Odevo Lead Intelligence
Group Lead Intelligence — concept prototype by Sliceo ← Growth Engine Illustrative data — not Odevo figures
View one

Sixteen operating companies. Sixteen separate lead engines.

Each Odevo US brand runs its own funnel, its own CRM hygiene, its own response habits — and nobody sees them side by side. Put them on one page and the spread does the arguing for you.

Inbound leads · 90 days
1,284
Across 12 US markets and 16 operating companies
Group win rate
22.7%
Best market 31% · worst market 14% — a 17-point spread
Median first touch
5.8 h
Range 1.8 h to 13.6 h. Speed is the strongest single predictor here
Leads a sister brand could serve
391
30% of inbound. Cross-brand routes actually made today: zero

Market health

Click any column head to sort · trailing 90 days
Market / brands present Leads Win rate First touch Cost / win Doors added Leaked-fit Status

Median hours to first human contact

Benchmark: San Antonio holds 1.8 h
Under 2 h — benchmark pace 2–6 h — recoverable Over 6 h — losing on speed alone
Every market above 6 hours is competing against a firm that already called the board president back.

Read this view as the diagnostic. Nothing here requires new software in the brands — it requires one place where the twelve funnels are visible in the same units.

View two

The 391 leads Odevo already paid for and then let go

When a lead lands at the wrong brand, it dies there. Wrong county, wrong asset type, under the door minimum, or not a management inquiry at all — in every one of those cases another Odevo company wanted that call. Today nothing forwards it.

What routing could be worth, with the arithmetic showing

Illustrative model — every input is an assumption, not a forecast
Leads a sister brand could serve (90 days)391
Annualized1,564
Routed and worked at group win rate 22.7%355
Haircut for routing friction and duplicates — 75%89
Average association: 180 doors at $19 / door / month$41,040
Recovered annual recurring revenue, if every assumption holds$3.65M

Why we think this is the cheapest growth available

The demand already exists, the brand is already paying to generate it, and the receiving company already has capacity. There is no new market entry, no new marketing spend, no acquisition multiple. The only missing piece is a rule that says this lead is not ours, it is the group's — and a system that moves it in minutes rather than never.

Treat the figure as a sensitivity exercise rather than a projection. The 75% haircut is a guess, not an observed rate — halve it and the number doubles, which is precisely why it needs replacing with measured data before anyone relies on it.

The two weakest links

  • The 22.7% win rate is borrowed from the wrong population. That is what the group converts on its own inbound. A lead handed over from a sister brand is colder, because the board contacted a different company. The haircut partly covers this, but it should be measured separately rather than assumed away.
  • $19 per door per month across the whole portfolio is crude. Single-family HOA management typically prices well below a high-rise. One blended figure spanning JellyBird-scale associations and Stratus towers will be wrong in both directions.

What would make this real

Thirty to ninety days of: inbound by operating company, disqualification reasons, how many of those disqualified sit inside another brand's footprint, how many are actually routed and accepted, qualification and win rates for routed leads specifically, real first-year contract value per association, and whether an internal referral credit exists to make the receiving brand want the lead. Until then the honest claim is not "there is $3.65M on the table" — it is "there may be meaningful leakage here, and measuring it is cheap."

Service-line attach inside the book Odevo already manages

Percent of managed associations carrying each Odevo service

The management contract is the hardest thing to win and Odevo already holds thousands of them. Insurance, restoration, maintenance and project work attach at a fraction of what the relationship supports — and the empty cells are simply markets where a sister company's service was never offered.

View three

One market already knows how to win. Nobody wrote it down.

Spectrum's San Antonio operation converts 31% of inbound at a cost per win less than half of the group's worst market. The difference is not talent or market luck — it is five habits that can be copied in a quarter.

Benchmark market

Spectrum · San Antonio, TX
  • Win rate31% best in group
  • Median first touch1.8 hours
  • Cost per association won$2,180
  • Proposals with a named manager100%
  • Win/loss logged100%

If the six slowest markets adopt the play

Modeled
Leads in the six slowest markets (annualized)2,136
Current blended win rate19.1%
Assumed win-rate lift from a two-hour first touch+3.1 pts
Additional associations per year, if the lift holds+66

The lift figure is derived from this invented dataset and discounted by half. It is an assumption for illustration, not an observed result — Odevo's own history has to replace it before it means anything.

The five habits, and who is missing them

Six slowest markets
Practice

This is intended as something a market can act on immediately. It is not a scorecard used against anyone — it is the shortest path between a market that already works and one that does not.

View four

What the group knows about one board, in one place

Everything below is assembled from first-party data Odevo already generates: website sessions, form fills, the CRM, the phone system, and the shared inbox. The panel at the bottom is equally important — it says plainly what this cannot do.

Harborview at Westshore Condominium Association

Tampa Bay, FL · 214 units · high-rise · illustrative record
87
Temperature
Hot — act this week
First seen
Jun 14, 2026
Sessions
7
Pageviews
31
People on the link
3
Current contract ends
Dec 31, 2026
Weekly session volume · last 12 weeks
Jun 8Aug 24

Visit and touch history

Newest first

    Relationship roll-up

    • In CRM asFolio — Tampa · Stage: Proposal
    • OwnerBusiness development, Folio
    • Email threads3 threads · 11 messages
    • Opens / clicks4 of 5 · 6 clicks
    • Inbound calls1 · 6 min 22 sec
    • Proposals sent1 (Aug 19)
    • Last touch6 days ago
    A 214-unit high-rise sits with a garden-style and HOA specialist. KWPMC and Stratus run this asset class in Tampa Bay. This is exactly the record the routing rules in view two would have moved on day one.

    Why the score is 87

    • Pricing page, 3 visits in 9 days+24
    • Downloaded transition checklist+18
    • Proposal link forwarded, opened by 2 more+12
    • Inbound call over 5 minutes+15
    • Contract expiry inside 120 days+18
    • No touch in 6 days−0 (decay pending)

    What this does, what it will not do, and the line we hold

    Reliable

    • Email stitching — the moment someone fills a form, every prior anonymous session on that browser ties to them
    • Unique tracked links — when one board member forwards a proposal, the extra opens reveal the buying committee, independent of IP
    • Referrer, campaign and search terms carried through to the CRM record
    • Company-level reverse-IP enrichment through a data provider — reliable for offices and business circuits, not for board members at home

    Not possible

    • Device serial numbers or MAC addresses. A web page cannot read them — browsers block it deliberately, and no vendor selling otherwise is telling the truth
    • Certain identification of the same person across phone and laptop with no login and no email
    • Naming an individual visitor who has never identified themselves
    • Grouping board members by a shared "building IP" — most units are separate ISP accounts, and single-family HOA members never share one

    Deliberately out of scope

    • Covert device fingerprinting of anonymous visitors — technically buildable, regulated under GDPR and state privacy law, and not worth the exposure for an owner-operated group
    • Person-level detail before someone identifies themselves. Company level until then; person level after
    • Anything not disclosed in the privacy policy and cookie banner

    Names, figures and the association in this record are invented for the prototype. The data model behind them is the one Odevo would actually run: sessions and pageviews keyed to an anonymous ID, promoted to a person on first form fill, joined to CRM, email and call records by email address and by property.