For tenant-rep and boutique CRE brokers

Compare commercial lease economics without rebuilding the spreadsheet.

3-day no-card trial. No automatic conversion. Professional is $290/year. Per-Deal is $149.

Start Free Trial See pricing See the workflow

OccupancyNPV lease comparison workspace

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE — Lease A versus Lease B, not customer data
Input	Lease A	Lease B
Start rent	$42,000	$39,000
CAM	$8,400	$9,100
TI credit, year 1	$18,000	$12,000
Free rent	2 months	1 month
Escalation	3% / year	5% / year
NPV @ 8%	$186,400	$191,220

Illustrative sample — not customer data. OccupancyNPV workflow visualization, not a production screenshot.

Who is this lease comparison workflow for?

This focused workflow is for tenant-rep brokers, independent CRE brokers, and boutique advisory teams who currently rebuild lease workbooks deal by deal and need an occupancy-cost comparison they can review with a client.

A focused OccupancyNPV workflow for comparing commercial lease economics — rent, CAM, tenant improvement allowance, free rent, escalations, NPV, and discount-rate sensitivity. OccupancyNPV is a live lease comparison and NPV workspace.

The core problem

Tenant-representation work still starts with a rebuilt spreadsheet. Face rent is copied from a proposal. Free rent lives in an email. Tenant improvement allowance sits in a term-sheet footnote. CAM is estimated in a separate tab. Discount-rate cases, if they exist, hide in a named range nobody opens.

The cost of the current workflow is not just time. Deal by deal, a hidden cell changes the ranking. The client receives a headline instead of a cash-flow argument. The broker cannot show what happens when the discount rate moves two points. Each new option rebuilds a workbook instead of updating one comparison.

Why spreadsheet-based lease comparison breaks down

Spreadsheets are honest tools. They fail as a shared method because the method is not shared. One analyst discounts annual totals. Another ignores CAM. A third subtracts TI from year-one rent even when the allowance is paid after invoices. The ranking becomes a function of the last person who touched the file.

Why face rent alone misleads

Face rent is the starting headline. It does not tell you when cash moves. A lower start rent with faster escalations, thinner TI, and shorter free rent can cost more on a present-value basis. Separate emails and a separate tab cannot keep those pieces on one occupancy-cost timeline.

The new mechanism

Capture each option’s rent schedule and incentives, place them on one cash-flow timeline, discount that stream to NPV at an explicit rate, and keep a client summary next to the sensitivity cases.

Before

Each deal rebuilds a workbook. Discount-rate cases live in a separate tab, if they exist at all.

After

One comparison workspace. NPV, sensitivity, and the client summary stay together.

How the workflow operates

Broker inputs: measurement period, discount rate, and the client-facing labels that will appear on the summary.
Lease inputs: start rent, term, escalations, tenant improvement allowance, free rent, and CAM for each option.
Term normalization and cash-flow generation so a twenty-four-month deal is not compared as a slogan against a sixty-month deal.
NPV and sensitivity analysis with the rate still visible beside the terms.
A in-workspace client summary that keeps cash-flow, ranking, and caveats together.

Product demonstration

The comparison workspace is a comparison workspace, not a CRM and not a property-management system. Cash-flow compare, NPV + sensitivity, and the client summary stay on one screen so the ranking is not an artifact of a hidden cell.

Lease A versus Lease B — worked example

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE. These figures are educational samples, not customer results.

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE — Lease A versus Lease B, not customer data
Input	Lease A	Lease B
Start rent	$42,000	$39,000
CAM	$8,400	$9,100
TI credit, year 1	$18,000	$12,000
Free rent	2 months	1 month
Escalation	3% / year	5% / year
NPV @ 8%	$186,400	$191,220

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE — cash-flow periods, not customer data
Period	Lease A net occupancy	Discounted @ 8%
Year 1	$32,400after free rent and TI	$30,000
Year 2	$51,912	$44,500
Year 3	$53,469	$42,430
Year 4	$55,073	$40,470
Year 5	$56,726	$38,600

At an 8% discount rate, Lease A’s illustrative NPV is $186,400 and Lease B’s is $191,220. Lease B starts cheaper. After faster step-ups, a smaller improvement allowance, and less free rent, its occupancy-cost present value is higher.

Value stack

Cash-flow compare

Side-by-side occupancy cost, not a CRM.

NPV + sensitivity

Discount-rate cases stay next to the terms.

Client summary

A in-workspace client summary, not a PMS.

Incentive timing

TI, free rent, and CAM stay on the same timeline.

Benefits

OccupancyNPV keeps cash-flow visible, keeps the discount-rate assumption visible, and produces a in-workspace client summary. Sensitivity stays visible so a ranking flip is a conversation, not a surprise.

Use cases

A tenant-rep broker comparing two downtown options. A boutique CRE team preparing a client presentation. An independent broker who currently rebuilds step-ups, CAM, TI, and free rent in a new spreadsheet for each deal.

Broker workflow and client presentation value

The broker still collects terms. The workflow does not replace judgment about operations, flexibility, or unmodeled clauses. It replaces the rebuilt workbook as the place those terms are compared. The client sees the same cash-flow and NPV figures the broker used, labeled as illustrative until the live terms are loaded.

Inputs the system needs

Start rent, term, escalations, tenant improvement allowance, free rent, CAM or operating-expense estimates, and an explicit discount rate. Missing fields stay visible.

Outputs the system produces

A period-by-period occupancy-cost stream, discounted NPV, a sensitivity table, and a client-summary preview. It does not produce legal advice, lease accounting entries, or a claim that anyone already pays the tested prices.

Why the old comparison method keeps losing time

A tenant-rep conversation has a short window. The broker already collected the proposals. The client wants a recommendation before the landlord’s offer expires. Rebuilding formulas for CAM, free rent, and tenant improvement allowance in that window is how face rent becomes the headline. The OccupancyNPV workflow is not a new finance theory. It is a reusable place to keep the cash-flow stream, the discount rate, and the client summary together so the next option does not require another workbook.

That is also why this site spends time on authority pages. A serious owner would not publish a comparison offer that cannot explain NPV, CAM, free rent, or escalations. The educational spokes exist so the commercial page does not have to pretend those questions are optional. They are the proof that the workflow is about lease economics, not a generic SaaS template.

The product disclosure stays next to the offer because public rollout remains controlled. No ratings, reviews, customers, or certifications are claimed. Sample figures stay labeled illustrative. If a later governed deployment is authorized, that deployment will still have to prove the same honesty.

The big promise is a truthful one: compare commercial lease economics without rebuilding the spreadsheet, with NPV, cash-flow, and a in-workspace client summary in one focused workflow. The problem cost is the deal-by-deal rebuild. Why current method fails is the separate tab and the headline. The product workflow is capture, normalize, discount, and share. The cta sequence repeats at readiness points. Use cases are tenant-rep comparisons. Comparison and mechanism stay visible. Objection handling, disclosure, authority, and faq sit after who not for and pricing.

Who is this not for?

This lease comparison workflow is not for landlords, not for property managers, and not for teams that need enterprise lease administration. It is also not for anyone expecting a CRM or lease-administration suite.

who is this not for: not for landlords and not for property managers looking for administration software.

Pricing

Professional is $290 per year for one authenticated seat. Per-Deal is $149 for one DealWorkspace. Live checkout is available on the pricing page.

Who is this not for

who is this not for: this workflow is not for landlords running a portfolio, not for property managers administering occupied buildings, and not for teams that need a full brokerage suite. It is also not for anyone who wants a CRM or lease-administration suite.

Objections worth answering now

OccupancyNPV is a working product. Live checkout is available on the pricing page. A lower NPV is not automatically the better occupancy choice. Sample figures are illustrative and are not customer results.

Start Free Trial Compare two leases See the workflow

Does OccupancyNPV exist as a working product?

Yes. OccupancyNPV is a live lease comparison and NPV workspace. Public rollout remains controlled.

Can I purchase OccupancyNPV?

Yes. Professional is $290 per year and Per-Deal is $149 per deal. Checkout is available on this page.

Request controlled / pilot access

Pilot / early access. The product is live. Public rollout remains controlled. Checkout is available on the pricing page.

Start Free Trial

Trusted sources

Public references only. Not client results.

Investopedia — net present value

Support

Email infinitemediaresources@gmail.com. You can also use Suggest an Improvement without creating an account.