Open Questions — Seed Round
Unresolved questions surfaced by the seed-round research. Each is a research target for later rounds.
-
Evidence quality of the US delay statistics. The headline figures (90-day payment cycle, $280bn annual cost, 70% facing delays) come largely from payment-technology vendors (Rabbet, Built, Billd, PYMNTS). Are these corroborated by independent regulator, census, or peer-reviewed academic data? Does the magnitude survive scrutiny?
-
Retention beyond the UK. Is retention withholding documented as a problem outside the UK with comparable evidence? How do trust/escrow models (New Zealand’s escrowed retentions) compare in outcome to the UK’s proposed outright ban?
-
Do prompt payment laws actually work? Where prompt payment legislation exists (UK since 1996, Australia, Canada, US states), is there hard evidence payment behaviour improved — or did delay persist despite the law? The UK 2026 reform implies the 1996 Act under-delivered.
-
Under-researched markets. The seed round has strong US/UK/Canada coverage but little on the EU, Australia, South Africa, India, Southeast Asia, and African markets. What quantified evidence exists for each?
-
Public vs private sector. Government and public clients are repeatedly named as slow payers (e.g. Ghana). How does the payment problem split between public-sector and private-sector projects?
-
Both sides of non-payment. Sources so far are subcontractor-sympathetic. What are the legitimate contractor/client reasons for withholding — defective work, variations, valuation disputes — and how often is withholding justified rather than abusive?