)
- micro1: $1B enterprise data commitment (9 Oct 2026)
- Handshake AI: employer data partnerships (20 Oct 2026)
- micro1: company data partnerships
- Handshake AI: license your data
- Scale AI: data partnership
- AfterQuery: data partnerships
- Chapter 11 Cases: Spirit Airlines data sale
