Vendor Report Template: What to Include and How Often to Send It

The template, ready to copy

Viewing Report — [Property Address]
Period: [date] to [date]

• Viewings: [X]
• Average rating: [X]/5
• Would consider offering: [X] of [X] viewers
• What viewers liked: [1–2 short themes]
• What came up as a concern: [1–2 short themes, if any]
• Recommendation: [one line, where you have one]

Six fields, none of them requiring more than a sentence, built to be read in under a minute — the whole point of a vendor report is that it saves the vendor from having to ask, not that it demonstrates how much work went into producing it.

A filled-in example

Viewing Report — 42 Maple Street
Period: 3–17 July

• Viewings: 8
• Average rating: 4.2/5
• Would consider offering: 4 of 8 viewers
• What viewers liked: The garden and the quiet location came up repeatedly.
• What came up as a concern: 6 of 8 mentioned the asking price.
• Recommendation: Worth a call this week to discuss a price adjustment — the interest is clearly there, but price is the consistent blocker.

Read that back as a vendor would: it’s a five-second scan that answers “is this working?” and “what should I do about it?” in the same short block, rather than a vendor having to infer either from a viewing count alone.

Why this structure works

• The numbers come first. Vendors want a fast read before detail, and a rating plus an offer-likelihood figure gives them that in two lines.
• Themes, not a transcript. Listing every comment a viewer made is slower to read and harder to act on than two or three grouped themes — “the garden came up repeatedly” is more useful than five separate quotes about the garden.
• The recommendation is separated out. Putting it in its own line, rather than folding it into the summary, makes it clear this is your professional read of the data, not just a restatement of it.
• Nothing is attributed to an individual viewer. Aggregating rather than naming keeps the report readable as a pattern rather than a set of individual opinions — see anonymous viewing feedback for the fuller reasoning.

What to leave out

• Every individual comment verbatim. Useful as raw data for you, but it slows the vendor down and can read as an unfiltered dump rather than a considered update.
• Viewer names or identifying detail, even if a viewer didn’t ask to be anonymous — consistency matters here, and it’s simpler (and generally friendlier from a data protection standpoint) to aggregate every report the same way.
• A recommendation you don’t actually believe. If the data doesn’t clearly point anywhere yet, it’s fine to say so — “no clear pattern yet, will update again after a few more viewings” is a legitimate, honest line.

How often to send it

Weekly, or after every 3–4 viewings, is a reasonable default — see how often to update a vendor for the fuller reasoning and for when to deviate from that cadence.

Report format: email, PDF, or a live link

The template above works as plain text in an email, but there are three common ways to deliver it:

• Plain email — fastest to produce, no extra tooling needed, works well for a routine weekly update.
• A one-page PDF — feels more polished for a vendor who’s used to a more formal update, and is easy to forward on to a co-owner or family member involved in the decision.
• A live, shareable link — updates automatically as new feedback comes in, so the vendor can check it whenever they want rather than waiting for the next scheduled email. See a real example of what this looks like.

None of the three is objectively “better” — plain email is the lowest-effort default, and a live link or PDF is worth the extra step for a vendor who specifically values a more polished or more current view.

Common mistakes

• Sending viewing counts with no qualitative detail. “6 viewings this week” on its own answers “how much activity” but not “is it working,” which is usually the vendor’s real question.
• Making the report too long. If it takes more than a minute to read, it’s more likely to get skimmed or set aside for later than a shorter version would.
• Inconsistent format week to week. A vendor who knows roughly what shape the update will take reads it faster and trusts it more than one that arrives differently every time.

Where this fits

This is the report itself; for the email wording that carries it, see the vendor update email template. For the full picture on vendor communication, see our complete guide to vendor communication and reporting.

If you’d rather not build this by hand every time, ViewingFeedback builds a report exactly like this automatically from collected feedback — as a live link or a one-page PDF, ready to share with the vendor without anyone needing to write it up.