How much FEC money is tagged Nimble Technology in 2012?

The join records $2,557,379 in itemized individual contributions for Nimble Technology in 2012, from 12 contributions and 1 donor. The grouping’s all-cycle total is $4,602,166.

Is 2012 most of this grouping?

It is more than half: $2,557,379 is 55.6% of $4,602,166. Other cycles hold $2,044,787. This packet does not break those other years out.

Is this a tech-industry total?

No. It is one grouped employer string. Microsoft and other tech names are other keys. PAC spending is outside the $2,557,379.

Does one donor mean one check?

No. One donor key produced 12 itemized lines totaling $2,557,379—about $213,115 per line. Multiple committees generate multiple rows.

← All data ties

Nimble Technology political money in the 2012 election cycle

The Nimble Technology employer grouping records $2,557,379 in FEC itemized individual contributions for 2012. Twelve contribution lines from one donor make up that presidential-year cell. The grouping’s all-cycle total is $4,602,166, so 2012 is 55.6% of the key. This is a named technology-employer string, not a Silicon Valley sector total and not Microsoft.

Key figures

$2,557,379 tagged Nimble Technology in the 2012 FEC cycle.
12 contributions from 1 donor; about $213,115 per contribution.
2012 is 55.6% of the grouping’s $4,602,166 all-cycle total.
Named employer string, not a Silicon Valley sector total.
Source: FEC.gov individual contribution aggregates.

One donor carrying more than half the key

Fifty-five-point-six percent of $4,602,166 is $2,557,379. 2012 is the dominant window for this string. One donor produced 12 lines, about $213,115 each, and the full cycle amount attaches to that single key. The residual after 2012 is $2,044,787 across other years.

A 12-line stack in a presidential cycle can mix candidate, party, and Super PAC receipts. The facts count 12 and 1. Recipients are on the overlay. Tech-industry narratives are not in the packet.

Small named-tech keys are not a software-sector index. Nimble Technology × 2012 = $2,557,379 on 12 lines from 1 donor, 55.6% of $4,602,166. More than half the running roll sits in one presidential cell. The residual $2,044,787 is the rest of this spelling, not the rest of tech. Microsoft’s 2012 join is a different key with 576 donors. Do not add those cells. This page is one grouped string, one year, one donor key, 12 lines.

Small all-cycle total, large year share

Some named tech keys have tens of millions across years. Nimble Technology’s running roll is $4,602,166. A 55.6% year share on a modest roll is a different story than a 7% share on a $30 million roll. Both are valid joins. This one is concentrated in 2012.

The industry hub shows whatever other even-year cells exist. This tie exists so the $2,557,379 is not mistaken for a sector ranking.

As-filed name, not a product category

Nimble Technology is the grouped spelling. Similar product or company names may live in other rows. This page does not merge them. People who listed Microsoft or another large tech employer are in those keys, not here.

The 2012 cycle hub places this one-donor string beside occupation labels with hundreds of donors. Comparison is of table shapes, not of innovation.

Exclusions

PACs, independent expenditures, and state gifts are outside $2,557,379. Federal IT contracts in USAspending are a different dataset. A technology vendor name in both systems is not a funding path from this donor key to those awards.

Unitemized gifts are absent. One donor key is a matching result, not a headcount of a startup.

The Nimble Technology 2012 overlay is the data join. The industry hub holds $4,602,166. The 2012 election-cycle hub holds every employer string that year. The ties index holds other industry–cycle pages. Quote $2,557,379 with the 55.6% share and the 12-and-1 shape.

Citing Nimble Technology × 2012

Write Nimble Technology, 2012, $2,557,379, 12 contributions, 1 donor, 55.6% of $4,602,166, source FEC.gov. State that one donor produced 12 lines, about $213,115 each, so “one donor” is not “one check.” State that similar product names may live in other rows and are not harvested here.

The overlay lists the 12 committees. The industry hub holds $4,602,166. The 2012 cycle hub places a one-donor tech string beside occupation keys with thousands of lines. The ties index holds other joins. PAC disbursements and independent expenditures are other schedules. Federal IT contracts in USAspending are another file. A technology vendor name in both systems is not a funding path from this donor key to those contracts.

A 55.6% year share on a $4.6 million roll is concentration, not a ranking of startups. Cite the share and the small lifetime total together so readers do not treat $2,557,379 as a Silicon Valley sector figure.

One donor, 12 lines, $2,557,379, 55.6% of $4,602,166: that is the entire 2012 numeric claim. Microsoft and other tech names stay elsewhere. USAspending IT contracts stay elsewhere. “One donor” still means 12 Schedule A rows. Quote the 12, the $213,115 average, and the 55.6% share together.

Researchers comparing tech employers in 2012 should keep Microsoft’s 576-donor cell and this 1-donor cell on separate URLs. Adding them invents a sector total the FEC employer field does not support. Cite Nimble Technology × 2012 as $2,557,379, 12 contributions, 1 donor, 55.6% of $4,602,166, then use the overlay for the 12 committees.

Questions

How much FEC money is tagged Nimble Technology in 2012?: The join records $2,557,379 in itemized individual contributions for Nimble Technology in 2012, from 12 contributions and 1 donor. The grouping’s all-cycle total is $4,602,166.
Is 2012 most of this grouping?: It is more than half: $2,557,379 is 55.6% of $4,602,166. Other cycles hold $2,044,787. This packet does not break those other years out.
Is this a tech-industry total?: No. It is one grouped employer string. Microsoft and other tech names are other keys. PAC spending is outside the $2,557,379.
Does one donor mean one check?: No. One donor key produced 12 itemized lines totaling $2,557,379—about $213,115 per line. Multiple committees generate multiple rows.

FEC.gov individual contribution aggregates by employer/industry grouping and election cycle.