There are seven systems inside a property management company that can leak revenue. Two or three of them leak in any given operation. The rest are usually fine. The trick is that operators rarely know which three are theirs. Leak one in most operations is follow-up. A guest inquires about a property. The inquiry lands in someone's inbox. Someone replies within a few hours, or the next morning, or sometimes not at all. By the time the reply arrives, the guest has booked something else. The lost booking does not show up in any report. There is no line item for "inquiries that became bookings somewhere else." There is no alert that says "fourteen guests showed interest this week and three converted." The leak is invisible because the data is invisible. The operator estimates the follow-up rate by feel, and the feel is always better than the reality. This leak compounds. A guest who inquired and did not get a fast response usually does not inquire again. The next time they need a stay, they go straight to the platform they already trust. The operator pays for the lead acquisition once and loses the lifetime relationship in the same week. The cost is not the missed booking. The cost is the missed guest, all of their future bookings, and the network of guests they would have referred. Leak two in most operations is pricing consistency. The listing page says one thing. The cards on the search results page say another. The PMS dashboard says a third. The checkout summary, after taxes and cleaning fees, says a fourth. The owner statement, after platform fees and management fees, says a fifth. Each number is correct from one perspective. Together they form a story that confuses guests, frustrates owners, and creates support tickets that drain operator hours. This leak shows up at the moment of trust. A guest sees one number, commits emotionally, and then sees a different number at checkout. The booking does not happen. Or it happens, and the guest leaves a review that mentions price surprise, and the operator's average rating drops two tenths of a star, and the OTA algorithm ranks the property a position lower for six weeks. The economic damage from a pricing-consistency leak takes months to manifest fully. Leak three in most operations is operational handoff. A booking confirms. Cleaning, key handoff, guest messaging, owner notification, maintenance prep, all need to happen in the next forty-eight hours. The operator coordinates these by hand, often through WhatsApp groups, partial automations, and tribal knowledge held by long-tenured staff. When a long-tenured staff member is on vacation, the handoff slips. When the cleaner is sick, the handoff slips. When two bookings overlap in unexpected ways, the handoff slips. Each slip costs hours of operator time, occasionally costs a guest a bad arrival experience, and occasionally costs an owner trust in the operator. The slips are individually small. The aggregate damage is real. These three leaks, in some combination, are the dominant revenue leaks in most property management companies under five hundred units. The other four leak zones, lead capture, OTA dependency, visibility, retention, exist and matter, but they rarely dominate the same company at the same time. The work is identifying which three are yours and addressing them in order of business impact. The Scorecard at /scorecard measures all seven leak zones and surfaces your top three by lowest score. Operators run it and the report rarely surprises them in identity, only in severity. The leak the operator suspected was a problem turns out to be more severe than they thought. The leak they did not think about turns out to be the one bleeding the most. You can audit the operation by feel. You can also score it once and stop guessing. The work of fixing a property management company starts with naming the three leaks specifically. The rest of the work follows from there.