Product: the moat lives outermost
ВведеноThe meal is not the product
- What the customer buys is nutrition (core), five frozen dinners (actual), and a subscription with a 6 pm slot and cancel-anytime (augmented). The meals compete on shelf; the subscription competes nowhere else.
- The moat lives outermost — where copying takes years of systems, not a quarter of recipes.
Three levels, one moat
- Core: nutrition — table stakes. Actual: 5 meals + recipes + packaging. Augmented: subscription flexibility, the delivery slot, the one-tap skip.
- The competitor can copy a frozen meal in a quarter. Copying the slot logistics and the trust takes years — so the campaign LEADS with the augmentation.
Which product level is this?
Place each offering element at core, actual or augmented level - and flag where the differentiation lives.
Why does the campaign lead with augmented features rather than the meals themselves?
Сложность 1/5 · 100 монет + небольшой бонус за первое завершение сегодня
Defensibility lives where copying is slow - slot logistics, subscription systems, trust. Product policy follows the moat.
Match each element to its level.
Сложность 2/5 · 140 монет + небольшой бонус за первое завершение сегодня
The levels name where value sits - and where it is defensible.
Value is a ledger, not a compliment
- The customer's ledger: benefits — 5 dinners solved (£35 of takeaway avoided), one decision a week, zero spoilage; costs — £29, remembering to freeze, novelty risk.
- Visible economic value ≈ £35 − £29 = £6 — the surplus a price rise could later capture. Value math is the ceiling of price (unit 7.4 stands on it).
Takeaway avoided 35 pounds; bundle price 29. The visible economic surplus, in pounds?
Сложность 2/5 · 140 монет + небольшой бонус за первое завершение сегодня
$35 - 29 = £6$ visible, plus time and mental-load benefits - the ceiling a price rise could capture part of.
A feature the customer does not perceive is still a benefit.
Сложность 1/5 · 100 монет + небольшой бонус за первое завершение сегодня
Value is PERCEIVED benefits minus costs - a benefit nobody perceives is a cost you paid. Communicate it or cut it.
Which belongs on the COST side of the customer's value ledger?
Сложность 1/5 · 100 монет + небольшой бонус за первое завершение сегодня
Costs are money, effort and RISK. The honest ledger counts the anxieties too - that is what the cancel-anytime promise is priced against.
Which comes first in the marketing math?
Сложность 1/5 · 100 монет + небольшой бонус за первое завершение сегодня
Value math is the ceiling; pricing (unit 7.4) captures a share of it. Reversing the order caps the business at the wrong number.
Augment against churn, priced in cohort math
- Meal-kit fatigue is a known churn driver. The answer: week-6 menu rotation and a two-minute "change my box" flow — designed against the churn data.
- The test is retention: each +5 points on the pilot's 66.4% month-2 rate is worth roughly 214 × 0.05 × 5 × £2.70 × remaining months — product decisions priced in cohort math, not adjectives.
Each +5 points of month-2 retention on 214 subscribers: extra meals a week (5 each, all retained weeks approximated)? The weekly CM gain in pounds?
Сложность 2/5 · 140 монет + небольшой бонус за первое завершение сегодня
$214 \times 0.05 \times 5 \times 2.70 = £144.90$ a week of contribution - one retention point beats any plausible click-rate gain.
Week-6 menu rotation is a product decision designed against churn data.
Сложность 1/5 · 100 монет + небольшой бонус за первое завершение сегодня
Meal-kit fatigue is measurable; the rotation and the change-my-box flow are augmentations aimed at the churn curve - priced in cohort math.
Three product slips
- Competing on the actual product when the augmentation is the moat.
- Features that are not benefits. What the customer does not perceive is a cost.
- Pricing before counting value. The ceiling comes first.
Recap
- Core, actual, augmented — the moat lives outermost.
- Value = perceived benefits − perceived costs, and it caps the price.
- Augmentations are priced in retention points, not adjectives.