# DenQAI: acquisition price bridge

File-specific companion · 2026-09-10

## Purpose

Which verified adjustment supports a price change or transaction condition?

**Who:** Buyer and independent financial, clinical, and transaction advisers

**Records:** Seller claim; underlying period records; normalization analysis; overlap check; concession and fallback terms.

## Complete the file

1. Create one line_id per seller_claim and source_record.
2. Separate annual_effect from one_time_effect and record already_counted_where.
3. State verification_state, requested_concession, and fallback_structure, then document seller_response and final_treatment with the review owner.

## Definitions

- **Normalization method:** Documented approach for translating a historical claim into buyer-relevant economics.
- **Annual effect:** Recurring yearly adjustment for the defined basis.
- **Already counted where:** Overlap control identifying another calculation that already includes the same effect.

## Fictional example

Fictional example: R-002 removes a supported $60,000 annual seller-dependent service effect; mark where it already enters the collections bridge before seeking a goodwill adjustment.

## Review and next action

Negotiate from the supported adjustment and prevent it being counted again elsewhere.

The CSV contains no pricing formula. A concession is a proposal, and a clinical-mix difference alone is not evidence of improper care.

[Related DenQAI guide](https://denqai.com/acquisition/negotiation)

## AI coach prompt

Help me use DenQAI’s acquisition price bridge. My question is: Which verified adjustment supports a price change or transaction condition? Explain these terms in plain language: Normalization method, Annual effect, Already counted where. Ask one question at a time about the required records: Seller claim; underlying period records; normalization analysis; overlap check; concession and fallback terms. Walk through the supplied fictional example before asking me for inputs. Treat every missing value as unknown, not zero. Do not invent source records, contract terms, legal conclusions, or clinical facts. Use only permitted fictional or aggregate, non-identifying information. Follow this boundary: The CSV contains no pricing formula. A concession is a proposal, and a clinical-mix difference alone is not evidence of improper care. End with the missing evidence and this next step: Negotiate from the supported adjustment and prevent it being counted again elsewhere.

## AI review prompt

Review my permitted fictional or aggregate draft of DenQAI’s acquisition price bridge against the file instructions. Check each required field and period, units, evidence locator, assumptions, arithmetic where formulas are actually supplied, and unresolved contradictions. Check the sequence: Create one line_id per seller_claim and source_record. Separate annual_effect from one_time_effect and record already_counted_where. State verification_state, requested_concession, and fallback_structure, then document seller_response and final_treatment with the review owner. Separate facts from assumptions and missing records. Do not supply unsupported numbers or make a professional decision for me. Apply this limitation: The CSV contains no pricing formula. A concession is a proposal, and a clinical-mix difference alone is not evidence of improper care. Return corrections, questions for the responsible reviewer, and the next action.