Every sales report begins by an hour in the CRM that feels awkward. Deals stagnant in one stage since March. Three records for the same company. A close date that has been moved eleven times. Reporting on that without saying so, builds a confident forecast on a grave foundation.
As stated in the report, evidence supports some findings while others are not as straight forward. The report also illustrates what the pipeline looks like after the cleanup.
Sales reports impact two key decision areas: allocation of rep time and what management communicates to the board regarding next quarter’s goals. Each of these is significantly impacted by a report that captures activity reporting instead of outcomes reporting. Call log reporting is easy and overreporting is too easily done. Finally, cohort conversion stages are difficult to report and more importantly, are the outcomes that significantly impact revenue.
A generated sales report will take whatever you paste in and ‘happily forecast’ regarding each deal marked as 80%. It has no way of knowing your team marks 80% completion when the champion responds to an email. The forecast is mathematics performed on a fiction.
The author works with a raw export rather than a dashboard. The writer begins by identifying issues with duplicates, stalled deals, inconsistent use of stages, and other issues that would skew the totals. Anything that would qualify as a caveat is placed toward the beginning of the report to ensure readers do not have to go through the entire report to identify the issue in question.
The final report presents actual events separately from expected events. History gets reported faithfully, and forecasts are given as a range covering deals that could move the range. If pipeline coverage does not support the target, the report states the number is uncertain rather than stating an optimistic guideline as a best case.
One rate, whatever the format: $10 per 100 words. You are paying for the writer’s time and judgement, so the price scales with the words rather than with a package tier.
| Typical sales report | Words | Writing | Fee (1%) | You pay |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Summary report | 1,200 | $120 | $1.20 | $121.20 |
| Standard report | 3,000 | $300 | $3 | $303 |
| In-depth report | 6,000 | $600 | $6 | $606 |
The writer receives 100% of the writing price. Our 1% fee is added on top of it, and 0.5% is donated to tree planting. Full pricing breakdown.
Primary sources wherever they exist — your own data, published research, filings, regulator and industry figures — with secondary reporting used only where nothing better is available. Everything used is listed with links so you can check it.
We write the analysis, label what each figure shows and describe the charts your designer should build, including the takeaway each one has to land. We do not produce finished graphics, so tell us if you need the underlying numbers laid out for a designer.
Usually yes, and the first one often pays for itself by naming the problems. The writer works with what exists and lists three solutions that would make the following month’s report materially more reliable, and states the corresponding limits.
Yes, please remove the names from the export and send it rolled up to the team level. The conversion of cohorts and the coverage of the pipeline will work at that level. However, individual data is necessary for the coaching conclusions. The report will indicate what information we lose from aggregation.
Completely. Copyright transfers to you on delivery, with no attribution requirement and no licence back to us. Nothing written for you is resold, repurposed or republished.
Reviews from completed, paid orders in this category.
Getting housing data wrong can be frustrating. Our writer noticed two instances where the spreadsheet data contradicted the board pack data. Instead of trying to choose a side, he asked which one was right. That kind of caution is better than good writing.
Three of the competitors are private and their numbers are not public. The report states this explicitly and cites what can be observed, pricing pages, job postings and packaging changes. Because of that, I trust the other parts of the report more.
For the first time, the board didn’t edit the executive summary. It was written based on our original survey data, and included the finding we buried on page nine, that participation was flat, but retention had doubled.
We do not ask you to take the no-AI promise on trust. Each draft is run through these platforms and the reports are attached to your delivery email.
Originality.aiAI detection + plagiarism
GPTZeroAI detection
TurnitinAI detection + similarity
CopyleaksAI detection + plagiarism
Winston AIAI detection
ZeroGPTAI detection
SaplingAI detection
Content at ScaleAI detection
Send the brief, get a human draft back within 3 days. No account, no subscription, no AI.
$10 per 100 words · all of it to the writer · 0.5% to trees