SKPSIS — Market Intelligence Report

Download PDFOpen Story Open Deck Memo Appendix

Market Intelligence Report

SAMPLE subject: an invoicing add-on for freelance studios

Demand looks real, but the price point is contested by free alternatives.

Confidence: MediumPrepared for: SAMPLE / EXEMPLUGenerated: 28/09/2026

Executive summary

The problem is discussed repeatedly in sample community threads, mostly as a time cost.
Three alternative categories already cover part of the job, including spreadsheet templates.
Paid tools in the sample set cluster around a lower monthly price than planned.
Red-team view: the wedge is workflow speed, not features.

12 (SAMPLE)Alternatives mapped

40 (SAMPLE)Threads reviewed

€0–€29 (SAMPLE)Price band observed

Research scope

Sample scope: EU freelance studios of 2–10 people, invoicing and time tracking workflows, public reviews, community threads and pricing pages.

Market & alternative signals

Relative signal strength per alternative category (SAMPLE index 0–100).

Spreadsheet templates

All-in-one suites

Accountant-led process

Dedicated add-ons

Pricing reality

Category	Typical price	Implication
Free templates	€0	Anchors expectations low
Suites	€15–29 (SAMPLE)	Bundle value is hard to beat
Planned offer	€39 (SAMPLE)	Needs a sharp time-saved story

Community & review themes

“Chasing late payments” is the recurring pain, more than creating invoices.
Switching away from a suite is seen as risky.
Local tax compliance is a trust requirement, not a feature.

Red-team challenge

What if studios only feel the pain at quarter end?
What if the suite ships the same feature next quarter?

Cheapest next test

Run two SKPTIK variants (€19 vs €39, “get paid faster” vs “invoice in 30 seconds”), then a small SKPTST landing test.

Next stepPressure-test price and message with SKPTIK.

Methodology. Desk research across public pricing pages, review platforms and community threads. Signals are sampled and coded by theme; counts are indicative, not census.

Research behind the method / SKPSIS

Current methodological context. These references are not evidence for this historical run.

Actively examine the opposing case

Lord, C. G.; Lepper, M. R.; Preston, E. (1984). Considering the opposite: A corrective strategy for social judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(6), 1231–1243. December 1984.

Research finding: Considering the opposite reduced judgment bias in two human experiments.

Our research workflow

The method's own rule: Frozen stop criteria, source classification and verdicts are our implementation choices.

The SKP suite

Adversarial research

Research designed to disagree with you.

This report

Synthetic decision panel

Where ideas meet resistance.

Logical next step →Explore SKPTIK

Observe real behavior

Test behavior, not opinions.

Explore SKPTST