We price per-project based on size/complexity not % of construction cost, so there’s no conflict of interest around bigger budgets. Today our main users are architects/engineers and GC pre-con teams, but subs who catch coordination issues early also get a ton of value.

▲

knollimar 3 days ago | parent [-]

At what stage do you run this on plans? like DD, some % CD? What's the intended target timeframe?

I don't see how subs get much value unless they can use it on ~80% CD for bid phases

▲

aakashprasad91 3 days ago | parent [-]

Most teams run us late DD through CD anywhere the set is stable enough that coordination issues matter. Subs especially like running it pre-bid at ~80–100% CDs so they don’t inherit coordination risk. Earlier checks also help designers tighten the set before hand-offs, so value shows up at multiple stages. Eventually the goal is to be continuous QA tool including during construction by pulling in field data too and comparing to drawings and specs. Like drawings showed X size and field photos show Y size.

▲

knollimar 3 days ago | parent [-]

Would love to run it and give feedback if it's cheap to do so; my company just finished a bunch of projects and would love to cross reference if it catches the issues that we found by hand (assuming it's inexpensive enough). I do high rise electrical work for a subcontractor.

	▲	aakashprasad91 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		We’d love that — perfect use case. Send a recent set and we’ll run a discounted comparison so you can see what we catch vs. what surfaced during construction. If helpful, we can hop on a quick call to walk through results and collect feedback. Email me aakash@inspectmind.ai