Quick answer
An introducer helps a company reach a potential partner; a direct buyer evaluates its own proposed license. Choose by asking which job you need done and where the next decision will actually be made.
Trace who does what
Avelence’s public process separates profile assessment from the selected partner’s detailed eligibility and terms. Polyshares describes itself as the direct counterparty. The useful difference is where the evaluation, agreement and payment sit.
Sources: Avelence · Polyshares
Compare the first useful output
An introduction should lead to a named relevant opportunity and a clear next step. A direct inquiry should establish whether the buyer wants to evaluate the company’s records. Neither output is the same as an accepted dataset or payment.
Ask the introducer what matching information it uses and which question it can resolve before introducing you. Ask the direct buyer what information makes an initial evaluation useful. You are comparing work performed, not merely counting how many parties appear.
| Question | Introduction route | Direct application |
|---|---|---|
| Who evaluates the final opportunity? | Selected partner; clarify its role | Named buyer or its team |
| What should I prepare first? | Reusable profile and matching priorities | Company and relevant record overview |
| What is the immediate result? | Proposed introduction or clarification | Evaluation request or response |
| Who pays? | Confirm eventual agreement party | Confirm buyer agreement party |
Work through a fictional owner’s choice
A fictional owner has a 35-person maintenance business and little knowledge of current buyer programs. An introduction may be useful if it identifies a partner with a relevant opportunity. A direct application may be useful if the owner has already found a buyer whose published scope clearly matches the records.
The same owner could prepare one profile for both. The introduction packet adds commercial preferences and the kind of support wanted. The direct packet emphasizes the collection the buyer could assess. The business facts should remain identical.
Check what the extra step contributes
An intermediary can reduce search work, but an introduction that provides no relevant context can simply add another conversation. Make the expected contribution concrete: finding the right program, clarifying a criterion or helping frame the collection.
Once a partner is proposed, inspect that partner’s own program evidence. A general matching description cannot settle its criteria, handling or payment terms. Add the partner to the shortlist with its own source and date; do not inherit a blanket approval from the introducer.
Prepare a question that reaches the decision-maker
Use a specific opening: we can describe this collection, this date range and this business process; which party would decide whether it is relevant? That question is useful in both routes and reveals where the next evaluation belongs.
Record what the introducer will do, who receives the introduction and the next step.
Questions about this comparison
Does an introduction mean a buyer has agreed to license the data?
No. It connects the company with a potential opportunity. The eventual buyer evaluates and agrees its own terms.
Should I write two different company profiles?
Use one consistent fact profile. Add matching preferences for the introducer and the relevant collection description for the direct buyer.
Sources
- Avelence program pageAvelence · Checked 2026-10-04
- Polyshares program pagePolyshares · Checked 2026-10-04