Assemble the residual calculation and re-perform the statement against the agreement it is owed under, track the assumption chain and the clocks that run, and hold both for the officer who signs.
A programme-wide accuracy figure across the guilds can look acceptable while a small number of title cohorts carry most of the underpayments. Nestack reports the underpayment rate by slice, not only in total.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
Transferred library titles
7.8%
3.8×
Review
Foreign streaming reuse
5.4%
2.6×
Review
Basic cable reruns
3.6%
1.8×
Watch
Current-cycle first runs
1.5%
0.7×
Normal
Bar: underpayment-rate lift vs. first-run baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
A cycle closes on a test, not a memo
The loop shuts when the missed payment is a regression case. That is what the next statement issued is measured against.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Underpayment rate rises in a title slice.
02Diagnose
The picture that changed distributor and lost its payer is traced back to the transfer nobody papered.
03Improve
Any change goes out numbered, with the titles that caused it attached.
04Verify
A statement case still failing is enough to hold the release back.
05Learn
One case added to the suite, one line added to the assumption record.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. The next detection runs against a suite one underpayment case longer.
Typical build scope
Twelve workstreams across six weeks
The build scope read against the delivery timeline. Week structure follows the six-week plan — discovery, sources, calculation workflow, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Residuals workflow discovery and boundary definition.
02Distribution and payment source review.
03Agreement, market and formula-table rule mapping.
04Use ingestion and market classification.
05Calculation logic and agreement binding.
06Confidence scoring and gap routing.
07Officer approval workflow.
08Distribution and payment integration.
09Calculation and chain cases.
10Guardrails and issuance controls.
11Title-trail instrumentation.
12Deployment, documentation and Agent Care handover.
12 workstreams · 6 weeks · bar shows the weeks a workstream is active — several run in parallelFinal scope and sequence confirmed in discovery
Engagement tiers
What each tier includes
Rows are the capabilities named in each tier's scope. Higher tiers include everything below them.
Capability✓ in scope · — not at this tierPilotOne title, one guildProductionProduction residual systemsAdvancedMultiple slates / guilds
Introduced at Pilot
Calculation to your agreements✓✓✓
Officer approval✓✓✓
Calculation-accuracy baseline✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Reporting by guild—✓✓
Approval workflow in your systems—✓✓
Approved write-back—✓✓
Distribution-data integration—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Multi-guild agreement sets——✓
Multi-stage studio approvals——✓
High title volume——✓
Multi-agreement residual controls——✓
Build priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on integrations, workflow complexity, transaction volume, approval controls and deployment requirements.
Separate from buildBuild pricing is separate from recurring Agent Care, which covers managed monitoring, evaluations, incidents and verified improvements after launch.
What we need from you
What you bring, and what we build with it
Each input maps to a piece of build scope and a week in the delivery timeline.
You bringWe build with it
01Your titles and their agreement versions→Use ingestion and market classificationWeek 1
02Representative statements already issued→Calculation baseline and reconciliation checksWeek 2
03Your assumption agreements and chain of title→Agreement, market and formula-table rule mappingWeek 1
04Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports→Distribution and payment assessment, then integration setupWeek 2
05Statements you would not want audited→Underpayment cases and failure-mode testingWeek 4
06What no statement may omit→Confidence scoring, gap routing, guardrails and issuance controlsWeek 3
07Named participations officers to approve→Officer approval workflow, then pilot and production validationWeeks 5–6
Nothing else is requiredDeployment, documentation and Agent Care handover are ours.
Delivery timeline
Four phases across six weeks
Each band spans the weeks its phase truly takes, which is why the fifth carries two of them at once.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Residuals workflow discovery, agreement mapping and the automation boundaryW2Distribution and payment integration and the calculation baselineW3Calculation workflow, confidence logic and issuance controlsW4Evaluation suite, assumption-chain checks and failure-mode testingW5Payment-system integration, pilot titles and targeted correctionsW6One reporting cycle run under the participations officer, then handover
Reading the bandEach bar covers only the weeks its work is named in. The week 5 overlap is real work, not padding.
At the end of W6Once the cycle validates, Agent Care assumes the running agent.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Media & Entertainment AI agent
Build a residuals agent around the agreement each payment is owed under.
A statement that has issued starts a clock that runs whether or not it was right. Show us your titles, your agreements and who issues — the officer signs, and a guild auditor tests it.
