No category exists for a "procurement ledger" — we create one. The engine is a single asset: the buyer's own data, returned as an evidence-backed savings report.
Pain: margin pressure, tariff whiplash, broker opacity.
Message: "7–10% landed-cost savings you can audit line by line — more on tariff-exposed SKUs."
Pain: spec chaos, "is this the same item?", quote archaeology.
Message: "Every match explained, every number sourced."
Pain: disputes, credit exposure, unauditable vendor claims.
Message: "An append-only ledger your auditors will love — and terms priced from real payment data."
flowchart TB TL["Named target list
ICP-scored accounts"] -->|outbound + events + referrals| OR["Qualified conversations"] OR -->|"data pull agreed · ~50%"| SR["Savings report delivered
(their data, our evidence)"] SR -->|"≥40%"| PI["Pilot · 30–60 days
2 product families"] PI -->|"≥70%"| PB["Paid buyer
take rate on sourced GMV"] PB -->|"expansion motion"| EX["Category expansion
+ terms attach"] EX -.->|"referrals & benchmark data"| TL
| Y1 | Y2 | Y3 | Y4 | Y5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marketing program spend | $150K | $600K | $1.4M | $2.8M | $5.0M |
| Savings reports delivered | 80 | 180 | 450 | 800 | 1,300 |
| Report → pilot conversion | ≥35% | ≥40% | ≥40% | ≥42% | ≥45% |
| Channel-sourced new logos | 0% | 5% | 15% | 30% | 40% |
Program spend matches the marketing line in the financial plan exactly. Report volume reconciles to sales capacity: direct landings ÷ 28% report→paid ≈ 40–45 reports per ramped AE per year, with channel partners running their own reports from Y3. Y1’s 80 reports are founder-delivered — 40 per founder, hand-picked from the named-account list — landing 20 buyers at playbook rates.