A one-page brief · written to be forwarded · prints on one sheet
NOI Engine is read-only software that sits on top of the property management system you already run. It gives eleven role-based views over one reconciled set of numbers, and it runs 51 automations across eight suites: the reports your team writes by hand, the deadlines somebody has to remember, the compliance checks nobody runs nightly, and the drafts that wait on a person with time. Nothing resident-facing or vendor-facing leaves the building without a named human pressing send. Every figure below is mine, published on this site, and none of it has been audited.
Arithmetic on published figures. The only question that matters is the last column: whether you believe your team is losing that much capacity to work a machine could do.
| Portfolio | Platform, per year | Year one, all in | Per door, year one | Staff hours a month you must recover to break even | Full-time equivalents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2,000 units | $96,000 | $141,000 to $171,000 | $70.50 to $85.50 | about 211 | 1.2 |
| 5,000 units | $240,000 | $285,000 to $315,000 | $57.00 to $63.00 | about 528 | 2.9 |
| 10,000 units | $480,000 | $525,000 to $555,000 | $52.50 to $55.50 | about 1,056 | 5.8 |
The two constants, and where they come from. One measured study of a single operating portfolio, timed task by task, reported about 1,100 staff-hours a month, roughly six full-time equivalents, and about $500,000 a year of loaded labor. Those two totals imply a loaded rate of about $38 an hour and about $83,000 per full-time equivalent, and those are the only two numbers used in the table. The full derivation, task by task is published so you can replace either one with your own.
Hours are the baseline. The catches are the point. On an income-restricted book, one lease signed over the AMI cap costs more than a year of this. One vendor contract that auto-renews because a 90-day window slipped is a five-figure miss. One turn that sits three extra weeks is priced per day, every Monday. Any one of those pays for the platform in a year where the labor math is merely acceptable, which is why the labor math is the floor of the case and not the case.
Six objections a buying group raises, with the mechanism that answers each one rather than a reassurance. The exact API scopes and the written exclusions sit behind these in full.
| The concern | How it is handled today |
|---|---|
| It writes something wrong into our system of record | It cannot. The Entrata connection is read-only through a dedicated read-only API user, and that scope is a contract term, not a configuration setting. Any future write capability would be a separately signed phase with its own sandbox testing. |
| AI creates fair-housing exposure | Resident-facing text is never freely composed. Facts merge into templates your counsel approves, with whitelisted merge fields and identical treatment at every stage of a process. Every send needs a named human approval and is logged immutably. Your legal team owns the template library and receives a quarterly report of exactly what went out. |
| Our data | Encrypted in transit and at rest. Credentials stored as encrypted secrets, never in code. Dashboard access gated to named email addresses. A data processing addendum is provided. |
| The vendor is one person | Papered rather than argued: source-code escrow, documented schemas, one-click export of everything, and a read-only architecture that leaves your own system as the system of record throughout. Ask me for the escrow agreement and read the release triggers yourself. |
| We get locked in | It is an overlay, not a migration. Nothing moves out of your property management system, so leaving means turning it off and taking the export. Contract term and notice period are a question below, not a published figure. |
| It is a headcount play | I decline to pitch it that way, in writing. The claim is returned capacity, not eliminated roles: the compiling, chasing and remembering goes away, and the hours come back for leasing, residents and judgment calls. Socialize it that way internally or you will spend your first month fighting a rumor. |
Stated plainly, because you will find it anyway.
In this order. The first two need nothing from me at all.
A working eleven-view platform on Meridian Residential, a fictional 2,554-unit portfolio where every number is synthetic. No form, no call, nobody follows up. The guided tour of the live demo lists six things to click.
noiengine.com/demoThe read-only architecture, the governance layer around resident-facing drafts, and the written exclusions are documented so both reviews can start before anyone books a call. Read-only in writing, and what IT and legal ask for.
noiengine.com/trustLive in the product, on real screens, with your questions. There is no sales team, so the person on the call is the person who wrote the software and will run the implementation. Email michael@michaelgaff.com or call (317) 985-2446.
Michael GaffProvenance. Every figure on this page is mine and is published at noiengine.com: $1.50 and $4.00 per unit per month, implementation from $45,000 to $75,000, 51 automations in 8 suites, 11 role-based views, and one measured portfolio study reporting about 1,100 staff-hours a month, roughly six full-time equivalents, and about $500,000 a year of loaded labor. The table is arithmetic on those figures. None of it is audited, a benchmark, or a guarantee. There is no published client list, so nothing here is a customer reference. Verify what matters directly with me.
This page is built to print on a single US Letter sheet. Use your browser's print command to save it as a PDF.