Some LPs decline out of generosity; others follow a rule, such as an institution that bars outside pay or a board seat at the company in question. Either way, respect the preference without creating a promise SourceX never made.
What turning down a reward changes, and what stays put
It changes who could be paid. It does not change the company's payout, who decides for the company, or what anyone may pass along.
| What an LP may assume | What actually holds | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| "If I refuse the reward, the company gets more." | SourceX pays any reward from its own share, so the company receives the same amount with or without a partner. Section 4 reads: "The referral reward is paid separately by SourceX and is never deducted from the supplier’s agreed compensation." | Terms, section 4 |
| "Unpaid means no paperwork." | Whoever submits an introduction needs an approved partner account and a signed Channel Partner Agreement first, and the agreement covers confidentiality as well as money | Terms, section 1 |
| "I can send my reward to the company, a charity or the fund." | Neither the published terms nor the sample agreement provides for redirecting a reward; that belongs in the same written question to SourceX | Terms; sample agreement |
| "Since I take nothing, I can vouch for the company." | Paid or not, nobody may commit SourceX to anything (sample agreement, section 7.1) or share a company's records (section 4.2), and nobody can say a company qualifies | Sample agreement |
| "An unpaid introduction gets special handling." | Credit, duplicates and fit follow the same terms for everyone: one partner per company, decided from dated records | Terms, section 2 |
Do not argue the LP out of the refusal. In experiments published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, Uri Gneezy and Aldo Rustichini found that performance did not simply climb with pay: among people offered money, more money brought better results, yet some people offered money did worse than people offered nothing (our paraphrase of a search summary of the abstract). The studies tested tasks, not LPs or introductions; we read them only as a reason to take the preference at face value.
Three routes for an LP who wants no pay
Pick the route with the LP before the CEO hears anything, because each one tells the CEO something different about who stands to gain.
| Route | Who submits | Who could be paid | What the CEO is told | What stays open |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A. The company applies on its own | Nobody on your side; the LP tells the CEO, and the company applies itself | Nobody you know of | That no one involved is being paid | Nothing from your side; if another partner's valid introduction came first, SourceX settles it in duplicate review |
| B. Your fund submits with the LP's consent | The fund, already approved and signed | The fund, under the published terms; the LP receives nothing from SourceX or the fund | That the fund could be paid and the company's payout is unaffected | Whether the LP is comfortable with the fund being paid for a relationship the LP holds |
| C. The LP registers and submits | The LP, once approved and signed | Not settled: the published terms do not cover a declined reward | That the reward question went to SourceX, and what SourceX replied | SourceX's written answer, which must arrive before submission |
Route A fits an LP bound by a rule against any benefit, and it means nobody on your side is credited, which the fund should accept knowingly. Route B suits an LP who wants nothing personally; ask out loud whether the fund being paid is acceptable, because some LPs object. How the fund's own documents treat such money is covered in management fee offsets and referral fees in the LPA.
Route C is for an LP who wants to be the introducer of record. The question for SourceX needs no company name: "I would like to introduce companies without receiving any reward; how will you handle that?" Ask by email, keep the reply, and submit nothing until it arrives. A remark on a call is no basis: the sample agreement says a dashboard edit, an unanswered message or a one-time exception does not amend it or waive any obligation (section 7.7). If the answer does not suit the LP, route A remains.
| Illustrative | Company payout | Partner reward |
|---|---|---|
| A. The company applies on its own | $250,000 | None; no introduction was submitted |
| B. Your fund submits | $250,000 | $62,500 to the fund under the default rule |
| C. The LP submits | $250,000 | As SourceX decides; not covered by the published terms |
Illustrative figures only, not a forecast or a completed deal. Whatever route is taken, a reward is paid only after the conditions in section 5 of the terms are met, and a lead, meeting or signature alone pays nothing.
The unpaid participation confirmation
Before anyone contacts the CEO, you and the LP agree seven short lines and both keep a copy. An email the LP answers "agreed" is enough; the point is a dated record that shows the favor was unpaid by design.
| Line | What it records | Why it is there |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Purpose | One named company, and a sentence saying this has nothing to do with the fund, the LP's commitment or any co-investment | The favor must not read as part of the investor relationship |
| 2. The LP's tie | The role the LP holds at the company: chair, director, owner, CEO, long-time customer | The ask should rest on a real relationship, never on a name seen in fund reports |
| 3. Route | A, B or C, and who submits, if anyone | Only one partner can be credited, and two people submitting creates a duplicate question |
| 4. Pay | Who could be paid: nobody, the fund, or the LP's position as SourceX answered it, with the date of that written answer | Route C waits for the answer |
| 5. The LP's own rules | The LP confirms that its own policies allow the introduction itself, as its compliance team or adviser reads them | Refusing pay does not settle whether introducing is allowed |
| 6. What travels | Public facts only; nothing from board packs, fund reports or company systems | Knowledge gained in confidence stays where it came from |
| 7. The CEO's decision | The CEO decides; a no ends the subject, including in later fund settings | Neither the LP nor the fund decides for the company |
Method note. Lines 3 and 4 follow sections 1, 2 and 4 of the terms (version 2026-10-22.2, since replaced by version 2026-11-04) and sections 4.2, 7.1 and 7.7 of the sample Channel Partner Agreement; lines 2, 6 and 7 follow SourceX's screening guidance on board materials and the CEO's role. All were read on 2026-10-27. The seven lines are this page's design, not a SourceX form, and have not been tested on completed introductions.
Reading the LP's tie to the company before choosing a route
The route matters less than whether the LP is the right person to raise it at all.
- The LP is the company's CEO. They decide for that company and can have it apply directly; there is nobody to introduce.
- The LP chairs the board or holds a seat. They can mention it to the CEO, who decides. SourceX's screening guidance says a board seat does not let anyone start a licensing discussion, and it treats board-pack knowledge as confidential. Director-specific questions are covered in whether a board member can earn a referral reward.
- The LP owns the company but someone else runs it. Ownership does not decide; the CEO does.
- The company has been bought. After closing, the acquirer's CEO decides; before closing, the target's own CEO still does. Every entity in the buyer's group then sits under the same single reward cap.
- The LP is only a passive investor in the company. Then the LP is the wrong person to ask. An LP whose only knowledge comes from fund reports should first read whether a limited partner can contact portfolio companies.
An unpaid favor still stays clear of the fund, endorsements and side benefits
Taking no money does not make the other boundaries optional; in one way it raises the stakes, because "I'm not even being paid" can make a mention sound like a recommendation.
- Fund business. The request travels in its own message, never near a re-up, a capital call or a co-investment decision. The wording for that message is in how to ask an LP for an introduction without making an investment ask, and the sorting of mixed asks is in the difference between an LP referral and fundraising solicitation.
- Endorsement. Neither the LP nor the fund says SourceX endorses anyone, that the company qualifies, or that the company will get better treatment for coming through a friend. Fit is decided in SourceX's review.
- Side benefits. The fund gives the LP nothing for the introduction: no fee concession, no allocation, no gift. Otherwise the LP has been paid after all.
Three LPs who wanted nothing (Illustrative)
Illustrative. Generic people and companies; no outcome implied.
A foundation's rule. An LP invests through a family foundation that bars personal fees and chairs a 280-person regional distributor. She chooses route A and tells the CEO, who decides to apply on the company's own. The confirmation records route A and that nobody stands to be paid.
Nothing for me, fine for the fund. A family office principal knows the CEO of a 160-person claims administrator and is happy for the fund to be paid. Route B: the fund submits after the CEO agrees, the CEO is told the fund could be paid and that the company's payout is unaffected, and the fund's counsel considers how its own documents treat the money.
The named introducer. A retired operator LP wants to be on record as introducing a 400-person logistics firm run by a former colleague, but wants no reward. Before contacting anyone he emails SourceX the general question. Nothing is submitted until a written answer arrives, and route A remains if it does not suit him.
Limits of the unpaid route
- The open question stays open. Until SourceX answers in writing, nobody can say how a declined reward is treated, and this page does not guess.
- The LP's rules may reach further than pay. Some institutions restrict the introduction itself, not just the money; their compliance team decides that.
- Perception. An unpaid LP can still be seen as acting for the fund. Separate messages reduce that impression; they do not remove it.
- General research. The pay experiments cited above did not involve LPs, funds or introductions.
- No published figures. Nothing has been published on how often LPs decline rewards or how such introductions turn out. Log your own: offers made, routes chosen, CEOs who agreed.
To see how a reward is calculated separately from the company's own proceeds, read the difference between a referral reward and the company's licensing proceeds; more guides on LP and board relationships sit in the guides library.
Next step
Refer a company. No cap on rewards. Default reward on a company's first qualifying transaction: the greater of $50,000 plus 5% and 15% of Actual Supplier Payout, with no cap; further qualifying transactions first agreed within 12 months of the first Closing pay 15%. Eligibility and payment conditions apply, including the USD 100,000 Minimum Transaction, and a signed Schedule A or addendum can differ. A lead, meeting or signature alone does not trigger payment.
Before an LP's offer becomes an introduction, register if your fund will be the one submitting, check the company's public facts against who qualifies, and read the program terms together with the LP so both of you can see what they cover and what they leave to SourceX.
An LP helping with one introduction is a separate matter from anyone's view of SourceX as an investment; readers assessing SourceX as a company can request materials through the SourceX investor overview.
This article is for information only and is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy securities. Any offering by SourceX is made only to verified accredited investors through its offering documents.