Undisclosed
Closed startup: codebase, workspace data pending
About $25K for code; about $15K more pending (estimate)
MIT Technology Review ↗Company data → AI training licences
Describe your records once. Hear from the buyers that fit. Compare the money and the terms, then pick. We never see your data.
29 buyers tracked · 7 we introduce · 109 sources listed
| Buyer | Their number | Captured | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
Handshake AI | $383,083–$896,969 | Their page ↗ | |
PewterBroker · routes to one unnamed licensing partner | $385,000–$895,000 | Their page ↗ | |
Nyne AI | $49,223–$115,252 | Their page ↗ | |
GreppedNot the reference company | $29,000–$41,500 | Their page ↗Featured partner · paid link |
Counts and metadata, never records. Five steps, saved as you go.
Offers and terms side by side: licence, exclusivity, who de-identifies, when you are paid.
Accept the best, decline the rest. Buyers pay us; you never do.
Illustrative. Real offers come from the buyers; amounts and terms vary.
Minewell's indicative band
$70K–$345K
Our heuristic, not an offer. How we compute it
24 buyers publish gates your company meets.
Biggest general lever: Internal communications anchor a deal: add Slack or Teams history if you have it.
Get quotes from all of themUndisclosed
Closed startup: codebase, workspace data pending
About $25K for code; about $15K more pending (estimate)
MIT Technology Review ↗Spirit Airlines (bankrupt carrier) business data
$10M
Reuters ↗Mercor
Spirit Airlines business data
$7.5M
TIME ↗Who Sells Data (Secludy)
A sourced comparison of programs that pay companies for their data: what each pays, the data it wants and who qualifies, with quotes as of Oct 14, 2026. It is the best single page for comparing buyers.
Christian
@coldemailchris
AI labs have run out of internet to train on. What they want now is how real companies work: how an email turns into a ticket, how the ticket turns into a CRM update, and why. That data sits inside
A micro1 referral partner lays out the micro1 company-data program: one-time payments of roughly $200K to $2M+, who qualifies (US, 20+ desk staff, 2+ years, 5+ tools), excluded data types, the export and QA timeline, and a flat referral fee. The author is paid through referrals, so the piece is promotional.
MIT Technology Review
From a buyerA reported feature on the wind-down industry's data-resale arm. One founder netted about $25K for code with more pending for workspace data, and SimpleClosure says 47% of its deals now include code or data. Sunset prices data on headcount, years, volume and tool usage, while lawyers warn the data can be 'legally radioactive'.
Business Insider
An investigation into the operating-company market. Owners get six-figure 'exploding offers' with 48-hour deadlines, and data is priced by volume and anonymized before resale. It quotes sellers, brokers and a law professor who calls employee consent an ethical gray area.
Corey Ganim
A full podcast interview with Polyshares co-founder Ryan Lock on how a data broker finds companies, does diligence, de-identifies records and sells licenses to labs. The description includes a Polyshares referral link, so the host has a commercial interest.
Erik Newsham
@eriknewsha
somewhere around last week my timeline began to flood with ai brokers and look, it's true, the money in this is absurd. but I've spent an unhealthy number of my waking hours doing it, and there are a
Grepped's founder describes what labs are actually asking for (finance, legal, semiconductors, manufacturing, niche workflows, RL environments with graders) and warns that a generic email archive is worth less than owners hope. He gives typical deal sizes, exclusivity norms, the payment timeline and referral terms, and he flags misconceptions spreading among new brokers.
Nobody can tell you precisely, and the buyers' own calculators prove it. For the same company (100 desk staff, 10 years of history), Handshake's calculator returned $383K–$897K and Nyne's returned $49K–$115K when we captured them on 16 October 2026. That is a gap of roughly 8x before any real review of your records.
Published ranges are just as wide: from about $20K for a small closed startup up to ceilings of $5M or more at the biggest programs. A ceiling is what the best case could reach, not what a typical company receives.
Four things move the number most: how many people worked at a desk, how many years of linked history you can export, how many separate systems the history spans, and your industry and status. Chat or email history that stops when you switched tools halfway through counts for much less than an unbroken run.
For a starting band built from the same published figures, use the estimator. Treat it as a way to decide whether this is worth a conversation, not as an offer.
Sources: Who's buying data; how to (actually) broker ai data; AI labs are offering companies big money to hand over their employees' private Slack DMs and emails
AI labs are building agents that do ordinary office work, so they want complete workflows rather than isolated files: the chat thread, the email, the ticket, the document and the code change that all belong to one piece of work, with the history that connects them. Communications usually anchor a deal, and the other systems add depth around them.
Mercor's CEO published which tools appear most often across the 300+ enterprises it has partnered with: Slack, GitHub, Google Drive, Gmail, Figma and Jira lead the list. Several programs set a bar of about five connected tools and two or more years of history.
Some material is off limits almost everywhere. Buyers and their partners list legal privilege, health records, payment data, Social Security numbers and anything involving minors as excluded. Also keep out anything you do not own, such as client data held under a confidentiality agreement or open-source code.
The inventory worksheet shows how to count what you have, system by system, without exporting or pasting any records.
Sources: Mercor has now partnered with > 300 enterprises to help them monetize their data, paying companies up to $10M per enterprise.; How To Master AI Data Brokering With Micro1; micro1 Offers $100K+ for CRM Records That May Not Be Yours to Sell
The usual path is: you describe the company, the buyer reviews that profile, you may share a small sample, the buyer makes an offer, you sign an agreement, you run an export, the data is de-identified, and payment follows acceptance. Each buyer fills in those steps differently, so the comparison table lists who does what.
Published timelines run from about two weeks from upload to payment at Grepped to about three months from first call to payment at Mode. Acceptance checks and payment terms account for most of the difference.
Two rules hold throughout. You never hand anyone a password or an admin login; exports are run by someone inside your company. And no raw data moves before you have signed. Minewell never receives raw data at any stage: we collect a description of your company and your systems, we introduce you to buyers, and everything after that happens between you and them.
If a company is closing, speed matters more, because the value depends on the workspaces still being live.
Sources: AI Data Broker Master Guide; AI labs are buying data from dead startups to train their models
Often it can be done lawfully, but having the data is not the same as having the right to sell it. The answer depends on your customer and partner contracts, the privacy notices you gave people when you collected their information, the terms of each platform you export from, and the law where your people and customers live.
The main questions lawyers raise are: do any contracts or confidentiality agreements stop you licensing the records; do platform terms restrict using exported data to train models; do employee communications touch protected activity under US labour law (NLRA section 7); does a transfer for value count as a sale under California's CCPA; and, for EU and UK staff, is there a valid lawful basis under GDPR and UK GDPR. Employee consent is a particular worry: critics call it an ethical gray area, and a court filing over the Spirit Airlines sale argues de-identification does not remove it.
This is general information, not legal advice. Have your own counsel check your contracts and employee notices before you sign anything. Our legal checklist lists what to bring to that conversation.
Sources: Selling Company Data for AI Training: What to Know Before You Say Yes (via Passle); EPIC Files Amicus Brief Challenging Spirit Airlines’ Bankruptcy Sale of Employee Data to Google
Buyers say they remove names and other identifiers, usually replacing each person with a stable pseudonym such as "employee 632" so that conversations still make sense. Who does that work differs by buyer: the buyer itself, a third-party vendor, or a tool running inside your own environment. That choice affects who sees the raw records, so ask for it in writing and compare it on the buyer table.
Be realistic about what scrubbing can do. Chat and email are unstructured, so a name can sit inside a sentence, a nickname or an attachment, and linked records can let a long-serving employee be recognised from context alone. Critics argue that de-identification does not prevent inferences about workers.
For that reason the safer approach is to leave high-risk categories out rather than rely on scrubbing them: HR and legal channels, health information, anything about customers you hold under contract, and any group where a small number of people would be easy to pick out. Tell your staff what you are planning before it happens, whatever the law requires.
Sources: he made $1,000,000 in 30 days as an AI data broker; Selling Company Data for AI Training: What to Know Before You Say Yes (via Passle)