I am not "selling" any idea. I agree with you that some abstractors do organize and index their prior searches into subdivision files, so that the next time that subdivision comes up, they don't have to re-do any work to show the items that affect the sub. However, many abstractors do NOT do this. 

If abstractors were to combine access to a subdivision or base plant with the streamlined search practices approved by many underwriters, they could maximize their output in a way that doesn't take as much time input. Perhaps make more "per hour" yet give the customer what they want, which is a faster search with a cheaper price than a full search. 

 Expectations from the policy issuing agent and the title insurance underwriters varies greatly by state and even sometimes by region within a state. So what works in one market may be very different than what works in another. Since I operate in 11 states in various parts of the country I have a decent overview of these regional variations and agent/underwriter expectation.

 Let's keep in mind that it's up the title insurance underwriter (companies) backing the policies to decide what the minimum search requirements are for each state/region. 

My suggestions are purely designed to help abstractors stay relevant and efficient in the marketplace. Some will appreciate my perspective and some won't. I'm fine with that.