Corrections
Every material fix we've made, dated, with the wrong figure left on the page where anyone can see it.
Our corrections policy
Research that deals in prices, occupancy rates, and bed counts will occasionally be wrong. What matters is what happens next. Our policy is simple: when we find — or a reader finds — a material error in a published figure, we fix it, and we log the fix here. Every entry below shows the date of the correction, the page affected, what the figure used to say, what it says now, and why it changed.
Two commitments make this log more than a courtesy. First, the wrong figure stays visible. On the corrected page, the original number remains in place with a strikethrough and a short note pointing to the corrected value and to this log. Quietly swapping a number and pretending it was always right is how research sites erode trust; we'd rather you see the seam. Second, the log is append-only. Entries are never edited after posting except to fix a typo in the entry itself, and entries are never removed. If this page is short, it's because we haven't been wrong much lately — not because we've been tidying.
What counts as "material"? Our working rule: any error that could change a reader's decision — a price range, an occupancy rate, a cost figure in a worked example, a bed count feeding a yield calculation. Typos in prose, broken links, and formatting glitches get fixed without a log entry; life is short.
Found something wrong? Email research@tyrol-crest-estates.com with the page and the figure. Reader reports have caught two of the four errors logged below, and both reporters got a free guide of their choice and our thanks. Being wrong is embarrassing; staying wrong after someone showed us the evidence would be worse.
The log
14 March 2026 — Ötztal page: Sölden bed count
What was wrong: Our Ötztal research page listed Sölden's commercial bed count as 13,500.
What it says now: 15,000 beds.
Why: The Tourismusverband published an updated bed inventory reflecting newly registered commercial accommodation in the resort, and our figure predated it. The correction flowed through to the page's beds-per-overnight-stay ratio; the underlying overnight-stay figures were unaffected. Because bed count feeds our occupancy modelling, we re-ran the Sölden section of the seasonal yield estimates — the change moved the modelled winter occupancy by less than one percentage point, so no separate yield-page entry was required.
22 January 2026 — Kitzbühel page: village-center price range
What was wrong: The 2024 price range for village-center apartments was published as €9,200–€15,400/m².
What it says now: €9,500–€16,000/m².
Why: A quarterly Grundbuch validation sample caught it. Two high-end closings we'd treated as outliers — and excluded under our standard interquartile filter — turned out to be genuine village-center sales, not the duplicate or mis-zoned listings we'd assumed. Reinstating them raised both ends of the range. This one stung, because the error came from our own outlier rule doing its job slightly too aggressively in a thin, expensive market. We've since adjusted the filter for Kitzbühel's luxury segment so that registry-confirmed sales are never auto-excluded, however far they sit from the median.
3 November 2025 — Seasonal Yield page: Kitzbühel annual occupancy
What was wrong: The worked yield example used an annual occupancy assumption of 61% for Kitzbühel.
What it says now: 58%.
Why: A reader emailed us — thank you — pointing out that we'd blended a strong winter season figure into the annual number rather than weighting it against the quieter shoulder months. Re-checking against Tourismusverband overnight-stay data confirmed the reader was right. The corrected assumption lowered the modelled gross annual yield in the example by roughly 0.3 percentage points; the revised figure is what the page shows today. The lesson we took: seasonal averages in alpine markets are treacherous, and annual figures should always be built up month by month rather than inferred from peak season.
18 September 2025 — Acquisition Costs page: notary figure in the studio case
What was wrong: The worked example for the Innsbruck studio purchase showed notary and contract-drafting costs of €3,650.
What it says now: €3,780.
Why: Our own arithmetic slip. Notary fees in Austria scale with the purchase price on a published tariff, and we'd applied the tariff bracket to the wrong intermediate value — the price net of a deduction that doesn't apply to the fee calculation. The €130 difference is small against a full acquisition budget, but a worked example that can't survive its own arithmetic doesn't deserve to be published, so the entire example was re-computed and re-checked line by line before the page went back up. All downstream totals in that example were corrected at the same time.
Older entries and minor fixes
Entries older than twelve months are kept on this page rather than archived away; the log above is complete back to September 2025. Sub-material fixes — a mistyped year in a paragraph, a mislabelled table column caught within the hour — are corrected directly and don't appear here. If you're ever unsure whether a figure on the site has changed, check the "data as of" note on the page and then this log; between the two, you should always be able to reconstruct what we published and when.
Corrections are the visible half of the system. The invisible half — sources, validation, refresh cycles, and the limitations we already know about — is documented on our method notes page. Read both before you rely on any single number, ours included.
Tyrol Crest Estates is not a real estate brokerage. This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.