Anatomy of a Broker Package

The package below is synthetic. The park, the seller, the broker, and every number are invented for this exercise. The pattern is the lesson.

The offering package describes an 84-site RV park on 14 acres. The headline claims are clean: 92 percent occupancy, $486,000 in gross revenue, $291,000 in net operating income, municipal water and sewer, and room to add 20 sites. Nothing in the package is presented as uncertain. That is exactly why it needs to be read claim by claim.

A broker package is a useful beginning. It is not proof. Its job is to introduce the asset and support the seller's ask. The buyer's job starts when each material claim is given a source and a state.

Claim 1: occupancy is 92 percent

The memorandum reports 92 percent occupancy. The rent roll lists 77 occupied sites out of 84. The package does not include bank deposits, a collections report, or a schedule separating paying sites from employee units, comps, and long-term nonpaying accounts.

State: Broker-reported. The number appears in the package and on the rent roll. It has not been independently checked.

The occupancy claim becomes useful when the buyer asks what kind of occupancy it is. Physical occupancy counts someone on a site. Paying occupancy counts sites producing revenue. Until deposits and collections are reviewed, the 92 percent is a reported claim, not an income fact.

The missing deposits are not a footnote. They are the evidence required to move this claim.

Claim 2: T12 NOI is $291,000

The seller's profit-and-loss statement lists $291,000 in net operating income. The package does not include the underlying bank statements, payroll records, utility bills, insurance invoices, or tax returns needed to test the expense lines. Two expense categories are summarized in a single line, and seasonal labor is described as contract help without supporting invoices.

State: Broker-reported, with the NOI output unresolved. The seller's P&L is a source, but the claim cannot be treated as verified until its material lines reconcile to documents behind it.

A model can calculate from the P&L. That does not verify the P&L. If the model carries the $291,000 forward, the output should show the state of its inputs. Calculated is not a synonym for confirmed.

Claim 3: water and sewer support the park

The package states that the park is served by municipal water and sewer. It does not include a utility capacity letter, recent utility bills, a service agreement, or records showing the permitted number of connections. A site photograph shows a meter. The photograph establishes that a meter was present when the photo was taken. It does not establish permitted capacity, condition, or remaining life.

State: Broker-reported. The service claim is sourced to the package.

Missing evidence: utility records, capacity documentation, and a reviewed field observation tied to the system.

Captured is not verified. A field photo can support a later review, but it does not close a capacity gate by itself.

Claim 4: there is room for 20 additional sites

The package describes 14 acres and states that there is room for 20 additional sites. No survey is included. No zoning letter addresses whether the additional sites are permitted. Setbacks, easements, floodplain boundaries, utility capacity, and road access are not documented.

This is where packages often turn a physical observation into an investment conclusion. Land may be present. Permission to use it for 20 more sites is a separate claim.

State: Broker-reported for the acreage and expansion statement as presented in the package.

Missing evidence: survey, zoning confirmation, utility capacity, and the site plan that places the proposed sites within the legal and physical limits of the property.

Underwriting assumption: any value assigned to the expansion before those records exist. The assumption can be modeled. It cannot be priced as if it were already entitled.

Claim 5: expenses run at 40 percent

The seller's expense ratio is presented as a strength. The package includes a summary P&L, but property taxes are listed at the prior owner's amount, insurance is represented by a broker estimate, and utility reimbursements are netted without a supporting schedule.

State: Underwriting assumption when the buyer's model uses the 40 percent ratio to project forward.

The ratio may become a useful input after the buyer approves it. Until then, the file should show what the ratio replaces, which documents were reviewed, and which expense categories remain untested. An approved assumption is not a defect. An unlabeled assumption is.

Claim 6: the park is grandfathered

The package states that the park is grandfathered. No zoning verification letter is included. The site count in the package does not appear in any public record provided with the materials, and there is no document addressing whether a destroyed or removed unit can be replaced.

State: Missing evidence. The package makes the claim, but the legal basis for the current use and replacement rights has not been located.

Grandfathered is a conclusion with conditions. The buyer needs the record behind the conclusion: the use that was legal, when it was established, what changed since, and what the current jurisdiction permits. Without that record, the claim stays open.

The package after the labels

Nothing about the synthetic park has been decided by these labels. The labels do something more useful: they tell the buyer where the work is.

• 92 percent occupancy is Broker-reported until deposits and collections are reviewed.
• $291,000 NOI is Broker-reported and unresolved until the material lines reconcile.
• Municipal service is Broker-reported, while capacity remains Missing evidence.
• Expansion value is an Underwriting assumption until entitlement and capacity are documented.
• The expense ratio is an approved input only after a person approves it.
• Grandfathered status remains Missing evidence until the legal record is produced.

That is the discipline in the ParkProof Standard: every material claim carries where it came from and what state it is in. The deal does not become true because the package is polished. It becomes legible because the record separates what is verified, what was reported, what is missing, and what the buyer has chosen to assume.

Next question for any package: if the headline number disappeared, what evidence would be left?