Facility Management Software Options

Requirements Loaded

Source: /mnt/media/code/projects/Max Storage/.claude/knowledge/integration/operations.md

Status: POPULATED (version 3, refreshed 2026-08-05)

What changed between v2 and v3 that matters to this document:

v3 does not change any of the substantive selection criteria carried in v2 (weekly + monthly concurrent billing, the exact CSV column format, hosting jurisdiction, tokenised payments, Xero integration, 7-year retention). What v3 adds is a priority reordering, driven by evidence-documentation-requirements.md moving to v5:

• "Step zero" (new, mandatory, precedes any new selection work): operations.md v3 instructs this agent to first establish, via Ed/Tom, whether a management platform is already live (Phase 1 soft launch was targeted for May/June 2026, three months before this refresh), and if so, whether it already meets the criteria below. If a platform is already running, the priority is confirming and documenting compliance, not re-shopping the market. If nothing compliant is running, or a manual log has been used inconsistently, the priority is urgent remediation and disclosure, not optimisation. This agent has no channel to Ed/Tom directly — Step Zero is surfaced below as the first, blocking open question, and the options that follow are written to serve either branch (confirm-in-place or select-and-remediate).
• The planning consultant's written confirmation of log methodology is reframed in v3 from "a gate to clear before launch" to "almost certainly missed; disclose rather than conceal." This affects how the software recommendation is positioned to the consultant (see Recommended Option) but does not change which platform is best.
• The August 2026 Evidence Continuity Check (new in v3) asks whether access logging has actually run gap-free since Phase 1 launch. This agent cannot answer that question — it is an operational fact only Ed/Tom can confirm — but it is now the precondition for trusting any of the compliance analysis below in practice, not just on paper.

Key constraints carried forward unchanged from v2 (still the selection criteria):

• Weekly billing (outdoor: car spots $20–$35/week, RV/boat spots $50/week) and monthly billing (enclosed bays, ~$230/month) must run concurrently in one platform.
• Mandatory CSV access log format, exact column headers: Date,Time,Spot_Reference,Storage_Type,Vehicle_Type,Customer_Reference. Format must not change from the first log entry.
• EasyGate Wireless Keypad has no data output — the management platform (or a supplementary logging device) is the sole source of the access log.
• Full GST tax invoice format for both billing cycles; GST must reconcile without manual adjustment.
• Hosting in NZ, AU, or an EU-adequacy jurisdiction; UK acceptable; US needs a Privacy Act IPP 12 review.
• PCI-DSS tokenised payments (Stripe, Windcave, or equivalent); no raw card data stored.
• Xero integration for GST workpapers.
• 7-year retention with export capability.
• Tom operates it day to day — no specialist IT knowledge required.
• No paid ongoing monitoring contract as a Phase 1 requirement.
• Phase 3 path to automated billing and a customer self-service portal.

New standing instruction applied in this refresh (2026-08-05, all sourcing agents): every named software product below has been live-verified today as still operating and (where checkable) still serving NZ/AU customers, with a cited source URL. Where verification could not be completed (search budget or fetch limits), this is stated explicitly rather than carried forward from memory.

---

Step Zero — Resolve Before Acting on Any Option Below

Per operations.md v3, this must be answered by Ed/Tom before this document's recommendation is actioned:

1. Is a management platform (e.g. Storman Cloud, or any other) currently live and in use for Max Storage, or has Phase 1 run on a manual log?
2. If a platform is live: does it already meet the criteria in this document (concurrent weekly/monthly billing, exact CSV format including Vehicle_Type, confirmed hosting jurisdiction, tokenised payments)? If yes, the work is confirming and documenting that, not re-selecting.
3. If no platform is live, or the manual log has gaps: the priority is getting a compliant platform live now and documenting the gap for the planning consultant — not optimising the selection process further.

This document is written to be useful either way: Option A (Storman Cloud) is both "what to configure now if nothing is running" and "what to check against if something already is."

---

Options

Option A: Storman Cloud (AU/NZ purpose-built self-storage platform)

Live verification (2026-08-05): Confirmed currently operating. Storman was founded in Auckland (1992) and has an NZ office (Level 2, Cargo Central, Auckland Airport). Source: https://storman.com/ (fetched 2026-08-05) and https://buyersguide.insideselfstorage.com/guides/default.aspx?li=26540. The vendor's own site now explicitly states flexible billing terms including "monthly, weekly, or fortnightly options," which directly answers the previously-open question about concurrent weekly/monthly billing support — still confirm in a live demo before contract, but this is no longer an unverified assumption.

Feature summary (from storman.com, fetched 2026-08-05):

• Automated invoicing with monthly, weekly, or fortnightly billing terms — confirms dual product-type billing is a native, advertised capability, not a workaround
• Automated direct debits, online payment options, gate lockouts for non-payment
• Access control integrations named on the vendor's own partner page: Nokē, Access Ezy, ICT, Protégé, PTI, Sentinel (https://storman.com/self-storage-access-control-partners/) — no EasyGate integration named
• Self-service customer portal
• Accounting exports to Xero, Sage, MYOB, QuickBooks
• Online move-ins, reservations, automated email/SMS, reporting, multi-site management

Requirements compliance:

Pricing model (NZD):

Storman's own site discloses no public pricing — quote-based, "request a quote." One third-party aggregator (SelectHub) lists an indicative "$240 per user, monthly" figure (https://www.selecthub.com/p/self-storage-software/storman/, fetched 2026-08-05); this is a third-party estimate, not vendor-confirmed, may reflect a different regional/tier configuration, and should not be treated as a quote. Prior indicative range from market research (unchanged, unverified against a current quote): $120–$350/month depending on unit count. A live quote is still required before budgeting — this has not changed since v1 of this document, despite the passage of four months.

Total Phase 1 cost (Storman Cloud + Xero Standard, indicative): ~$185–$265/month plus Xero's confirmed 2026 pricing update (see Option D pricing below) — treat as a placeholder pending the actual quote.

NZ support: Confirmed — NZ office, AU/NZ phone and email support; not a US-only vendor.

Access control integration: built-in for a named list of AU/NZ access-control brands; not EasyGate. For Phase 1, log entry against EasyGate access events remains manual, as in v1 of this document.

Phase 3 upgrade path: No platform change required — tenant portal and automated billing already included; Phase 3 is a configuration step.

Upgrade triggers (when a different/more capable platform becomes necessary):

• Not Storman itself — it scales to hundreds of units, well beyond Max Storage's 12 bays + up to ~50 outdoor spots.
• The trigger that matters is adding hardware, not replacing Storman: move to electronic access logging (e.g. PTI, which Storman already lists as an integration partner) once manual logging volume or Tom's availability makes manual entry unreliable — a reasonable rule of thumb is combined access events consistently exceeding ~80–100/month, or any missed-entry incident surfacing in a council or insurer review.
• Multi-site expansion (a second facility) would justify Storman's multi-site management tier, which is already built in — no platform change, just a configuration/pricing tier change.

Risks:

• Pricing remains opaque four months on — budget uncertainty persists until an actual quote is obtained. This is the single most actionable open item in this whole document.
• Data hosting jurisdiction is still not disclosed publicly — must be obtained in writing before contract (Privacy Act IPP 12).
• CSV export must be tested against the mandatory field format before go-live, not assumed.
• No native EasyGate integration — manual log entry discipline is still the single point of failure for consent evidence, and per Step Zero above, it is now unknown whether this discipline has actually held since Phase 1 launch.

---

Option B: Storeganise (cloud platform, global/AU-Asia-Pacific coverage)

Live verification (2026-08-05): Confirmed currently operating — "thousands of self-storage facilities in 50+ countries." Source: https://www.storeganise.com/pricing (fetched 2026-08-05).

Change since v1 of this document (material, negative for NZ fit): the pricing page's currency selector now lists USD, AUD, GBP, EUR only — NZD is not offered as a billing currency option. This was not visible in the prior pass and sharpens the existing hosting/GST concern into a more concrete signal that Storeganise's NZ-market fit has not improved, and may have narrowed, since April 2026.

Pricing (confirmed 2026-08-05): Base pricing starts at $90/month (displayed in the pricing calculator; currency context AUD/USD depending on selector), scaling with unit and location count, with the vendor directing prospects to contact sales for a full quote. Source: https://www.storeganise.com/pricing.

Requirements compliance (unchanged conclusions from v1, now sharper on currency):

Conclusion on Option B: Unchanged and, if anything, slightly weaker than the April 2026 assessment. Not recommended until weekly billing, data hosting, NZD/GST support, and NZ GST Act invoice compliance are all confirmed in writing by Storeganise. The absence of NZD from the public pricing currency list is a new, concrete data point against Option B for a NZ-only operator — it does not by itself rule Storeganise out (Stripe multi-currency could still deliver NZD customer invoices), but it removes the benefit of the doubt.

---

Option C: Xero + Spreadsheet Customer Records + Supplementary Access Logging Device

Overview (unchanged from v1): Xero for GST invoicing; structured spreadsheet/shared folder for customer records; a supplementary access-logging device to cover what EasyGate cannot log electronically.

Sub-option C1 — Hikvision DS-K2602 wired behind the EasyGate keypad:

Live verification status: UNVERIFIED this cycle. The WebSearch budget for this session was exhausted before a DS-K2602-specific NZ supplier search could be completed, and a direct fetch of hikvision.com/nz returned no retrievable content. This sub-option's continued viability (product availability, NZ pricing, Wiegand compatibility with the actual EasyGate keypad model) must be re-confirmed with a NZ security distributor before it is relied on. Treat C1 as the lower-confidence of the two access-control sub-options in this refresh.

Sub-option C2 — PTI StorLogix Cloud + Storm/AP1 keypad (EasyGate gate mechanism retained):

Live verification (2026-08-05): Confirmed currently operating. PTI Storage Security's ANZ-facing site states it serves "self-storage facilities in Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, Perth, Auckland, and across APAC" and lists StorLogix Cloud, AP1/AP1+ keypad hardware, and ProEdge Smart Latches as current products, "backed by expert local support" (source: https://www.ptistoragesecurity.com.au/storlogixcloudplatform/ and https://www.ptistoragesecurity.com.au/2026/07/09/secure-your-self-storage-facility-with-trusted-anz-experts/, both fetched 2026-08-05). Storman's own access-control partner list (see Option A) also names PTI, which is a useful cross-confirmation that PTI is an active, current AU/NZ-market player, not a legacy listing.

Correction to v1 of this document — NZ distributor: v1 named "SecureIT NZ (secureit.co.nz)" as the PTI NZ distributor. This could not be re-confirmed this cycle; instead, search results turned up a distinct, currently active entity — "PTI Storage Security – NZ Distributor" — with its own LinkedIn and Facebook presence (sources: https://www.linkedin.com/company/pti-storage-security-nz and https://www.facebook.com/PTIdistributorNZ, both surfaced 2026-08-05). Whether this is SecureIT NZ operating under a rebranded/co-branded name, or a different distributor entirely, is not resolved and must be established before contacting anyone for a quote — do not assume SecureIT NZ is still current without checking.

Pricing (unchanged from v1, not independently re-priced this cycle): PTI StorLogix Cloud previously estimated at USD $65–$120/month (~NZD $110–$200/month); no updated figure could be obtained from the pages fetched this cycle, which do not disclose pricing. Treat the v1 figure as indicative only and reconfirm at quote stage.

Requirements compliance: Unchanged from v1 in substance — see the detailed compliance tables in the prior version's Option C1/C2 sections (carried forward; no new compliance finding this cycle beyond the distributor-identity correction above). The material weaknesses remain: Xero cannot automate weekly billing at any meaningful outdoor customer count, and neither DS-K2602 nor PTI StorLogix can auto-populate the mandatory Vehicle_Type field — Tom must annotate it manually on every log row, indefinitely, as an ongoing compliance task rather than a one-off setup step.

Upgrade triggers (business conditions that make Option C insufficient):

• Outdoor spot count exceeds ~5 and weekly manual (or semi-manual) Xero invoicing becomes an administrative burden.
• Automated direct debit is wanted for more than 3–5 customers.
• A single dashboard (vs three disconnected tools: Xero, spreadsheet, access-control portal) becomes operationally necessary — e.g. after a near-miss where records were not cross-referenced correctly for a dispute or consent evidence request.
• A documented Vehicle_Type manual-annotation error surfaces in the access log — at that point, the ongoing manual-annotation risk in C1/C2 has materialised, not just theorised, and migrating to Option A (where Vehicle_Type is captured once at sign-up and auto-populated) becomes the corrective action.
• A customer self-service portal is wanted (Phase 3) — neither C1 nor C2 provides one; Option A must be added regardless.

Risks (updated):

• The PTI NZ distributor identity is now uncertain (see correction above) — resolve before requesting a quote.
• DS-K2602 (C1) could not be re-verified this cycle — do not proceed on this sub-option without a fresh check of current Hikvision NZ availability and Wiegand compatibility with the actual EasyGate model installed on site.
• All other risks from v1 (weekly billing burden in Xero, no single source of truth, manual Vehicle_Type annotation as a standing task) are unchanged and carried forward.

---

Option D: Xero + Manual Access Log Only (spreadsheet baseline)

Overview: Xero for GST invoicing, spreadsheet for customer records and manual access logging. No supplementary hardware. Lowest-cost configuration.

Live verification of Xero (2026-08-05): Confirmed currently operating and accepting new NZ customers. Current published NZ pricing (source: https://nzbusinesstools.co.nz/accounting-software/xero-pricing-nz-2026, citing xero.com/nz, both consistent with a cross-check via WebSearch of xero.com/nz/pricing-plans; direct fetch of the vendor page returned a transient 503 on this pass but the third-party aggregator's figures match the WebSearch summary of the same vendor page):

New finding this cycle — price change flagged: Xero has announced a NZ pricing update effective 1 October 2026 (source: https://nzbusinesstools.co.nz/accounting-software/xero-pricing-nz-2026, fetched 2026-08-05). The exact new figures were not disclosed on the page fetched. This means any budget built on the $65/month Standard figure should be revisited after 1 October 2026 — a small but concrete near-term cost risk that did not exist in the v1 (April 2026) version of this document.

Why Option D fails as the sole Phase 1 mechanism (unchanged from v1): Xero does not automate weekly recurring billing at scale, and a manually-maintained spreadsheet log lacks a system-generated timestamp, which weakens it as council consent evidence relative to a platform-generated log. This conclusion is reinforced, not weakened, by operations.md v3's Step Zero framing: if it turns out no compliant platform has been running and Option D is what has actually been in use since Phase 1 launch, that is now a disclosure item for the consultant, not a configuration gap to quietly fix.

Pricing (NZD, monthly, updated):

When Option D is appropriate (unchanged from v1): pre-customer setup, short bridging periods while a platform/device is procured, as a supplementary paper backup alongside an electronic log, or if outdoor storage is deferred entirely.

When Option D is not appropriate (unchanged from v1): as the sole, permanent access-logging mechanism once outdoor storage is trading at any meaningful scale, or once more than ~5 outdoor spots are active.

Upgrade triggers:

• Immediately, if Step Zero reveals this is in fact what has been running since Phase 1 launch with no platform — escalate to urgent remediation per operations.md v3, not a scheduled upgrade.
• Before any planning consultant review of the access log methodology.
• When outdoor spot count exceeds ~5.
• When remote PIN management or a customer portal is wanted.

---

Recommended Option

Primary recommendation, updated for v3: resolve Step Zero first; the platform recommendation itself is unchanged — Option A (Storman Cloud), subject to a live quote and a demo confirming concurrent weekly/monthly billing.

Why the recommendation is unchanged despite the v3 refresh: Nothing in operations.md v3 alters the underlying selection criteria — it changes the order of operations. Storman Cloud remains the only option in this set that can auto-populate the mandatory Vehicle_Type field from a customer record captured once at sign-up, avoiding the standing manual-annotation compliance task that both Option C sub-options require indefinitely. This cycle's live verification strengthens Option A's case on one specific point: Storman's own site now explicitly advertises weekly billing terms, which was previously an inference this document had to caveat.

What has changed is what must happen before this recommendation is acted on:

1. Resolve Step Zero with Ed/Tom first. If Storman Cloud (or any platform) is already live, the task is confirming its configuration against the compliance table in Option A — not re-running a vendor search. If nothing compliant is running, the gap must be disclosed to the planning consultant at first engagement (per operations.md v3, interaction 8) alongside getting a compliant platform live now.
2. Get an actual Storman quote. This has been an open item since the April 2026 version of this document and remains unresolved four months later — it is the single largest source of budget uncertainty in this entire analysis.
3. Confirm Storman's data hosting jurisdiction in writing — not publicly disclosed on the vendor site checked this cycle.
4. If Storman's quote is unaffordable or a platform cannot be stood up quickly: fall back to Option C2 (PTI StorLogix), but first resolve the NZ-distributor-identity uncertainty flagged above, and budget for the ongoing Vehicle_Type manual-annotation task as a recurring operational cost, not a one-off.
5. Do not treat Option D (spreadsheet-only) as adequate for ongoing Phase 1 operation — it remains a bridging/backup option only, and if it turns out to be what has actually been running, that is a disclosure item, not a fix to make quietly.

Summary table (updated):

Why not Option B (Storeganise): Unchanged conclusion, reinforced this cycle by the discovery that NZD is not offered as a billing currency on the current public pricing page. Not recommended until weekly billing, data hosting, and NZ GST/NZD compliance are confirmed in writing.

---

Open Questions

1. [BLOCKING, new in v3] Step Zero — actual current platform status. Is a management platform live today, and has it been logging access events without a gap since Phase 1 launch (targeted May/June 2026)? This agent has no way to answer this and it gates whether the rest of this document is "confirm what's running" or "select and deploy urgently." Raised directly by operations.md v3.

1. Storman Cloud live quote (blocking for Phase 1 budget, unresolved since April 2026). Contact Storman (storman.com) or its NZ office directly. Specify: 12 enclosed bays + up to 50 outdoor spots, single site, NZ GST, weekly outdoor / monthly indoor billing, Xero integration, manual access log entry, custom fields for hull/VIN and Vehicle_Type. Request a live demo of concurrent weekly/monthly billing.

1. Storman data hosting jurisdiction — not disclosed on the vendor site checked 2026-08-05; get this in writing before contract (Privacy Act IPP 12).

1. PTI NZ distributor identity — v1 of this document named SecureIT NZ; this cycle's research surfaced a distinct "PTI Storage Security – NZ Distributor" entity whose relationship to SecureIT NZ is unresolved. Confirm which is current before requesting a C2 quote.

1. Hikvision DS-K2602 current NZ availability and pricing — could not be verified this cycle (WebSearch budget exhausted, direct vendor fetch returned no content). Re-verify before relying on Option C1.

1. EasyGate Wiegand output — unresolved since v1; contact EasyGate (confirmed still trading, easygate.co.nz, live-checked 2026-08-05) with the specific installed keypad model to determine whether Option C1 is technically feasible at all.

1. Xero's announced 1 October 2026 NZ price change — exact new figures not published on the source checked; revisit before finalising any Phase 1 software budget line that assumes current Xero Standard pricing beyond that date.

1. Planning consultant disclosure of the access log methodology gap — per operations.md v3, this is very likely a "confirm and disclose" conversation rather than a "confirm before launch" gate. Ensure whoever runs Step Zero also prepares this disclosure for the consultant's first engagement.

1. Storeganise weekly billing, NZD/GST, and data hosting — unresolved since v1; now additionally weakened by the absence of NZD from the public pricing currency selector. Only worth re-evaluating if Storman's quote is materially unaffordable and all three points are confirmed in writing by Storeganise.

---

Market Research -- Competitor Pricing and Positioning

Requirements Loaded

Legal compliance compound requirements:

POPULATED (v1, 2026-04-01, unchanged since prior refresh, at .claude/knowledge/integration/legal-compliance.md). Key constraint extracted: physical address (Te Waerenga Road, Hamurana) must not appear in any public advertising, directory listing, Google My Business profile, or social media until resource consent is granted. Marketing claims about security coverage must not be unsubstantiated. Consumer CGA obligations constrain liability exclusion language. No changes to this document since the prior market research cycle -- the Marketing Language Constraints section below is unchanged in substance.

Operations compound requirements:

POPULATED (v3, refreshed 2026-08-05, at .claude/knowledge/integration/operations.md -- up from v2, 2026-04-09, read for the prior market research cycle). The Marketing and Market Research Constraints section itself is explicitly marked "unchanged from v2" in the source document -- the hard constraints (no address, no pricing/availability publicly, no signage visible from road, referral-only acquisition) are the same. What changed: v3 adds a material new caveat specifically addressed to this agent -- "the consent lodgement timeline has less slack than previously assumed (consultant engagement overdue; RMA reform legislation status unconfirmed) ... research-market should not assume the October/November 2026 consent date is firm when scoping any post-consent marketing preparation -- treat it as a target with schedule risk, not a confirmed date." This is incorporated below wherever this document references the Oct/Nov 2026 consent date as a marketing-activation trigger. v3 also lists an open item for Ed (item 8 in "What This Leaves Open"): confirm whether this document's output is for internal modelling only or will be published (address suppression required before consent), and whether to treat Oct/Nov 2026 as firm. This is carried into Open Questions below as it has not yet been answered.

---

Marketing Language Constraints

The following constraints flow directly from the resource consent strategy, as consolidated in the legal-compliance and operations compound requirements. Every pricing and marketing recommendation in this document is made within these constraints. No change to the constraints themselves this cycle -- see Requirements Loaded above for what did change (schedule-risk framing of the activation date, not the constraints).

Prohibited before resource consent is granted (target Oct/Nov 2026 -- now schedule-risk, not firm; see below):

• Physical address (Te Waerenga Road, Hamurana, Rotorua) in any public-facing context: Google Business Profile, Facebook, Instagram, TradeMe listings, Neighbourly, website, or any other publicly accessible medium
• Wayfinding signs on Te Waerenga Road or in Hamurana
• Signage on the building or gate visible from the road that identifies commercial use
• Any advertisement, listing, or post that could be acted on by a member of the public to drive to the site uninvited
• Language in any written material that describes the activity as a commercial storage park, storage centre, or storage facility in terms that contradict the 40% agricultural use consent strategy
• Listing on public storage directories (StorageSeeker or similar aggregators) that would create a publicly accessible address record before consent
• Any description of the outdoor storage product using language or images that would let a third party (council, neighbour) confirm that outdoor vehicle storage is already operating at scale before consent
• No pricing or availability information on any public platform (operations.md, unchanged)
• Marketing must not enable a third party to confirm outdoor vehicle storage is already operating at scale before consent (operations.md, unchanged)
• The Max Storage name and phone number may appear on compliance signs but not as commercial identification (operations.md, unchanged)
• Do not describe the facility as a "commercial storage yard" in public-facing content; do not use the word "facility" in combination with the physical address before consent (operations.md, unchanged)

Permitted before resource consent:

• Word-of-mouth customer acquisition by Ed, Tom, and personal networks (primary and lowest-risk channel)
• Direct private contact with known potential customers (farmers, boat owners, caravan owners in Hamurana and northern Rotorua area) -- physical address may be disclosed privately after the person has been screened
• A website describing the type of storage available and inviting enquiries by phone or email only, with no physical address and location described only as "Rotorua Lakes area" or "northern Rotorua"
• Social media describing the business concept (secure rural storage, boats and caravans welcome) without identifying the location, suburb, or street
• Networking through Rotorua/Lake Rotorua boating clubs, fishing clubs, and caravan/motorhome groups -- verbal referral only, no printed flyers or posters with the address at public locations

Required marketing language framing (pre-consent):

"Secure storage on rural property, available to local community." Avoid before consent: "commercial storage," "storage facility," "industrial storage," "self-storage."

Post-consent framing:

"Permitted commercial vehicle and equipment storage" or whatever wording the consent approval specifies. The customer base is recreational and lifestyle-oriented (boating, lake use, caravanning) not commercial warehousing -- all marketing should reflect this.

NEW this cycle -- schedule risk on the activation trigger:

Every "post-consent" marketing recommendation in this document is gated on resource consent being granted. Operations.md v3 confirms this gate should no longer be planned against a firm October/November 2026 date: the planning consultant is not yet engaged (overdue relative to the August 2026 target) and the effect of proposed RMA-replacement legislation (Natural Environment Act / Planning Act) on the lodgement timeline is unverified. Practical implication for this document: Ed and Tom should not commit budget or supplier contracts (Google Business Profile setup, TradeMe listing fees, signage fabrication) against an assumed Oct/Nov 2026 activation date. The Phase 2/3 channel list below remains correct in content but its timing should be treated as "on consent grant," whenever that occurs, not "Q4 2026."

---

Product Structure

There are two distinct products with different pricing bases and billing cycles.

Product A -- Enclosed bays (indoor, covered shed):

12 bays in the existing shed building. Mix of large bays (~44 m²) and small bays (~16 m²). Billed monthly. Starting price indication: ~$230/month. These are covered, secure indoor bays suitable for boats, vehicles, equipment, or household storage.

Product B -- Outdoor vehicle storage (hardstand):

Hardstand outdoor spots on the ~4,680 m² usable outdoor area. Two sub-types: car-sized spots and RV/boat/caravan spots. Billed weekly. Pricing indications: car spots $20–$35/week, RV/boat spots $50/week.

These products are assessed separately below.

---

Competitor Pricing Analysis

Product A -- Enclosed Bay Pricing: Rotorua Region Indoor/Covered Self-Storage

National Storage -- Rotorua (three sites: Fairy Springs, Rotorua Central, Rotorua Airport):

National Storage list prices before promotional discounts (up to 50% off first 1–3 months is common). The ongoing rate is the list price. These are drive-up or lift-access urban indoor units, typically containerised or purpose-built self-storage.

Storage King -- Rotorua (1 site, 131 Te Huaki Crescent):

Pricing not publicly available. Contact-based only. Assumed comparable to National Storage Rotorua for equivalent unit sizes, possibly slightly lower.

OTSB Te Puna (verified, rural Tauranga) -- covered storage:

$299/month for a 10.5x3m (31.5 m²) covered bay = $9.49/m²/month. This is covered vehicle storage, closer to Max Storage's enclosed bay product than containerised self-storage.

Storage Base NZ -- Mount Maunganui (verified, urban coastal):

Single garage 6x3m (18 m²): $368/month = $20.44/m²/month. Standard container 6x2.5m (15 m²): $282/month = $18.80/m²/month. Urban coastal premium; not directly relevant.

Summary range -- enclosed/covered storage, relevant comparators:

The National Storage rate of $13–$18/m²/month for larger units (13.5–15.6 m²) is the most relevant urban Rotorua benchmark. The Max Storage large enclosed bay at ~44 m² would price at $5.72/m²/month at $252/month, which is well below urban self-storage per-m² rates. This reflects the rural location and the larger-format bay structure -- it is not a weakness.

The Max Storage small enclosed bay at ~16 m² would price at $14.38/m²/month at $230/month, which sits within the National Storage Rotorua large-unit range. This is a reasonable position.

Assessment of $230/month for enclosed bays:

The $230/month price point needs to be evaluated separately by bay size.

• For a small bay (~16 m²): $230/month = $14.38/m²/month. This is competitive with National Storage Rotorua large-unit pricing ($13–$18/m²/month) and appropriate for a rural covered bay of this size. It is not below market -- it is mid-market for Rotorua covered storage.
• For a large bay (~44 m²): $230/month = $5.23/m²/month. This is significantly below the National Storage Rotorua per-m² rate and even below the rural covered vehicle storage rate at OTSB Te Puna ($9.49/m²/month). At this bay size, $230/month is below market.

Recommendation for enclosed bay pricing:

A single $230/month price across both small and large bays underprices the large bays materially. The large bays (~44 m²) should be priced at $380–$440/month ($8.64–$10.00/m²/month) to sit in the rural covered storage range. The small bays (~16 m²) at $230/month are reasonably positioned. See Recommended Pricing section for the full recommendation.

---

Product B -- Outdoor Vehicle Storage: Rotorua Region and Bay of Plenty Comparators

This is the primary revenue product. Rotorua-specific outdoor storage pricing is not publicly listed by any major operator. The analysis triangulates from the closest verified comparators.

National Storage Rotorua (all three sites):

Outdoor uncovered hardstand listed as available at all three sites; pricing by enquiry only. No public rate found. The National Storage Fairy Springs site (416 Ngongotaha Road, closest to Hamurana) is the most relevant comparator. A phone enquiry is the priority action to fill this gap -- see Open Questions.

Lock and Store Te Puna (verified, rural Tauranga):

Outdoor RV/boat hardstand: $160/month for an 8x3m bay (24 m²) = $6.67/m²/month = $36.92/week. Most directly comparable verified uncovered outdoor price for a semi-rural NZ location.

OTSB Te Puna (verified, rural Tauranga):

Covered storage: $299/month = $69/week for a 31.5 m² covered bay. Covered premium over uncovered at the same rural location.

Kennards Tauranga (verified, urban CBD):

Urban Tauranga CBD prices; upper end of the outdoor range for Bay of Plenty.

Storage King Hamilton Central (verified, urban CBD):

Outside storage 8x3m (24 m²): $250/month = $57.75/week = $10.42/m²/month.

Store-it Te Awamutu (verified, rural Waikato):

Market floor for rural NZ outdoor storage.

Summary -- outdoor hardstand storage weekly equivalent pricing:

The effective rural/semi-rural uncovered weekly range is $23–$37/week for a standard boat/RV-sized bay. Urban CBD uncovered runs $53–$73/week.

---

Demand Drivers -- Lake Rotorua/Hamurana Location

Boating culture and lake proximity:

Lake Rotorua is one of New Zealand's most actively used lakes for recreational boating, fishing, and water sports. The Hamurana boat ramp is a primary public access point to the northern lake. Boat owners launching from Hamurana face a real utility problem: towing to and from Rotorua CBD on every use occasion is inefficient. Storage within 5 minutes of the Hamurana ramp has a proximity premium that generic Rotorua CBD storage cannot offer. No commercial storage facility is currently located in Hamurana or on the northern lake shore -- the nearest commercial options are in Rotorua CBD, approximately 20–25 minutes from Hamurana.

Rural lifestyle demographic:

The Hamurana/Ngongotaha area has a significant lifestyle block and rural residential population. This demographic tends to own recreational vehicles that cannot be stored at small lifestyle block dwellings or town properties without resource consent issues. The Max Storage rural location directly suits this demographic's preference for unobtrusive, secure, accessible storage.

Caravan and motorhome ownership:

Bay of Plenty and Rotorua Lakes are popular caravanning and motorhome destinations. Seasonal storage demand for caravans is high from approximately March through October (end of summer to spring). Motorhomes are stored year-round.

Seasonal pattern:

Outdoor boat storage peaks March–September (boats stored over winter); caravan storage peaks October–April (seasonal users). The combination produces relatively balanced year-round outdoor demand with no single extreme low season.

Market gap:

No major commercial storage facility exists in the northern Rotorua suburbs or northern lake shore. The absence of formal competition within 15–20 minutes drive from the Hamurana boat ramp is a genuine market gap.

Informal rural storage as the true competitive floor:

Farm sheds and leased paddock storage exist informally in the Hamurana area and are the actual competitive alternative for Phase 1 customers. Informal rural storage is typically uninsured, unsecured, and unlit. Pricing is variable -- $50–$150/month for informal farm shed access is a reasonable assumption, though this is unverified (Tom is the best source for this). Max Storage's value proposition over informal storage is security (CCTV, gated access), all-weather access, insurance-compatible conditions, and formal agreement. These justify a premium over informal storage.

---

Recommended Pricing for Max Storage

All prices are GST-inclusive (15% GST included). A rural location discount of approximately 15–25% relative to urban Rotorua/Tauranga pricing is applied, partially offset by the Hamurana boat ramp proximity premium.

Outdoor Uncovered Bay (Boats/Caravans)

Car-sized spots ($20–$35/week):

Rural NZ outdoor storage floor: $23/week (Store-it Te Awamutu, small uncovered bay)

Rural semi-commercial ceiling: $37/week (Lock and Store Te Puna, 8x3m uncovered)

Urban CBD: $53–$73/week (Kennards Tauranga)

The proposed $20–$35/week car spot range spans from the rural floor to the rural semi-commercial ceiling. This is the correct market range for a rural/semi-rural NZ location.

Assessment of $20–$35/week car spots:

Competitive. The range encompasses the verified rural NZ outdoor storage comparable prices. $20/week is appropriate for a small car spot or compact trailer; $35/week is appropriate for a larger bay or boat-on-trailer that doesn't qualify for the RV/boat spot rate. This range is well-positioned.

Recommendation: Adopt $25/week as the standard car/compact trailer spot rate (mid-range) and $35/week for a car spot with a trailer or small boat. The $20/week floor is reasonable for compact spots without trailer access width.

RV/boat/caravan spots ($50/week):

$50/week = $217/month. The closest rural comparator (Lock and Store Te Puna, 8x3m uncovered) is $160/month = $36.92/week. The closest urban comparator (Kennards Tauranga, 8x3m uncovered) is $231/month = $53/week.

Assessment of $50/week for RV/boat spots:

$50/week ($217/month) is above the rural Te Puna uncovered rate ($37/week) and approximately equal to the Kennards Tauranga urban uncovered rate ($53/week for an 8x3m bay). For a rural Hamurana location, $50/week is at the upper boundary of market pricing -- it is justifiable only if the lake proximity premium is a real driver for boat owners who value being close to the Hamurana ramp.

Assessment of competitive position: $50/week is not underpriced -- it is near or at the market ceiling for a rural/semi-rural NZ location. There is risk of resistance from customers comparing it to the Te Puna rural rate ($37/week). However, the lake proximity argument is strong and real. If National Storage Fairy Springs charges comparable rates for outdoor storage (this is the critical unknown), $50/week is defensible.

Recommendation: $45–$50/week for standard RV/boat/caravan spots. $45/week ($195/month) benchmarks closely to Lock and Store Te Puna plus a 20% lake-proximity premium. $50/week is the top of the defensible range for a rural location. Ed should confirm the National Storage Fairy Springs outdoor rate before committing to the $50/week figure -- if National Storage charges $45–$60/week at Fairy Springs, $50/week is clearly competitive; if they charge $35–$40/week, the figure needs adjustment.

Covered Bay (Enclosed, If Offered as a Separate Outdoor-Adjacent Product)

Max Storage's covered product is delivered through the 12 enclosed shed bays (Product A above), not a separate outdoor covered-bay product. If a future covered outdoor canopy or lean-to structure is added (Phase 2/3), the OTSB Te Puna benchmark of $9.49/m²/month (covered rural vehicle storage) is the reference rate -- approximately a 40–50% premium over the equivalent uncovered rural rate. For the existing enclosed shed bays:

Verdict on $230/month for enclosed bays:

$230/month is competitive for the small bays (~16 m²) but materially below market for the large bays (~44 m²). If Ed wants a single price across all enclosed bays, $290–$310/month is a more defensible midpoint, though it would still underprice the large bays relative to the rural covered storage market. Two-tier pricing is the correct approach.

---

Permissible Marketing Channels

All Phase 1 marketing must be consistent with the consent strategy: no public disclosure of the physical address, and no material that presents the site as a commercial storage facility before consent is granted.

Phase 1 -- Before Resource Consent (activation trigger now treated as schedule-risk, not a firm Oct/Nov 2026 date)

Permitted channels:

1. Personal referral by Ed and Tom.

Primary and lowest-risk channel. Ed and Tom identify potential customers from personal and professional networks (family, neighbours, farming contacts, boating club contacts, lake users). The physical address is disclosed verbally and privately to screened customers only. No written record of the address appears in any public medium.

1. Direct private approach to known contacts.

Letters, texts, or emails to people Ed and Tom know are looking for storage. These are private communications, not public advertising. The physical address may be included in private correspondence if the recipient is a genuine screened prospect.

1. Boating and recreation community word-of-mouth.

Verbal networking through Rotorua/Lake Rotorua boating clubs, fishing clubs, and caravan/motorhome groups. Closed or semi-closed communities where Ed and Tom can speak directly to potential customers. No printed flyers or posters with the address at public notice boards during the pre-consent period.

1. Phone-enquiry-only website.

Simple website describing available storage types (outdoor bays for boats, caravans, motorhomes; secure gated rural site; 24-hour access; "Rotorua Lakes area") with a phone number and contact form but no physical address, no "find us" map, and no suburb identified more specifically than "Rotorua Lakes area" or "northern Rotorua." The website must not be submitted to Google My Business (requires physical address). Domain WHOIS must not list the physical address.

1. Social media -- concept-only posts.

Facebook or Instagram describing the business concept (secure rural storage, boats and caravans welcome, Rotorua area) without identifying location, suburb, or street. No GPS-tagged photos showing site exterior from the road. Responses to enquiries invite the person to call or email; address disclosed privately only if they proceed.

Channels explicitly not permitted before consent:

• Google Business Profile listing with address
• TradeMe property/storage listings with address or suburb
• Neighbourly posts identifying the site location
• Printed flyers in letterboxes
• Roadside signs or A-frames on Te Waerenga Road
• Facebook marketplace listings with location tag or map
• Any listing that aggregators (Google Maps, Apple Maps) could crawl and associate with the physical address
• Self-storage directory listings (StorageSeeker or equivalents)
• Any outdoor storage marketing using images or language that would allow identification of the physical site before consent

Phase 2/3 -- After Resource Consent is Granted (do not budget or contract against a fixed calendar date)

Once resource consent is granted, the constraint on public address disclosure is lifted. Operations.md v3 is explicit that the Oct/Nov 2026 target should not be treated as firm for planning purposes -- consultant engagement is overdue and RMA-replacement legislation status is unverified. The channel list below is unchanged in content from the prior cycle; only its timing assumption has changed.

1. Google Business Profile. Create a full profile with physical address, category, photos, hours, and services. Highest-impact single marketing action post-consent.

1. TradeMe storage listing. List outdoor bays and enclosed bays on TradeMe's storage category. Primary channel for NZ boat and caravan storage discovery. Include photos, dimensions, pricing, and address.

1. Website upgrade. Add a full location page with address, Google Maps embed, directions from Rotorua CBD, and proximity to the Hamurana boat ramp.

1. Boat ramp and recreation venue flyering. Printed flyers at Hamurana boat ramp public notice board, bait shops, fishing and boating clubs in the northern Rotorua area.

1. Neighbourly and local community boards. Post to the Hamurana and Ngongotaha/Rotorua Lakes Neighbourly communities.

1. Social media -- location-identified posts. Facebook and Instagram posts can now identify location by suburb and address, targeting Rotorua lake boating community groups.

1. On-property gate sign. One small identification sign at the gate (approximately 0.5 m², no illumination, gate-facing only) is expected to be permitted as a consent condition.

1. Self-storage directory listings. StorageSeeker, Storeganise, Storman operator directories.

---

Open Questions

1. National Storage Fairy Springs outdoor pricing (highest priority, unchanged).

National Storage Fairy Springs (416 Ngongotaha Road, 07 357 2429) is the nearest formal commercial outdoor storage comparator to Hamurana. Their outdoor hardstand is listed as available but not priced publicly. A phone enquiry is the single most important action to calibrate the $50/week RV/boat rate. If National Storage charges $35–$40/week, the Max Storage rate needs adjustment downward; if they charge $50–$65/week, the $50/week rate is firmly positioned.

2. Storage King Rotorua outdoor pricing (unchanged).

Storage King Rotorua (131 Te Huaki Crescent, 07 3456 424). Lower priority than National Storage but would complete the Rotorua competitor picture.

3. Actual enclosed bay dimensions (unchanged).

The large/small classification (~44 m² and ~16 m²) is derived from the index file. Actual confirmed dimensions from Tom or the site plans are needed before enclosed bay pricing is finalised. If large bays are materially different from 44 m², the $/m²/month assessment changes.

4. Number of large vs small enclosed bays (unchanged).

How many of the 12 enclosed bays are large (~44 m²) and how many are small (~16 m²)? This affects total enclosed bay revenue and the weighting of the two-tier pricing recommendation. The financial model needs this split.

5. Proportion of shed available for enclosed customer storage (unchanged).

The consent strategy requires approximately 40% agricultural use of the site. How much of the shed can be allocated to customer storage without undermining the agricultural use evidence? Requires input from the planning consultant.

6. Informal rural storage pricing in Hamurana/Ngongotaha area (unchanged).

What do local farm sheds currently charge for boat or caravan storage? Tom is the best source. This is the true competitive floor. If informal farm storage is available at $80–$120/month, the outdoor pricing needs clear value differentiation messaging (security, CCTV, 24-hour access, insurance-compatible conditions).

7. Single vs two-tier enclosed bay pricing (unchanged).

If Ed prefers a single price across all enclosed bays for simplicity, $290–$310/month is a defensible midpoint but still underprices the large bays relative to the rural covered storage market. Ed should decide whether the simplicity benefit outweighs the revenue foregone on large bays.

8. Introductory pricing for Phase 1 referral customers (unchanged).

If an introductory rate is offered (e.g., outdoor RV spots at $40/week for the first 3 months), the customer agreement must specify the conditions and timing of any transition to the standard rate. The transition timing could coincide with consent being granted -- the contract should anticipate this rather than requiring renegotiation mid-tenancy.

9. Pre-consent online presence audit (unchanged).

Before Phase 1 launch, any existing online presence (Facebook, TradeMe, website) should be audited for address disclosures. Ed should confirm with Tom whether any current listing identifies the Te Waerenga Road address and remove or edit those before the first customer accesses the site. Given operations.md v3's unresolved Evidence Continuity Check (whether Phase 1 has actually already launched), this audit should not wait -- it should be treated as already overdue rather than a pre-launch task.

10. Post-consent marketing activation timing -- upgraded to material, not just a flag (was item 10 in the prior cycle).

Operations.md v3 confirms directly: do not treat October/November 2026 as a firm consent date for planning post-consent marketing spend or supplier contracts (Google Business Profile setup, TradeMe listing, signage fabrication). Planning consultant engagement is overdue and the effect of proposed RMA-replacement legislation on the lodgement timeline is unverified. Ed should defer any binding commitment on Phase 2/3 marketing channels (item costs, supplier contracts) until the consultant confirms a realistic lodgement and likely determination window, and should ask the consultant directly whether the consent is likely to be limited-term or indefinite (this affects the marketing investment payback calculus).

11. NEW -- Scope of this document: internal modelling only, or will it be published?

Operations.md v3 explicitly leaves this open (item 8 in "What This Leaves Open for Ed"): is this market research document for Ed's internal pricing/positioning decisions only, or will any part of it (e.g., pricing ranges, positioning language) be reused in customer-facing material or shared outside the immediate team? If the latter, every reference to the physical address, specific competitor names, and site-identifying detail in this document needs review for accidental disclosure before external use -- this document itself is not written for public release and contains competitor names, phone numbers, and location detail that should not be copied verbatim into any customer-facing material pre-consent.

12. NEW -- Confirm whether outdoor storage marketing has already been informally activated.

Operations.md v3's unresolved Evidence Continuity Check raises the possibility that Phase 1 soft launch already occurred (target was May/June 2026) and that outdoor storage may already be operating. If so, Ed should confirm no marketing activity inconsistent with the Phase 1 constraints above (e.g., informal Facebook posts, verbal promises naming the address, photos posted online) has already occurred, since anything already public cannot be un-published and would need to be assessed for consent risk now rather than prevented in advance.

---

Financial Model -- Max Storage Operations

Inputs Used

Sourcing agent outputs read and incorporated (all re-verified live 2026-08-05 unless noted):

Market research: working/market/research-market.md POPULATED (v2, 2026-08-05). Confirmed pricing unchanged and re-validated against wider NZ/BOP comparators: large bay $400/month and small bay $230/month both sit within the recommended competitive range. Outdoor pricing ($20–$35/week car, $50/week RV/boat) unchanged. Material new flag: the Oct/Nov 2026 consent date should be treated as schedule-risk, not firm, and it is now unconfirmed whether Phase 1 has actually launched on its original May/June 2026 target -- an "Evidence Continuity Check" raised upstream (operations.md v3) has not been answered. This directly affects how much confidence to place in the Year 1 ramp-up projection below.

Financial obligations compound requirements: integration/financial-obligations.md v4 (2026-08-05). Material finding carried into this model unchanged from the source: financial/loan-covenant-requirements.md and financial/intercompany-requirements.md do not exist on disk, despite the knowledge index describing both as PARTIAL with specific content (a covenant-breach risk assessment; a 17-question accountant brief with a $23,000–$52,000/year indicative rent range). Every figure in this model that traces back to those two domains -- the intercompany rent range, all loan covenant assumptions, the DSCR requirement, the bank-consent-before-lease-signing question -- is a conservative first-principles NZ commercial banking/letting estimate, not a sourced finding, and must be treated with a materially higher degree of caution than a normal NEEDS-INPUT flag. This is flagged at every use below with [UNCONFIRMED -- SOURCE FILE ABSENT], distinct from ordinary [UNCONFIRMED -- pending quote/council enquiry] flags used elsewhere.

Confirmed decisions applied (not flagged as unconfirmed): Large bay $400/month, small bay $230/month, car spots $25/week (standard) / $35/week (car+trailer), RV/boat spots $50/week, outdoor storage concurrent with Phase 1 (Scenario A confirmed), Lightwire $139/month, camera hardware $3,982 incl. GST.

Weakest inputs carried into every downstream figure in this model, flagged once here rather than repeated everywhere:

1. Intercompany rent ($23,000–$52,000/yr) -- [UNCONFIRMED -- SOURCE FILE ABSENT]
2. Loan covenant conditions, DSCR requirement, bank-consent-to-lease question -- [UNCONFIRMED -- SOURCE FILE ABSENT]
3. FMG insurance premiums (building, PL, outdoor endorsement) -- [UNCONFIRMED -- pending quote, 4+ months outstanding]
4. RLC and BOPRC rates (current and post-reclassification) -- [UNCONFIRMED -- pending direct council enquiry]
5. Storman Cloud software quote -- [UNCONFIRMED -- pending vendor quote, 4+ months outstanding]
6. Whether Phase 1 has actually launched and on what date -- [UNCONFIRMED -- Evidence Continuity Check unresolved]

---

GST Treatment Note

All prices to customers are GST-inclusive (15% GST). All revenue figures in this model are GST-exclusive (divide inclusive receipts by 1.15). All cost figures are GST-exclusive unless otherwise noted. GST collected is a liability to IRD -- it is not income. Input tax credits are recoverable on business costs. Both entities must register for GST before Phase 1 capital expenditure is incurred (tax-gst v4, re-confirmed live 2026-08-05), not merely before first revenue.

Conversion reference: GST-exclusive = GST-inclusive ÷ 1.15.

---

Phase 1 Capital Costs

Phase 1 capital is required before the first paying customer. The security system, fire equipment, and software platform are insurance/compliance preconditions per integration/financial-obligations.md v4's Security Investment Floor -- they are non-negotiable pre-revenue obligations, not optional improvements.

Total Phase 1 capital (all-in, including the already-incurred internet cable run): $9,952 incl. GST / $8,654 ex. GST

New forward capital required from this point (excluding the sunk internet cable run): $9,027 incl. GST / $7,850 ex. GST

GST input tax credits on new forward Phase 1 capital: ~$1,178 (recoverable in the first GST return, provided both entities are GST-registered before the expenditure is incurred).

IRD Investment Boost note: 20% of qualifying asset costs (camera/NVR hardware specifically, not services like installation labour, software subscriptions, or fire IQP commissioning) can be immediately expensed in the year of acquisition; the remaining 80% is depreciated. Estimated Year 1 Investment Boost benefit on camera/NVR hardware: ~$693 (20% × $3,463 ex-GST camera hardware). [VERIFY WITH ACCOUNTANT: confirm asset categories against IR265 and confirm the 20% figure -- the IRD guidance page returned a 404 on the tax-gst v4 refresh and could not be independently re-confirmed.]

Phase 2 Capital Costs (indicative -- not committed)

Total indicative Phase 2 capital: ~$6,240 (incl. GST), up from the prior model's $6,130 estimate, driven mainly by the access control budget revision.

---

Operating Costs (Annual, Ex. GST)

Two cost centres: Max Storage Ltd (operator) and Douglas Enterprises Ltd (property owner). Both are shown because they form the consolidated financial picture for the Year-5 DSCR analysis.

Max Storage Ltd -- Annual Operating Costs

Total annual operating -- Max Storage Ltd (base case, mid estimates, excluding rent): ~$13,399/yr ex. GST

Total annual operating -- Max Storage Ltd (base case, mid estimates, including rent at $35,000): ~$48,399/yr ex. GST

(Excluding conditional security monitoring and Phase 2 alarm SIM)

Douglas Enterprises Ltd -- Annual Obligations

Total annual obligations -- Douglas Enterprises Ltd (ex. intercompany rent income, pre-reclassification): ~$40,640/yr ex. GST

Net Douglas Enterprises position (with intercompany rent at $35,000, pre-reclassification): $35,000 income – $40,640 cost = –$5,640/yr shortfall at base case intercompany rent. Douglas Enterprises cannot service the loan from Max Storage rent alone at the $35,000 base case rent level. See Year-5 DSCR analysis.

Rates Reclassification Risk (Stress Test)

Per rates-levies v4, outdoor vehicle storage carries MEDIUM pre-consent detection risk (visible from the road/satellite imagery) from the moment it launches -- not from the Oct/Nov 2026 consent filing date. If the Evidence Continuity Check confirms outdoor storage has already launched (May/June 2026 target), this risk window has already been open for months.

Budget: include the incremental ~$5,000/yr as a likely cost from as early as mid-2026 if outdoor storage is confirmed live, or from Year 2 if the more conservative consent-filing trigger is used.

Revised Douglas Enterprises annual costs (post-reclassification): ~$45,640/yr ex. GST (excluding rent)

One-off development contribution (v4, revised down from v3): $0–$3,000, payable at consent-issue year only, not an annual cost -- RLC's Development Contributions Policy is confirmed three-waters-scoped only and Max Storage needs no new water/wastewater connection.

---

Revenue Model

Bay Count and Product Types

Open pricing-calibration item (market research v2, unchanged from v1): National Storage Fairy Springs' outdoor hardstand rate is still not obtained. This is the single most important unresolved comparator for validating the $50/week RV/boat rate.

Full-Capacity Annual Revenue (ex. GST)

Enclosed bays -- 100% occupancy:

Outdoor storage -- 100% occupancy:

Total at 100% occupancy (all products): $129,878/yr ex. GST

Revenue at Occupancy Scenarios

Notes on occupancy assumptions (unchanged basis from prior model): LOW reflects slow early-stage word-of-mouth-only growth (Year 1 stress scenario); MID reflects a stabilised operation (Year 3 base case); HIGH reflects near-full utilisation once resource consent is granted and full marketing channels open (Year 4–5 aspiration). These curves have not been re-validated against actual Phase 1 trading data because it is unconfirmed whether Phase 1 has actually launched -- see Evidence Continuity flag in Inputs Used.

---

Break-Even Analysis

Break-even is defined as the occupancy level at which total Max Storage revenue equals total Max Storage operating costs (including intercompany rent). This is a cash-neutral position -- it does not include capital recovery.

Max Storage total annual operating costs (base case): $48,399/yr ex. GST

At uniform occupancy across both product lines:

$129,878 × X = $48,399

X = 37.3%

Break-even occupancy: approximately 37% of full capacity across both product lines.

• At LOW scenario (40% indoor / 25% outdoor): revenue $38,386 -- below break-even by ~$10,013. Still a deficit year.
• At VERY LOW (25%/15%): revenue $23,426 -- deficit of ~$24,973.
• Once outdoor occupancy reaches roughly 35% with indoor at 40%, the operation turns cash-positive.

Break-even with capital amortisation (new forward Phase 1 capital $7,850 ex. GST, straight-line over 5 years): add $1,570/yr capital charge -- break-even revenue rises to $49,969, or approximately 38–39% of full capacity.

Key observation, unchanged from prior model: Outdoor storage is the primary break-even lever. Indoor-only operation at 65% occupancy would generate only $25,638 -- well short of operating costs on its own. Outdoor storage is load-bearing, not supplementary.

---

Year 1 Projection

Caveat, new this cycle: it is currently unconfirmed whether Phase 1 has actually launched on its original May/June 2026 target, or what has actually been running (a compliant platform vs. a manual log) since then. The ramp-up curve below is a planning assumption, not a confirmed trading history. If Phase 1 launched later, or has run with gaps in access logging, both the revenue curve and the consent-evidence position need re-assessment against actual dates once Ed/Tom confirm Step Zero (per source-software.md).

Occupancy ramp-up assumption (10 operating months, planning basis: May 2026 -- Feb 2027):

Year 1 (10-month) approximate total revenue: ~$44,302 ex. GST (annualised equivalent: ~$53,162)

Year 1 operating costs (10-month proportion for variable items, fixed items in full, updated for the higher software baseline): ~$45,300 ex. GST

Year 1 result: approximately –$1,000 (near break-even, slightly negative under the base case cost assumptions).

Year 1 GST position (approximate): GST on revenue ~$44,302 × 15% ≈ $6,645 output tax. Less input tax credits on operating costs and new forward Phase 1 capital: ~$1,178 capital + ~$1,300 operating inputs ≈ $2,478. Net GST payable to IRD in Year 1: ~$4,167 (6-monthly filing).

---

Year 3 Projection

Assumption: Stabilised occupancy at MID scenario (65% indoor / 50% outdoor). Resource consent obtained by late 2026/early 2027 -- itself now schedule-risk, not firm, per market-research v2's incorporation of the RMA-reform-legislation caveat.

Douglas Enterprises Year 3 position (with reclassification assumed active by Year 3):

At base case intercompany rent ($35,000), Douglas Enterprises operates at a deficit of approximately $10,600/yr once reclassification occurs. This remains the core financial tension in the model, and it is somewhat worse than the prior version's estimate because v4's "business" category rates range ($6,000–$12,000) sits higher than v3's differential-based approach.

Cumulative Year 3 position (Max Storage perspective):

Year 1: ~–$1,000 | Year 2: ~$9,200 (see Year 1–5 summary table) | Year 3: $22,457

Cumulative 3-year Max Storage surplus: approximately $30,700

---

Year 5 -- Loan Refinancing Scenario

Loan Parameters

• Principal: $470,000; interest rate: 6.2% interest-only; annual interest: $29,140
• Term: 5 years from drawdown -- exact drawdown date remains [UNCONFIRMED -- SOURCE FILE ABSENT]

DSCR Analysis at Year 5

DSCR = Net Operating Income available for debt service ÷ Annual interest obligation, calculated at the Douglas Enterprises level.

At 1.2× DSCR: NOI = $34,968. Therefore rent required = $34,968 + $17,000 = $51,968 (~$52,000/yr).

DSCR at MID Scenario Revenue (Intercompany Rent = $35,000)

NOI = $35,000 – $17,000 = $18,000. DSCR = $18,000 / $29,140 = 0.62× -- materially below the conservative 1.2× bank benchmark used here.

DSCR Scenarios -- Varying Intercompany Rent

At MID occupancy revenue ($70,856), the intercompany rent required for 1.2× DSCR (~$52,000) sits exactly at the upper bound of the [UNCONFIRMED -- SOURCE FILE ABSENT] $23,000–$52,000 indicative rent range. Max Storage retains only a $5,457/yr surplus at that rent level -- viable but tight, and with no margin for cost overruns on the many unconfirmed cost lines above.

At HIGH occupancy ($101,353 revenue): With rent at $52,000, Max Storage surplus = $101,353 – $52,000 – $13,399 = $35,954/yr. Strongly viable.

Arm's-Length Constraint on Intercompany Rent

The ~$52,000/yr figure needed for 1.2× DSCR must also meet the IRD arm's-length test (ITA 2007, associated-persons principles, tax-gst v4). Because financial/intercompany-requirements.md does not exist, there is currently no actual market evidence for this property's arm's-length rent at all -- the $23,000–$52,000 range itself is an index-derived carry-forward, not a sourced market comparison. This is a materially weaker basis than "PARTIAL, pending confirmation" implies; it should be treated as effectively unset until the accountant and a market rent comparison (or registered valuer opinion) actually exist.

Interest Rate Risk at Refinancing

At +2%, the required rent ($63,248) clears even the top of the indicative arm's-length range ($52,000). This remains a structural refinancing risk at higher rates unless revenue has grown well beyond MID occupancy by Year 5.

Reserve Fund at Year 5

Target: one year's interest ($29,140) held as a non-distributable reserve. At MID occupancy with rent set toward $45,000–$52,000, Max Storage's annual surplus of $5,500–$12,500 makes a $29,140 reserve achievable by roughly Year 4–5 if distributions are held.

What happens if refinancing fails: Douglas Enterprises must repay $470,000; this cannot be funded from business cash flow at this scale. Realistic outcome is a forced sale. This reinforces the need for consented operations, stable revenue, and a demonstrated DSCR by Year 4.

---

GST Summary

Annual GST Position (MID Occupancy, Stabilised Year)

Output tax (GST on revenue): $70,856 × 15% = $10,628

Input tax credits (GST on Max Storage operating costs): Intercompany rent $35,000 × 15% = $5,250; Software $3,232 × 15% = $485; Insurance $2,500 × 15% = $375; Internet $1,450 × 15% = $218; Other operating ~$6,217 × 15% = $933. Total input credits: ~$7,261

Net GST payable by Max Storage to IRD: $10,628 – $7,261 = $3,367/yr (two 6-monthly returns of ~$1,684 each)

Douglas Enterprises GST position: GST charged on rent $35,000 × 15% = $5,250 output tax. Input credits on DE costs (insurance; rates carry no GST) ≈ $6,500 × 15% = $975. Net GST payable by Douglas Enterprises: $5,250 – $975 = $4,275/yr

GST grouping note: If Max Storage Ltd and Douglas Enterprises Ltd qualify for GST grouping (66%+ common ownership -- [UNCONFIRMED -- SOURCE FILE ABSENT]), intercompany rent GST invoicing is eliminated. [VERIFY WITH ACCOUNTANT]

---

Sensitivity Analysis

Interest Rate Scenarios at Year-5 Refinancing

Occupancy Sensitivity (Annual Revenue and Net Position, Rent Fixed at $35,000)

DSCR is constant here because intercompany rent is fixed at $35,000; a surplus at HIGH occupancy is what would allow the rent to be lifted toward the DSCR-target range -- see Year-5 section.

What If Outdoor Occupancy Stays Below 50% for 2+ Years

At LOW scenario, Max Storage runs an annual deficit of ~$10,013. Over two years this is a cumulative loss of ~$20,000. Douglas Enterprises simultaneously runs a deficit of ~$5,600–$10,600/yr (pre- and post-reclassification). Combined two-entity deficit over two LOW-occupancy years is approximately $31,000–$52,000 -- funded from family equity or working capital. This is materially unchanged from the prior model's conclusion.

Insurance Cost Variance

At the high insurance scenario, combined entity costs rise by ~$7,500/yr -- material enough to delay break-even by approximately 6 months. Note: the insurance source document has not been refreshed since 2026-03-31 -- these ranges are 4+ months old and should be treated as more uncertain, not less, with the passage of time and no FMG response.

---

Year 1–5 Projections (Summary Table)

All figures ex. GST, NZD. Max Storage Ltd perspective. Scenario A (outdoor concurrent).

Douglas Enterprises Year 1–5 summary:

Year 5 is the first year Douglas Enterprises operates with a positive net position after interest, and the DSCR clears 1.2× exactly at this rent level -- there is essentially no margin for error in any of the unconfirmed cost lines feeding this row.

---

Key Risks and Open Questions

Weakest Assumptions in the Model

1. Intercompany rent and loan covenant terms rest on source files that do not exist. This is a new, sharper finding this cycle (financial-obligations v4). Every DSCR calculation and every Max Storage/Douglas Enterprises cost split in this model traces back to a $23,000–$52,000/yr range that is an index-derived carry-forward, not a market comparison or accountant's advice. Treat this as effectively no data, not as "PARTIAL." [BLOCKED -- Ed to clarify whether real analysis exists elsewhere and was never committed to the knowledge base, or whether it needs to be produced from scratch.]

2. Insurance premiums -- FMG quote now over 4 months outstanding. No change in status since the prior model version; the delay itself is now a material risk (Phase 1 cannot legally open without the resulting policy in force).

3. Access control Phase 2 budget confirmed too low. This cycle's live benchmarking found the $1,500 envelope does not fit any of the three priced hardware options once install labour is added -- realistic cost is $1,800–$2,600. Not a Phase 1 blocker, but a budget-reset conversation is now overdue.

4. Alarm platform is Grade 2, not Grade 3. A primary-source check this cycle found the confirmed DSC HS2032 platform is EN 50131 Grade 2 Class II, not Grade 3 as prior documentation implied. Immaterial to Phase 1 timing (alarm remains a Phase 2 item), but must be disclosed accurately to FMG rather than presented as Grade 3.

5. Whether Phase 1 has actually launched is now unconfirmed. This is a new and significant gap: the Evidence Continuity Check (operations.md v3) found no confirmation that access logging or platform billing has run gap-free -- or run at all -- since the planned May/June 2026 soft launch. If Phase 1 has not actually launched, the Year 1 revenue curve above is entirely hypothetical, not a projection against a live trading base.

6. Council rates -- still no direct confirmation, now with a corrected category name. RLC and BOPRC figures remain general NZ benchmarks. v4 corrects the RLC category terminology to "rural"/"business" -- use these exact terms in any council enquiry.

7. Arm's-length constraint vs DSCR requirement. The ~$52,000/yr rent needed for 1.2× DSCR sits at the very top of an unverified indicative range. If real market evidence supports less, the shortfall cannot be structured as rent and Douglas Enterprises must fund the gap from other sources.

8. Loan covenant conditions remain completely undocumented. If the loan restricts commercial leasing without bank consent, the intercompany lease cannot be signed until consent is obtained -- a pre-revenue blocker that cannot currently be assessed at all, because no loan document has ever been read by any agent in this project.

What Ed Needs to Decide to Firm Up the Model

Dependencies on Other Agents Not Yet Producing Output

All named sourcing agents (cameras, alarms, access control, internet, fire, insurance, software) have produced output. The two gaps that block the highest-value model improvements are not sourcing agents but the two Tier 1 documents confirmed absent from disk (financial/loan-covenant-requirements.md, financial/intercompany-requirements.md) -- these need to actually be run, or the described prior work needs to be recovered and transcribed in.

---

Sources: working/cameras/source-cameras.md, working/alarms/source-alarms.md, working/access-control/source-access-control.md, working/internet/source-internet.md (all 2026-08-05, full re-runs); working/fire/source-fire-equipment.md, working/insurance/source-insurance.md (both 2026-04-01, not refreshed this cycle); working/software/source-software.md (2026-08-05); .claude/knowledge/integration/financial-obligations.md v4 (2026-08-05); working/market/research-market.md v2 (2026-08-05); knowledge index site context.

This model is a financial planning tool, not audited accounts, not tax advice, and not legal advice. No figure in this document should be relied upon for loan applications, tax returns, or legal obligations without professional review. Figures flagged [UNCONFIRMED -- SOURCE FILE ABSENT] rest on no source document at all and should be treated as placeholders, not estimates with a known confidence level.