marchon/master-zapier-plan-draft
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 1
master-zapier-plan-draft/research/zapier/docs/vendor-research-summary.md
George Lambert b4150c8250 Milestone 0: import zappier billing, Verae middleware, and Zapier research 
Compose-ready workspace: packages/zappier (rate card, portal, Stripe),
packages/verae-zapier-middleware (timestamp + NATS), packages/verae-zapier
(CLI app), vendor/zapier-platform, and research/zapier vendor corpus.

Gate 0 structure checks pass. Product code and research are not yet wired.
2026-09-09 02:37:36 -04:00

4.9 KiB
Raw Blame History

VENDOR-RESEARCH.md — what was collected

Source file: VENDOR-RESEARCH.md
Compiled: 17 August 2026
Catalog: Zapier API v4, 9,985 apps
Contacts: official company pages (same campaign as CONTACTS.md)

This is the strategy layer on top of the contact tables: 15 “immutable-proof” verticals, why each matters for a timestamping / seal product, Zap usage, fit, and a card per vendor (legal name, HQ, USP, record they create, Zapier rank).

How the list was built

Vendors.txt named 15 verticals and approximate app counts, not vendor names. The live directory was filtered to products that create contemporaneous records (a signed envelope, an inspection, a claim note, a filed return, a recorded call, a certificate). Counts match the brief: 270 placements / 256 unique companies.

Each card aims to include legal name, HQ, phone, email, sales/demo URL, support, LinkedIn, Zapier slug, published Zap count, parent, pricing posture, directory blurb, USP, and the record they create (what would be sealed). Many SaaS vendors only publish a form.

Roll-up

# Vertical n Zap usage Fit (as written)
1 E-Signature and Execution 26 9,177 High (crowded; differentiation is the point)
2 Contract Lifecycle Management 7 223 High (natural feature; higher ACV)
3 Inspection, Safety and Field Evidence 18 1,198 Strongest
4 Construction and Change Orders 20 13,128 High (SMB long tail is the fastest land)
5 Legal Practice and Case Management 19 5,224 High (ILTACON beachhead)
6 Insurance and Claims 16 2,767 High (low IT friction at agencies)
7 Accounting, Audit and Tax 23 26,423 High (IRS-examination adjacency)
8 HR, ATS and Employment Records 26 4,178 High
9 Property, Title and Mortgage 17 12,547 High with conflict caution (Catalis adjacency)
10 Meeting and Call Recording / Transcription 24 20,578 High (fast-growing; no one seals)
11 Document Generation and PDF Automation 21 6,883 Highest technical ease / OEM
12 Credentials and Certificates 13 1,021 High (verification already the use case)
13 Forms and Field Data Capture 20 152,268 Distribution, not ACV
14 GRC, Compliance and Risk 10 93 High OEM (under-represented on Zapier)
15 Logistics and Chain of Custody 10 748 Validate demand first

Zap usage is Zapier’s published Zap count for those apps, not revenue.

How to read a vertical

Each numbered section typically has:

  • Competitive density
  • Why immutable proof matters (what buyers already think “proof” is)
  • Fit rating
  • Link to a long dossier under profiles/ (five dossiers cover clusters of verticals)
  • A vendor table (legal name, phone, email, sales URL)
  • Then per-vendor cards (Docusign-style): HQ, Zapier rank, years on Zapier, parent, pricing posture, USP, record they create, contact notes

Example of “record they create”:

  • Docusign — completed envelope + certificate of completion + audit log (vendor-attested)
  • SignNow — signed document + workflow history
  • eSignatures.com — web-signed contract + status webhooks

The research thesis: today’s proof is vendor-attested. An independent cryptographic timestamp is a response they have to make.

Files in this campaign

File Role
VENDOR-RESEARCH.md This narrative + cards
CONTACTS.md / contacts.csv Outreach table for the same 256
CONTACTS-ALL.md / contacts-all.csv All 9,985 public apps
identified-vendors.json Machine list per vertical (slug, Zap count, USP blurb)
profiles/01–05 Long-form dossiers (e-sign/CLM; inspect/construction/logistics; legal/insurance/property; accounting/HR/GRC; meetings/docs/creds/forms)
CAPABILITIES.md Triggers, actions, searches, hook vs poll
Vendors.txt Original 15-vertical brief

Strategic read (from the roll-up, not new invention)

  • Most Zap volume in-scope: Forms (152k) — distribution, low ACV.
  • Highest “seal is the product” adjacency: e-sign, credentials, GRC, inspection.
  • Highest technical ease / OEM: document generation and PDF automation.
  • Strongest field-evidence story: inspection / safety.
  • Validate before a bet: logistics and chain of custody (748 Zaps, n=10).
  • Crowded: e-sign (Zapier Signatures category ~85 apps; 26 on this list).

Limits

  • Fit ratings are analyst judgment from public pages, not customer interviews.
  • Zap counts are a popularity proxy and double-count multi-vertical placements in the 270 figure.
  • Contact fields go stale; confirm before outreach.
  • Not a substitute for CAPABILITIES.md (controls) or OpenAPI (Verae’s own API).

Related summaries