What changed, what stayed the same, and why
18
Published studies
45+
Supporting guides
2016
Founded year
These studies span digital products, content licensing, niche services, and lightweight software. Each one lists starting assumptions, what was tested, and the operating changes that improved consistency. Use them to calibrate your own expectations before allocating time or budget.
A weekly newsletter evolved into a structured course. The study details onboarding, scope control, and workload per lesson, with notes on churn and refund handling.
Key insight: community prompts increased completion more than adding new modules.
Two developers launched a focused plugin. We cover pricing trials, documentation strategy, and how templated support replies controlled cost per ticket.
Key insight: a concise setup wizard outperformed long docs for reducing support time.
A small studio packaged evergreen assets for licensing. Topics include rights tiers, outreach pacing, and renewal prompts that encouraged longer agreements.
Key insight: clear usage tiers reduced negotiations and improved close rate.
A solo maker targeted a narrow workflow. The study shows feature pruning, billing cycles, and how in-app tips replaced most of the help desk load.
Key insight: one-click templates outperformed new features for perceived value.
A designer listed focused kits on a marketplace. We cover thumbnail tests, refund windows, and why fewer SKUs led to stronger reviews and repeat buyers.
Key insight: a live demo link increased saves and cart adds at no extra ad cost.
A community moved from chat to a structured members area. The breakdown covers onboarding nudges, event cadence, and the metrics that predicted churn.
Key insight: weekly office hours beat long-form content for ongoing value.
Every case study is compiled from interviews, operating notes, and metric exports provided by the subject, plus our own verification where possible. We document assumptions up front, including any edge conditions such as seasonality, prior audience, or unusual costs. We avoid forward-looking projections and publish only what can be shown with data or a clear, replicable process description. If anonymization is requested, we still include the same level of operational detail without exposing personal information.
We request exports from billing systems, analytics, and support tools to confirm timelines and volumes. When that is not possible, we label figures as estimates and explain how they were derived.
We exclude sensitive personal data, avoid inflated claims, and publish clear disclaimers. Studies are educational and should support your own due diligence, not replace it.
We prefer multi-month views to smooth out noise. Quarterly reviews reveal whether improvements hold, which helps avoid decisions based on short spikes.
Context matters. Audience quality, pricing power, and production capacity differ across teams. Use these studies to shape your tests and constraints, not as direct templates.
We aim for enough transparency to inform your planning without exposing private data. You will see how choices affected workload, margins, and predictability, along with the signals that guided each decision.
We break down fixed and variable costs, show gross margin ranges, and note where savings reduced quality or increased churn risk.
We track hours for research, production, support, and marketing so you can assess whether the workload fits your schedule.
We highlight early signals such as saves, trial activations, replies, and setup completions that predicted later revenue changes.
We explain why people left or stayed, and which small changes improved retention without inflating costs.
These studies are reference material to help you design safer tests. They do not replace professional advice. We recommend budgeting guardrails, small experiments, and clear stop-loss rules before adding complexity or ad spend. If you have a question about a model, we will clarify assumptions and point you to the most relevant guide.
Tell us what you are working on and we will share the most relevant resources. We respond within two business days.
By contacting us, you agree to our Privacy Policy.