The test looks at the company's history with SourceX, not at your history with the company. A ten-year friendship with the CEO does not outrank a company assessment that the controller started on sourcex.si last spring and forgot about.
What section 3 counts as a relationship since 21 October 2026
The terms list their own changes, and one of them matters here: from version 2026-10-21, section 3 states what counts as an existing relationship with SourceX. Older explanations, including some written before that date, describe a narrower test such as whether SourceX was "in discussion" with the company. The current wording is broader, and it is the one that governs a new introduction.
| Contact between the company and SourceX | Effect on a later introduction | Where the answer comes from |
|---|---|---|
| Anyone at the company started an application or company assessment | Reviewed as a duplicate, not credited to a later partner | Section 3: an existing application |
| An employee opened an account, whoever it was | Treated as an existing relationship | Section 3: "any earlier lead, account or email correspondence" |
| Email went back and forth, whoever wrote first | Treated as an existing relationship | Section 3: "however it began" |
| Another partner made a valid introduction first | Not credited to you | Sections 2 and 3: one partner per company, earlier valid introduction |
| A single SourceX email that nobody answered | Unclear: whether it created a lead under this company is a fact in SourceX's records | Send the inquiry |
| SourceX writes to the CEO after your introduction | No effect on valid attribution | Section 2: direct communication is allowed |
| The company clicked a partner link months ago and did nothing else | A click alone does not decide credit | Section 2: dated records decide |
Two rules sit behind the table. SourceX checks its own records before inviting an introduced company, and a company it already knew is not a new company. And, as the program's home page puts it, attribution is locked when the application is submitted.
Rebuild the dates before anyone forwards a link
A duplicate review is a question about order: what happened between SourceX and the company, and when, compared with when you introduced it. Write the timeline down before you introduce anyone, because a week later the CEO will remember less and you will remember it more favorably.
You can see part of the picture and the company can see another part. SourceX holds the rest, and the terms say partners never receive access to other partners' records, applicant documents or confidential buyer information.
| Date to record | Who knows it | How to fix it |
|---|---|---|
| Any earlier contact between the company and SourceX | The company, roughly; SourceX, exactly | Ask the CEO; write down the answer and the date you asked |
| Your first conversation about data licensing with the CEO | You | A dated note or calendar entry |
| Your introduction, by referral link, dashboard form or email | You | The form confirmation, the link record, or the original email |
| The verified application | The company and your dashboard | Dashboard status |
| Day 90 of the attribution window | You can count it | Introduction date plus 90 days |
Keep your introduction email as the original message, not a screenshot. Under RFC 5322, the Date field of an email records when its author marked it complete and ready to send, such as pressing send, rather than when it travelled. Exported with its headers, the message carries its own date. The company introduction record template has columns for the rest.
Name every identity the company may have used: its legal name, trading names, former names, every web domain and any parent or subsidiary. An application filed by a subsidiary under its own domain may turn out to be the company's earlier contact. Groups get their own treatment in multiple subsidiaries in referral attribution.
Six questions for the CEO before you introduce
Ask them in one short call or message, and keep the answers at the level of dates and types of contact. You do not need to see SourceX's emails to the company, and you should not ask for them.
- Has anyone at the company started an assessment, application or account with SourceX? Include staff below the CEO: finance, operations and IT often find a data-licensing estimate before the owner does.
- Has anyone exchanged email with SourceX, whoever wrote first? A reply to an outreach message counts as correspondence under section 3.
- Has another advisor, investor or partner already introduced the company, or offered to? The CEO may not know, but often does.
- Under which names and domains could that have happened? Trading names, former names, a sister company's domain.
- Roughly when? A month is enough. "Before or after today" is the question that matters.
- Do you want this conversation now, with me as the introducing partner? A clean timeline does not rescue an introduction the CEO was never told about; SourceX usually treats that as not a fit.
If the answers to 1 to 3 are all a confident no, introduce. If any answer is yes, the company can still talk to SourceX; your introduction is simply not the one that will be credited. If any answer is "maybe" or "I'd have to check", send the inquiry before you spend the relationship.
Three timelines through section 3 (Illustrative)
Illustrative. Generic companies, invented dates, no outcomes implied beyond what the cited terms say.
| Case | Before your introduction | Your introduction | After it | Governing term | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A. 260-person property manager | March 3, 2026: the controller starts a company assessment on sourcex.si and stops halfway | September 14, 2026, by referral link | September 30: verified application | Section 3: an existing application, "however it began" | Reviewed as a duplicate, not credited |
| B. 140-person engineering firm | No contact of any kind | August 4, 2026, by dashboard form | August 11: SourceX emails the CEO to schedule; August 28: verified application | Section 2: direct communication does not affect valid attribution | Credited if it is the first valid introduction |
| C. 410-person freight audit firm | Sometime in 2025: one SourceX email reached a regional manager; nobody recalls a reply | October 2, 2026, by email, then link | October 20: verified application | Section 3: "email correspondence"; whether one unanswered message created a lead for this company is in SourceX's records | Unresolved: send the inquiry |
Case A is the one partners argue with, because the controller never finished the assessment and the CEO never heard of it. Section 3 does not ask how far the earlier contact got or who started it. Case B is the one partners worry about needlessly: SourceX's direct contact after a valid introduction is part of the process, not a competing claim. Case C is the reason the inquiry exists.
When the existing relationship is yours. If your introduction was credited, later business with the same company stays inside it. The cap covers every installment, agreement, repeat license and renewal with that company and does not reset. Illustrative: SourceX pays the company $240,000 under a first license, so the reward is $60,000; a renewal paying $200,000 brings the cumulative payout to $440,000, and the reward stops at the $100,000 cap. A partner who introduces the same company later is not credited. The renewal cap scenarios work through installments and reductions.
The duplicate-review inquiry
Send it when one of the six answers is uncertain, or when your dashboard shows a duplicate review you think is wrong. Ask for a decision, not for SourceX's records: the terms rule out sharing other partners' records, so a question that can only be answered with them will not be.
| Field | What to write | Example (Illustrative) |
|---|---|---|
| Partner | Your name and the email on your partner account | Registered partner, account email |
| Company identity | Legal name, trading names, former names, web domains, parent and subsidiaries | Freight audit firm, two domains, no parent |
| Your introduction | Date, channel and whether the CEO knew and agreed | October 2, 2026, email then link; CEO agreed on September 29 |
| Application | Date of the verified application, if your dashboard shows it | October 20, 2026 |
| Prior contact the company reported | Type, approximate date and which person or entity | One SourceX email to a regional manager in 2025; no reply recalled |
| Terms in force | Version at your introduction and any signed Schedule A or addendum | Version 2026-10-22.2; no addendum |
| The question | One sentence asking for a decision | Is my October 2 introduction treated as the first valid introduction of a new company, or as a duplicate under section 3? |
| Evidence attached | Only your own dated records | Original introduction email with headers; link record; dated call note |
Leave out the company's records, any SourceX emails the company received (the company can send those itself if it chooses), guesses about which other partner may be involved, and personal details beyond the CEO's name and role.
Where it goes depends on timing. Before you introduce, a general question goes to SourceX via sourcex.si. Once the introduction exists, check the referral's status in your dashboard first. If you disagree with an attribution decision, section 7 of the program terms asks you to contact SourceX with the referral details and supporting evidence; SourceX reviews it and communicates its decision.
What a duplicate finding does not change
A duplicate finding settles credit, not the company's prospects: the company can still proceed with SourceX on its own merits, as the existing data sales question explains for companies that already sell data elsewhere.
Never ask a company to withdraw an earlier application, open a new account or apply under another entity to make your introduction look new. Section 3 looks at the company's history with SourceX, and a restart does not erase it. The broader rules for competing introductions are in what happens when a company was already known to SourceX and introductions that overlap an existing opportunity; note that the current section 3 wording, quoted above, governs where older wording differs. When the earlier claim is another partner's rather than SourceX's own, the evidence checks in when two partners refer the same company apply. For how the 90-day window and contact protection interact, see attribution versus contact protection.
Next step
Refer a company. Earn up to $100,000. Default reward: 25% of Actual Supplier Payout, capped at $100,000 cumulatively per referred company. Eligibility and payment conditions apply, and a signed Schedule A or addendum can differ. A lead, meeting or signature alone does not trigger payment.
If all six answers come back as a confident no and the CEO is ready to talk, register for a partner link, confirm the company still meets who qualifies and file the version number of the program terms alongside your dated introduction record.