The Teardown.
Every two weeks we take one submitted pre-revenue B2B product and read the public record for evidence that somebody wants to buy it. We publish what we find in full, with the product named and every source linked, and it costs nothing.
No email gate on reading one. No card anywhere on this page. It is free because the half of the method you can audit is the half that is easy. The part we sell is the judgment about which three people are worth writing to, and what to say when one of them pushes back on your price.
What a teardown contains, and what it deliberately leaves out.
One page about your product, published under your product's name. Three things in it: the public evidence, the accounts that evidence points at, and the reasoning that connects them. All three are shown, not summarized.
You get
- Your buyer claim, rewritten as something testable. Job title, industry, headcount band, and what those people do about the problem today.
- The search stack. The exact query strings a person ran, grouped by where they were run. Copy them and run them yourself.
- Three named target accounts. Real companies, legal names. For each: the dated public artifact, the quote, the live URL, the date, and which signal family it came from.
- A "why now" line per account. One sentence tying the dated artifact to a reason this month differs from last month at that company.
- The rejects. The accounts that looked promising and did not survive, each with the point on the evidence bar that killed it.
- The gaps. The parts of your buyer claim that nothing public confirms and nothing public contradicts, written down as unknowns rather than smoothed over.
You do not get
- No contact data. No email addresses, no phone numbers, no personal profile links. Not withheld until you pay: not collected for a teardown at all.
- No named individuals. We name companies. We do not put a stranger's name on a public page next to our guess about what they need.
- No sequences. No opener, no follow-ups, no cadence, no subject lines.
- No deliverability check on your sending domain.
- No conflict check against contacts you already have, which means one of the three accounts may be someone you already know.
- No call. Nobody gets on the phone with you because of a teardown.
Why it is shallow on purpose. Two of the six points on the evidence bar cannot be checked from a public page at all, and both protect you rather than us. One needs a live deliverability test on your sending domain. The other needs the list of companies you have already contacted, which only exists after a kickoff call. A teardown clears four of six and says so. Calling four out of six a shortlist would be the same padding we refuse to do inside a paid sprint, and doing it in public would be worse.
It is published in public, with your product named.
There is one cost and it is not money.
A teardown goes up on a page anyone can open. Your product is named and linked. The buyer you told us you have is quoted back and examined. If the public record disagrees with you, that disagreement is the most interesting thing on the page and we write it down, with the sources, where your competitors and your next prospect can read it.
We also publish the result when the result is thin. If a person reads the public record for ninety minutes and finds one account instead of three, the teardown says one, and the archive keeps it. There is no drawer where the disappointing ones go. A method that only publishes its good days is a marketing asset, not a method.
Two rules we hold on the other side of it. We name companies, never individuals. And where the evidence is a post somebody wrote under their own handle, we quote it verbatim with the link and the date, because that is what they published. Where the evidence sits inside a licensed review site, we describe the complaint and cite the product being reviewed rather than reproducing the reviewer's words.
You see the finished teardown before it publishes and can pull it entirely, but you cannot edit the conclusions. A veto is the minimum that makes public naming a fair trade. A no-edit rule is what keeps the archive worth reading. This term is awaiting the founder's written confirmation before the first teardown goes up.
We pick the one the method can say something about.
This is a selection with a bias in it, and the bias is worth stating before the criteria: a teardown is chosen partly because it will make a readable teardown.
What we do not select on. Whether you could afford a Deal Sprint, or would qualify for one. A founder whose first deal is worth less than $5,000 fails the sprint's hard gate and makes a perfectly good teardown, because reading the public record works the same either way. Being picked is not a shortcut into the cohort either. The two decisions run on different criteria and neither carries into the other.
The honest caveat. Requiring a public record means the archive will over-represent products whose buyers are loud in public, which is not the same set as products with real buyers. The more useful thing to read would be a teardown of a product whose category leaves no trail at all, and we will publish one of those deliberately once there is a body of work to set it against.
The archive.
There is nothing here, and there is no reason to dress that up. Cohort 001 has not opened yet. This page fills from the top when it does.
The first two land inside the first fourteen days: one on day 2 of the cohort clock, one on day 10. After that it is one every two weeks, and the cadence is every two weeks rather than weekly for a boring and honest reason, which is that one person's hours are finite and the paid work comes first.
Two rules for this list. Every teardown enters the archive on publication, including the ones where a person read for ninety minutes and found almost nothing. Nothing is written and then quietly not published. And entries stay up: a teardown that aged badly is more useful to read than one that was removed, so the archive is not curated after the fact. A named company that asks to be removed has its account struck with a visible line saying so.
Submit yours.
Seven fields. Do them properly. The specificity of what you write here is most of what decides the pick. Everything submitted gets read. Only the submission we pick gets a reply, and that reply arrives before anything is published, not after.
Submitting does not put you on a mailing list, does not start an application, and does not generate a sales email. If you want the paid rung, you apply for it separately and it is judged on your product.
The first three rungs of five, one method.
An increasing amount of it pointed at you.
After the sprint, opt in: Live Desk at $600 a month, three months maximum with an auto-stop, and the Close Fee at 25% of cash collected, floor $1,250, cap $2,500, charged only after you confirm the money landed. Zero booked meetings by day 45 and every sprint and desk fee is refunded within five working days. We start it. You do not have to ask.