{ "version": "1.0", "generated_at": "2026-06-22", "methods": [ { "schema_version": "1.0", "id": "VB-M001", "slug": "narrow-digital-product-presell", "name": "Narrow digital product pre-sell", "summary": "Test willingness to pay for one bounded digital result before expanding the manuscript, asset pack, or catalog.", "status": "testing", "evidence_grade": "E1", "category": "digital_products", "value_mechanisms": [ "package_expertise", "reduce_risk", "increase_speed" ], "buyer": "A creator, freelancer, or small operator with one recurring job they want to complete faster or with fewer mistakes.", "problem": "Building a complete digital product before proving that a specific buyer will pay for the result.", "value_created": "A small paid commitment reveals demand while the offer is still cheap to change.", "method_steps": [ "Name one buyer, one painful job, and one concrete deliverable.", "Publish a proof-led offer page before producing the full asset set.", "Ask for a preorder, paid pilot, or qualified waitlist commitment.", "Record objections, checkout behavior, and the pre-written decision rule.", "Build the complete product only after the demand signal clears the threshold." ], "economics": { "revenue_model": [ "preorder", "low-ticket sale", "paid pilot" ], "pricing_basis": "Price the smallest useful outcome, not the eventual size of the catalog.", "capital_required": "very_low", "time_to_first_test": "Two to seven days", "fulfillment_load": "low" }, "distribution_channels": [ "owned audience", "targeted outreach", "search content", "small capped paid test" ], "skills_required": [ "offer design", "proof writing", "basic landing page setup", "customer interview notes" ], "tools_required": [ "static landing page", "checkout or waitlist form", "experiment ledger", "decision log" ], "first_test": { "hypothesis": "A narrow buyer will commit before the full product exists when the job, proof, delivery, and price are clear.", "setup": [ "Create one page for one job and one tier.", "Show one worked example or sample artifact.", "Route all traffic through tracked links.", "Ask for a preorder or qualified signup." ], "primary_metric": "qualified_paid_commitments", "decision_rule": { "scale": "Build and distribute after 5 paid preorders, 10 low-ticket sales, or 50 qualified signups.", "iterate": "Change the job, proof, price, or audience when interest is visible but commitment is weak.", "archive": "Archive the offer after intentional distribution produces no qualified response." }, "budget_cap": "Use no broad paid spend until purchase tracking is reconciled." }, "risks": [ { "risk": "A weak traffic source can create a false negative.", "control": "Define the intended buyer and minimum distribution effort before judging the method." }, { "risk": "Pre-selling creates a delivery obligation.", "control": "State the delivery date, scope, refund path, and capacity limit before taking payment." } ], "scores": { "speed": 5, "capital_light": 5, "codex_leverage": 5, "feedback_speed": 4, "margin": 5, "risk_control": 4, "defensibility": 2, "strategic_fit": 5 }, "compounding_asset": "A library of buyer language, proof examples, price responses, and completed experiment records.", "sources": [ { "type": "internal", "title": "Mission Brief", "ref": "docs/00-mission-brief.md", "note": "Sets the rule to test offers before building products." }, { "type": "internal", "title": "Product Experiments", "ref": "docs/04-product-experiments.md", "note": "Defines first offer candidates and paid commitment thresholds." } ], "experiment_history": [ { "id": "exp-first-bundle", "status": "assets_ready", "result": "Assets were built, but no market result was recorded. The method remains in testing." } ], "decision": { "current": "Keep as the default product-development method.", "rationale": "It is the closest match to the mission rule that evidence must precede catalog growth." }, "public": true, "created_at": "2026-06-22", "updated_at": "2026-06-22" }, { "schema_version": "1.0", "id": "VB-M003", "slug": "productized-diagnostic-audit", "name": "Productized diagnostic audit", "summary": "Sell a bounded diagnosis and repair path when buyers ask for help but do not commit to a self-serve kit.", "status": "sourced", "evidence_grade": "E1", "category": "productized_services", "value_mechanisms": [ "reduce_risk", "package_expertise", "increase_certainty" ], "buyer": "A buyer with a visible problem who values expert judgment more than another template or prompt collection.", "problem": "Self-serve products can fail when the buyer cannot diagnose their own case or trust that the generic asset fits it.", "value_created": "A fixed-scope review converts expert judgment into a clear next action without open-ended consulting.", "method_steps": [ "Define one inspectable object and one fixed delivery format.", "Publish a free example that shows the diagnosis and repair logic.", "Invite a small number of real submissions.", "Deliver the same bounded analysis using a checklist and evidence trail.", "Convert repeated findings into a product, tool, or higher-value implementation offer." ], "economics": { "revenue_model": [ "fixed-fee audit", "implementation upsell", "retainer after proof" ], "pricing_basis": "Price the bounded judgment and saved rework, not hours alone.", "capital_required": "very_low", "time_to_first_test": "Seven days", "fulfillment_load": "medium" }, "distribution_channels": [ "direct outreach", "public teardown", "community replies", "existing customer list" ], "skills_required": [ "diagnosis", "clear evidence notes", "scope control", "customer communication" ], "tools_required": [ "intake form", "audit template", "delivery folder", "feedback log" ], "first_test": { "hypothesis": "Buyers who request a free diagnosis but ignore a self-serve kit will pay for a bounded audit with a concrete repair path.", "setup": [ "Post one useful before-and-after each day for seven days.", "Invite one real example per post.", "Record exact objection language.", "Offer a fixed-scope paid audit after providing useful public value." ], "primary_metric": "qualified_audit_requests", "decision_rule": { "scale": "Package the service when 5 qualified requests or 3 paid pilots arrive from the defined buyer.", "iterate": "Narrow the object, deliverable, or buyer when requests are vague or fulfillment varies too much.", "archive": "Archive when the full outreach cadence produces no submissions, saves, or qualified conversations." }, "budget_cap": "Use operator time, not paid media, for the first test." }, "risks": [ { "risk": "Custom work can expand without limit.", "control": "Use a fixed input, checklist, delivery format, revision count, and turnaround window." }, { "risk": "The audit may depend on one operator.", "control": "Capture recurring checks and examples so delivery becomes teachable and partially automatable." } ], "scores": { "speed": 4, "capital_light": 5, "codex_leverage": 4, "feedback_speed": 5, "margin": 4, "risk_control": 4, "defensibility": 3, "strategic_fit": 5 }, "compounding_asset": "A failure-pattern library, real buyer language, before-and-after proof, and reusable delivery procedures.", "sources": [ { "type": "internal", "title": "Anti-Slop Launch Retrospective And Next Tests", "ref": "docs/11-anti-slop-launch-retrospective-and-next-tests.md", "note": "Defines the seven-day mini-audit loop and the signal that requests may support a service before a kit." }, { "type": "internal", "title": "Roadmap And Architecture", "ref": "docs/09-roadmap-and-architecture.md", "note": "Includes a productized AI micro-service pilot as a faster buyer-feedback path." } ], "experiment_history": [], "decision": { "current": "Keep as the next alternative when self-serve product interest does not become purchases.", "rationale": "The method directly tests whether buyers need diagnosis rather than more information." }, "public": true, "created_at": "2026-06-22", "updated_at": "2026-06-22" }, { "schema_version": "1.0", "id": "VB-M002", "slug": "proof-led-content-to-owned-audience", "name": "Proof-led content to owned audience", "summary": "Turn source-backed public notes into qualified email capture, then use the owned audience to test offers over several touches.", "status": "provisional", "evidence_grade": "E0", "category": "creator_business", "value_mechanisms": [ "improve_distribution", "package_expertise", "increase_certainty" ], "buyer": "A small publisher or specialist brand that receives attention but loses every visitor who does not buy immediately.", "problem": "Cold visitors rarely trust a new brand enough to purchase on the first session, and unowned traffic disappears after the click.", "value_created": "Useful public proof earns permission for a second contact and creates a lower-cost path to later offer tests.", "method_steps": [ "Choose one recurring buyer question tied to a method or offer.", "Publish a source-backed answer with a worked example.", "Offer a directly relevant checklist or template for email signup.", "Deliver a short sequence that teaches the mechanism before asking for a purchase.", "Track search impressions, signups, replies, product clicks, and sales by topic." ], "economics": { "revenue_model": [ "digital product sales", "service leads", "sponsorship later" ], "pricing_basis": "The content is free; value is captured through qualified follow-on offers.", "capital_required": "very_low", "time_to_first_test": "Four weeks", "fulfillment_load": "medium" }, "distribution_channels": [ "organic search", "owned social account", "email" ], "skills_required": [ "source research", "clear writing", "basic email operations", "search intent mapping" ], "tools_required": [ "static site", "email service provider", "search console", "analytics" ], "first_test": { "hypothesis": "A consistent cluster of useful, source-backed pages will create a rising impression line and qualified signups for one coherent wedge.", "setup": [ "Choose one wedge and four buyer questions.", "Publish on a fixed weekly cadence.", "Attach one relevant lead magnet to every page.", "Send a five-message teaching sequence." ], "primary_metric": "qualified_email_signups", "decision_rule": { "scale": "Continue when search impressions, clicks, and qualified signups rise week over week.", "iterate": "Change titles, intent match, proof, or capture placement when impressions rise but clicks or signups lag.", "archive": "Switch the topic or channel when four consistent weeks produce no rising impression line and no qualified signups." }, "budget_cap": "No paid media is required for the first test." }, "risks": [ { "risk": "Publishing volume can replace learning.", "control": "Every page must map to one method, one buyer question, one capture asset, and one metric." }, { "risk": "Email capture can damage trust when the magnet is generic.", "control": "Match the signup asset to the exact job solved on the page." } ], "scores": { "speed": 3, "capital_light": 5, "codex_leverage": 5, "feedback_speed": 3, "margin": 4, "risk_control": 5, "defensibility": 4, "strategic_fit": 5 }, "compounding_asset": "A searchable body of public evidence, an owned audience, and topic-level conversion data.", "sources": [ { "type": "internal", "title": "Elevation Plan", "ref": "docs/16-elevation-plan.md", "note": "Identifies the missing capture layer and recommends one repeatable organic distribution engine." }, { "type": "internal", "title": "Organic Traffic And Brand Voice Product Brief", "ref": "docs/15-organic-traffic-and-brand-voice-product-brief.md", "note": "Lists validated-intent topic hypotheses and current public resource routes." } ], "experiment_history": [], "decision": { "current": "Run as the primary low-capital distribution hypothesis after capture is installed.", "rationale": "The repository has public content but no owned-audience loop or completed four-week test." }, "public": true, "created_at": "2026-06-22", "updated_at": "2026-06-22" }, { "schema_version": "1.0", "id": "VB-M004", "slug": "sample-first-data-brief", "name": "Sample-first paid data brief", "summary": "Publish a small, useful sample of structured market intelligence before building a recurring report or data product.", "status": "provisional", "evidence_grade": "E0", "category": "data_products", "value_mechanisms": [ "structure_information", "increase_speed", "increase_certainty" ], "buyer": "An operator who needs a current shortlist, benchmark, market map, or opportunity scan but cannot justify doing the research from scratch.", "problem": "Data products are expensive to maintain when freshness, buyer use, and willingness to pay are unknown.", "value_created": "A sample proves whether structure and freshness reduce enough research time to justify payment.", "method_steps": [ "Choose one recurring decision that depends on scattered public information.", "Define a compact schema that makes comparison easier.", "Publish a representative sample with source dates and confidence notes.", "Offer one paid issue, update, or custom slice.", "Track which fields buyers use, question, and request next." ], "economics": { "revenue_model": [ "one-off report", "subscription", "custom data slice" ], "pricing_basis": "Price against research time saved, update frequency, and decision value.", "capital_required": "low", "time_to_first_test": "One to two weeks", "fulfillment_load": "medium" }, "distribution_channels": [ "email", "search content", "direct outreach", "professional communities" ], "skills_required": [ "source evaluation", "data normalization", "clear comparison design", "update discipline" ], "tools_required": [ "source registry", "structured data file", "report generator", "change log" ], "first_test": { "hypothesis": "A defined buyer will pay for a current, structured brief when the free sample clearly shortens a recurring research decision.", "setup": [ "Create one sample with 10 to 25 records.", "Show source dates, confidence, and missing fields.", "Offer one paid full issue or custom cut.", "Ask buyers which decision they used it for." ], "primary_metric": "paid_brief_orders", "decision_rule": { "scale": "Build a repeatable update cycle after 5 paid orders or 10 qualified requests for the next issue.", "iterate": "Change the schema, niche, or update frequency when the sample is used but not purchased.", "archive": "Archive when targeted buyers do not use the sample or request deeper coverage." }, "budget_cap": "Cap paid data access until the sample produces direct buyer pull." }, "risks": [ { "risk": "Freshness costs can exceed revenue.", "control": "Record update frequency, source rights, and maintenance time before promising a subscription." }, { "risk": "A report can repeat public information without adding value.", "control": "Make the schema, comparison logic, confidence notes, or update speed the paid advantage." } ], "scores": { "speed": 4, "capital_light": 4, "codex_leverage": 5, "feedback_speed": 4, "margin": 5, "risk_control": 4, "defensibility": 4, "strategic_fit": 5 }, "compounding_asset": "A normalized dataset, update history, buyer-request map, and reusable reporting system.", "sources": [ { "type": "internal", "title": "Economic Value Library", "ref": "docs/08-economic-value-library.md", "note": "Defines data products as a core economic category." }, { "type": "internal", "title": "Roadmap And Architecture", "ref": "docs/09-roadmap-and-architecture.md", "note": "Defines the Opportunity Radar as a future recurring data product." } ], "experiment_history": [], "decision": { "current": "Keep provisional until a buyer decision and sample schema are selected.", "rationale": "The method fits the archive mission but has no completed demand test in the repository." }, "public": true, "created_at": "2026-06-22", "updated_at": "2026-06-22" }, { "schema_version": "1.0", "id": "VB-M005", "slug": "concierge-workflow-before-software", "name": "Concierge workflow before software", "summary": "Deliver a repeatable workflow manually before investing in software, so real inputs and failure cases define the product.", "status": "provisional", "evidence_grade": "E0", "category": "software", "value_mechanisms": [ "save_time", "increase_speed", "reduce_risk" ], "buyer": "A team or operator with a repeated workflow that is painful enough to pay for, but not yet understood well enough to automate safely.", "problem": "Software built from assumptions can automate the wrong step, miss edge cases, and hide whether the buyer values the outcome.", "value_created": "Manual delivery exposes the true workflow and tests the result before code becomes the expensive commitment.", "method_steps": [ "Choose one repeated workflow with a measurable before and after state.", "Sell or recruit a small manual pilot.", "Perform the workflow using checklists and lightweight tools.", "Record every input variation, exception, review step, and buyer correction.", "Automate only the stable steps that repeat across paid pilots." ], "economics": { "revenue_model": [ "paid pilot", "setup fee", "software subscription after proof" ], "pricing_basis": "Charge for the completed workflow outcome during the concierge phase.", "capital_required": "low", "time_to_first_test": "One to two weeks", "fulfillment_load": "high" }, "distribution_channels": [ "direct outreach", "existing client base", "vertical landing page", "partner referrals" ], "skills_required": [ "workflow mapping", "manual operations", "customer discovery", "basic automation" ], "tools_required": [ "intake form", "checklist", "spreadsheet or database", "automation tool later" ], "first_test": { "hypothesis": "Three paid manual pilots will reveal a stable workflow and a repeated willingness to pay before software is built.", "setup": [ "Define one workflow and output.", "Recruit three buyers in one vertical.", "Deliver manually with a visible work trail.", "Measure time saved, corrections, and repeat intent." ], "primary_metric": "paid_pilots_completed", "decision_rule": { "scale": "Automate stable steps after 3 paid pilots show the same core workflow and repeat intent.", "iterate": "Narrow the vertical or outcome when inputs and review needs vary too widely.", "archive": "Do not build software when buyers will not pay for the manual result or the workflow does not repeat." }, "budget_cap": "No custom software build before paid manual evidence." }, "risks": [ { "risk": "Manual delivery can become an unprofitable service.", "control": "Track fulfillment minutes and stop adding scope outside the defined workflow." }, { "risk": "A small sample can hide edge cases.", "control": "Keep the first automation reversible and retain human review until exceptions are understood." } ], "scores": { "speed": 3, "capital_light": 4, "codex_leverage": 4, "feedback_speed": 4, "margin": 3, "risk_control": 5, "defensibility": 5, "strategic_fit": 5 }, "compounding_asset": "A verified workflow model, exception library, training examples, and an initial customer cohort.", "sources": [ { "type": "internal", "title": "Mission Brief", "ref": "docs/00-mission-brief.md", "note": "Places micro-SaaS after repeated demand signals." }, { "type": "internal", "title": "Economic Value Library", "ref": "docs/08-economic-value-library.md", "note": "Defines concierge MVPs as the first test for software methods." } ], "experiment_history": [], "decision": { "current": "Keep as the software gate.", "rationale": "The archive should not treat code as evidence of demand." }, "public": true, "created_at": "2026-06-22", "updated_at": "2026-06-22" }, { "schema_version": "1.0", "id": "VB-M006", "slug": "cold-paid-clicks-to-low-ticket-checkout", "name": "Cold paid clicks to low-ticket checkout", "summary": "Send broad cold paid traffic directly toward a low-ticket digital checkout and judge the method on completed purchases, not click volume.", "status": "archived", "evidence_grade": "E2", "category": "digital_products", "value_mechanisms": [ "improve_distribution", "increase_speed" ], "buyer": "A cold audience that recognizes the problem from an ad but has little prior trust in the publisher.", "problem": "Cheap clicks can look like demand while post-click trust, payment friction, offer clarity, and tracking remain unresolved.", "value_created": "When measurement is complete, a capped paid test can reveal the economics of acquiring a first-time buyer quickly.", "method_steps": [ "Define a narrow ad promise and one completed-purchase conversion event.", "Send traffic to a proof-led page with one obvious offer and checkout path.", "Reconcile ad clicks, sessions, checkout starts, purchases, revenue, and refunds.", "Judge the method on purchase completion and contribution economics.", "Stop spend when tracking or checkout completion fails the pre-written threshold." ], "economics": { "revenue_model": [ "low-ticket digital product sale" ], "pricing_basis": "Price must support customer acquisition cost after fees and refunds.", "capital_required": "medium", "time_to_first_test": "One to seven days", "fulfillment_load": "very_low" }, "distribution_channels": [ "paid search", "paid social" ], "skills_required": [ "ad creative", "landing page proof", "conversion tracking", "checkout diagnostics" ], "tools_required": [ "ad platform", "analytics", "checkout platform", "daily reconciliation table" ], "first_test": { "hypothesis": "A recognizable pain and low price will convert enough cold buyers to cover acquisition cost after tracking and checkout are proven.", "setup": [ "Use one promise, one tier, and one proof example.", "Verify the purchase event before spend.", "Set a hard budget cap.", "Reconcile every funnel stage daily." ], "primary_metric": "completed_purchase_rate", "decision_rule": { "scale": "Scale only after completed purchases reconcile and acquisition economics meet the declared margin threshold.", "iterate": "Repair checkout, trust, traffic quality, or offer clarity when clicks and checkout starts appear but purchases do not.", "archive": "Stop broad paid traffic when purchase tracking is incomplete or serious checkout intent produces almost no completed sales." }, "budget_cap": "No additional broad paid spend until GA4 and checkout purchases reconcile end to end." }, "risks": [ { "risk": "Platforms optimize toward cheap curiosity instead of buyers.", "control": "Use completed purchase as the primary conversion and separate low-cost regions when needed." }, { "risk": "Broken tracking can turn spend into unusable data.", "control": "Run a test purchase and daily reconciliation before the campaign." }, { "risk": "A new brand may not clear the checkout trust threshold.", "control": "Show proof before checkout and build an owned-audience path for non-buyers." } ], "scores": { "speed": 5, "capital_light": 2, "codex_leverage": 4, "feedback_speed": 5, "margin": 2, "risk_control": 2, "defensibility": 1, "strategic_fit": 4 }, "compounding_asset": "A clean funnel dataset, creative response data, and a record of post-click failure modes.", "sources": [ { "type": "experiment", "title": "Anti-Slop Launch Retrospective And Next Tests", "ref": "docs/11-anti-slop-launch-retrospective-and-next-tests.md", "note": "Records 421,507 impressions, 49,558 clicks, and one completed Payhip checkout, with unresolved cross-system reconciliation." }, { "type": "internal", "title": "Elevation Plan", "ref": "docs/16-elevation-plan.md", "note": "Keeps paid spend blocked until a test purchase appears in GA4 and the funnel table." } ], "experiment_history": [ { "id": "exp-anti-slop-playbook", "status": "observed", "result": "Attention was abundant and cheap, but one completed checkout and incomplete tracking made the method unfit to scale." } ], "decision": { "current": "Archive broad cold paid traffic in its current form.", "rationale": "The observed test did not produce trustworthy or viable purchase economics. Retain the record and revisit only after measurement and checkout acceptance pass." }, "public": true, "created_at": "2026-06-22", "updated_at": "2026-06-22" } ] }