@lucapimenta/copy-chief-black 1.0.0

package/framework/copy-squad/tasks/bullet-writing.md

@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+# Task: Bullet Writing
+
+> **Primary Expert:** Gary Halbert
+> **Supporting:** Joe Sugarman (curiosity), John Caples (benefit-first)
+
+---
+
+## Bullet Formula
+
+```
+[CURIOSITY HOOK] + [SPECIFIC BENEFIT] + [PAGE/DETAIL REFERENCE]
+```
+
+## 7 Bullet Types
+
+| Type | Structure | Example |
+|------|-----------|---------|
+| **Curiosity** | "The [specific thing] that [surprising result]" | "The $3 ingredient that dissolves trapped fat faster than $200 diet pills" |
+| **Contrarian** | "Why [common belief] is [wrong] -- and what to do instead" | "Why everything your doctor said about cholesterol is potentially dangerous" |
+| **Story** | "How [specific person] [achieved specific result]" | "How a retired Navy SEAL taught his wife a 30-second trick for knee pain" |
+| **Warning** | "The [specific danger] that [consequence]" | "The common breakfast food that feeds tinnitus crystals (most people eat it daily)" |
+| **Secret** | "The [insider thing] that [insiders] use for [result]" | "The 4AM protocol that Brazilian gold medalists swear by" |
+| **Number** | "[Exact number] ways to [benefit]" | "7 words that make any bank approve your loan (page 34)" |
+| **Question** | "What [unexpected thing] reveals about [their situation]" | "What your tongue color reveals about your liver in the next 5 seconds" |
+
+## Rules
+
+1. Each bullet = MINI-AD (could justify buying on its own)
+2. Start with the most intriguing element
+3. Include specific number, name, or detail
+4. Reference page number for credibility
+5. Vary the angle across bullets (no two same type in a row)
+
+## Quality Checklist
+
+- [ ] Each bullet creates standalone desire
+- [ ] Mix of 3+ bullet types used
+- [ ] Specific numbers in every bullet (non-round)
+- [ ] No two consecutive bullets use same structure
+- [ ] Page/detail references included
+- [ ] Zero generic bullets ("Includes chapter on...")
+- [ ] Logo Test: competitor cannot steal any bullet

package/framework/copy-squad/tasks/cta-framework.md

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+# Task: CTA Framework
+
+> **Primary Expert:** Dan Kennedy
+> **Supporting:** John Caples (testing), Gary Halbert (PS technique)
+
+---
+
+## CTA Stacking (Kennedy)
+
+```
+CTA #1: WHAT TO DO
+  "Click the [color] button below right now."
+
+CTA #2: HOW TO DO IT
+  "On the next page, fill in your name and email.
+   Select your preferred package. That's it -- takes 30 seconds."
+
+CTA #3: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DO
+  "Within 60 seconds, you'll receive [specific thing].
+   By tonight, you'll already be [specific first result]."
+
+CTA #4: CONSEQUENCE OF NOT DOING
+  "If you leave this page, this offer disappears.
+   The price goes to $[higher amount] and [bonus] is gone forever."
+```
+
+## CTA Button Text (Not "Submit")
+
+| Weak | Strong |
+|------|--------|
+| "Submit" | "Send Me [Product] Now" |
+| "Buy Now" | "Start My [Transformation] Today" |
+| "Learn More" | "Show Me The [Mechanism] Method" |
+| "Get Started" | "Claim My [Named Package] Before [Deadline]" |
+| "Order" | "Yes, I Want [Specific Result] in [Timeframe]" |
+
+## CTA Placement Rules
+
+```
+1. FIRST CTA: After the mechanism reveal (for impatient buyers)
+2. SECOND CTA: After the proof section
+3. THIRD CTA: After the guarantee (primary conversion point)
+4. FOURTH CTA: End of page with urgency wrapper
+5. PS CTA: In the PS (Halbert -- most-read section after headline)
+```
+
+## PS Template (Halbert)
+
+```
+P.S. [Strongest benefit restated] + [Deadline reminder]
+
+Example:
+"P.S. Remember, the [Guarantee Name] means you have [X days] to try
+[Product] completely risk-free. But the [Bonus Name] disappears at
+midnight on [Date]. Click here now before it's gone."
+```
+
+## Quality Checklist
+
+- [ ] Minimum 3 CTA instances on page
+- [ ] CTA stacking present (WHAT + HOW + WHAT HAPPENS + CONSEQUENCE)
+- [ ] Button text is specific (not "Submit" or "Buy Now")
+- [ ] Imperative verbs used: "Click", "Call", "Enter", "Claim"
+- [ ] Process described step-by-step
+- [ ] Immediate aftermath painted (next 60 seconds)
+- [ ] Negative CTA present (what they LOSE)
+- [ ] PS includes strongest benefit + urgency
+- [ ] CTA placed after mechanism, proof, guarantee, and end-of-page

package/framework/copy-squad/tasks/dre-escalation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+# Task: DRE Escalation (Level 1 → 5)
+
+> **Primary Expert:** Gary Halbert (emotional intensity)
+> **Supporting:** Eugene Schwartz (awareness progression), Bond Halbert (modern DR)
+
+---
+
+## Process
+
+### Step 1: Identify Current DRE
+- Primary DRE: ___ (Fear/Shame/Frustration/Anger/Guilt)
+- Current intensity: ___ (1-5)
+- Target intensity: ___ (must be 4-5 for conversion copy)
+
+### Step 2: Write Each Escalation Level
+
+| Level | Type | Horizon | Your Line |
+|-------|------|---------|-----------|
+| 1 | Physical/Immediate | Hours/days | |
+| 2 | Social | Days/weeks | |
+| 3 | Consequence | Months/years | |
+| 4 | Relational | Permanent | |
+| 5 | Identity/Existential | Existential | |
+
+### Step 3: Validate Progression
+- Does each level naturally follow the previous? YES/NO
+- Is the jump between levels believable? YES/NO
+- Does level 5 create genuine urgency? YES/NO
+
+### Step 4: Add VOC Validation
+- Quote supporting Level 4: "___" (source: ___)
+- Quote supporting Level 5: "___" (source: ___)
+
+## Quality Checklist
+
+- [ ] All 5 levels written
+- [ ] Natural progression (no jumps)
+- [ ] VOC quotes validate levels 4-5
+- [ ] Level 5 touches identity/mortality
+- [ ] Each level uses specific language (not generic)
+- [ ] Passes Logo Test at every level

package/framework/copy-squad/tasks/email-sequence.md

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+# Task: Email Sequence
+
+> **Primary Expert:** Andre Chaperon
+> **Supporting:** John Carlton (voice), Gary Halbert (subject lines), Dan Kennedy (close)
+
+---
+
+## Structure: Soap Opera Sequence (5-7 emails)
+
+```
+EMAIL 1: THE SCENE        - Drop into vivid situation, open loop
+EMAIL 2: THE BACKSTORY    - How it happened, deepen investment
+EMAIL 3: THE EPIPHANY     - The discovery / mechanism reveal
+EMAIL 4: THE PROOF        - Testimonials, results, social proof
+EMAIL 5: THE TRANSFORMATION - What life looks like after
+EMAIL 6: THE CALL         - Product as natural conclusion
+EMAIL 7: THE LAST CHANCE  - Urgency + close (Kennedy)
+```
+
+## Per-Email Template
+
+```
+SUBJECT: [Halbert -- curiosity + specificity, lowercase personal style]
+OPENER: [Collier -- enter the conversation in their mind]
+BODY: [Chaperon -- narrative arc, open loops, personal tone]
+CLOSE: [Kennedy -- CTA or cliffhanger for next email]
+PS: [Halbert -- strongest benefit or urgency]
+```
+
+## Quality Checklist
+
+- [ ] Each email ends with open loop or cliffhanger
+- [ ] No product mention before email 3
+- [ ] Subject lines feel personal (not marketing)
+- [ ] 300-500 words per email
+- [ ] 3:1 value-to-pitch ratio across sequence
+- [ ] Final email closes ALL open loops
+- [ ] Plain text format (no HTML templates)
+- [ ] Each email standalone valuable but incomplete

package/framework/copy-squad/tasks/future-pacing.md

@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+# Task: Future Pacing (Positive + Negative)
+
+> **Primary Expert:** Andre Chaperon (emotional arcs)
+> **Supporting:** Gary Halbert (vivid imagery), Frank Kern (results in advance)
+
+---
+
+## Process
+
+### Step 1: Negative Future Pace (Without Solution)
+- Timeline: 30 days / 6 months / 1 year / 5 years
+- For each timeline:
+  - What specifically gets WORSE: ___
+  - Who notices: ___
+  - What they say: "___"
+  - Physical manifestation: ___
+
+### Step 2: Positive Future Pace (With Solution)
+- Timeline: 7 days / 30 days / 90 days / 1 year
+- For each timeline:
+  - First small win: ___
+  - Moment of realization: ___
+  - What others notice first: ___
+  - Identity shift: "I am now ___"
+
+### Step 3: Contrast Bridge
+Write the pivot sentence that connects negative to positive:
+"Instead of [worst negative], imagine [best positive]"
+
+## Quality Checklist
+
+- [ ] Both positive AND negative paces written
+- [ ] Specific timelines (not "someday")
+- [ ] Third-party reactions in both
+- [ ] Identity-level transformation in positive
+- [ ] Sensory details in at least 3 timeframes
+- [ ] Contrast bridge is specific, not generic

package/framework/copy-squad/tasks/guarantee-framework.md

@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+# Task: Guarantee Framework
+
+> **Primary Expert:** Dan Kennedy
+> **Supporting:** Gary Bencivenga (conviction devices), John Carlton (plain speak)
+
+---
+
+## Guarantee Hierarchy
+
+| Level | Type | Template | Power |
+|-------|------|----------|-------|
+| 1 | Standard | "Full refund if not satisfied within [days]" | WEAK |
+| 2 | Enhanced | "Full refund, no questions asked, keep the bonuses" | MODERATE |
+| 3 | Conditional | "[Specific result] in [timeframe] or full refund + $[bonus]" | STRONG |
+| 4 | Nuclear | "[Specific result] in [timeframe] or I pay you $[amount] from my pocket" | NUCLEAR |
+
+## Guarantee Construction Template
+
+```
+NAME: "[Name] Guarantee" (e.g., "Triple Protection Guarantee")
+
+PROMISE: "If you don't [specific measurable result] within [timeframe]..."
+
+REVERSAL: "...I'll [refund action] AND [extra compensation]."
+
+REASON: "I can offer this because [specific statistic]% of people who
+         follow the [method name] see results within [timeframe]."
+
+PLACEMENT: Adjacent to CTA button. Visible. Not buried.
+```
+
+## Guarantee Naming Patterns
+
+| Pattern | Example |
+|---------|---------|
+| Number + Protection | "Triple Protection Guarantee" |
+| Timeframe + Promise | "90-Day Results Guarantee" |
+| Outcome + Or Else | "Silence Your Ears or Pay Nothing" |
+| Confidence + Name | "Iron-Clad Promise" |
+
+## Reason-Why Templates
+
+| Reason Type | Template |
+|-------------|----------|
+| Statistical | "94.7% of people who follow [method] see [result] within [time]" |
+| Business | "An unhappy customer costs me more in refunds and support than..." |
+| Confidence | "After [X years/users], I know this works for [specific type]" |
+| Logical | "If it didn't work, I'd be out of business by now" |
+
+## Quality Checklist
+
+- [ ] Guarantee is NAMED (not generic "satisfaction guaranteed")
+- [ ] Tied to MEASURABLE outcome (not feeling)
+- [ ] Specific TIMEFRAME stated
+- [ ] Has reason-why for the guarantee
+- [ ] Placed NEXT to the CTA
+- [ ] At minimum Level 2 strength
+- [ ] Risk feels entirely on the SELLER, not the buyer
+- [ ] Language is plain and direct (Carlton -- no legalese)

package/framework/copy-squad/tasks/headline-testing.md

@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+# Task: Headline Testing Framework
+
+> **Primary Expert:** John Caples
+> **Supporting:** Eugene Schwartz (awareness), David Ogilvy (long headlines)
+
+---
+
+## Process
+
+### Step 1: Diagnose (Schwartz)
+- Awareness level: ___
+- Sophistication level: ___
+- DRE: ___
+
+### Step 2: Generate 10+ Variations (Caples Formulas)
+
+| # | Formula | Headline | Awareness Match |
+|---|---------|----------|----------------|
+| 1 | How-To | "How to [result]..." | |
+| 2 | Number | "[X] ways to [benefit]..." | |
+| 3 | Question | "Do you [problem]?" | |
+| 4 | Command | "[Verb] your [thing]" | |
+| 5 | News | "Announcing [discovery]..." | |
+| 6 | Testimonial | "[Quote]" | |
+| 7 | If-Then | "If you [situation], then..." | |
+| 8 | Long (Ogilvy) | "[Benefit + detail + mechanism]" | |
+| 9 | Curiosity | "[Unexpected] + [specific detail]" | |
+| 10 | Challenge | "[Common belief] is wrong. Here's why." | |
+
+### Step 3: Score Each Headline
+
+| Criterion | Weight | H1 | H2 | H3 | H4 | H5 |
+|-----------|--------|----|----|----|----|-----|
+| Benefit clarity | 25% | | | | | |
+| Curiosity/open loop | 25% | | | | | |
+| Specificity | 20% | | | | | |
+| Awareness match | 15% | | | | | |
+| Uniqueness (Logo Test) | 15% | | | | | |
+| **TOTAL** | 100% | | | | | |
+
+### Step 4: Test Plan
+
+```
+TEST A vs B: Top 2 scored headlines
+METRIC: CTR (for ads) or read-through rate (for VSL/LP)
+SAMPLE: Minimum 1,000 impressions per variation
+DURATION: 48-72 hours minimum
+DECISION: Winner by 95% statistical significance
+```
+
+## Quality Checklist
+
+- [ ] 10+ variations generated
+- [ ] Multiple formulas used (not just How-To)
+- [ ] Awareness level diagnosed BEFORE writing
+- [ ] Each headline includes a specific benefit
+- [ ] Top 3 selected by scoring matrix, not gut feeling
+- [ ] Test plan defined with success metrics
+- [ ] Logo Test passed on all finalists

package/framework/copy-squad/tasks/lead-generation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+# Task: Lead Generation / Lead Magnet
+
+> **Primary Expert:** Gary Halbert (hook + specificity), Robert Collier (entry)
+> **Supporting:** Frank Kern (results in advance), Eugene Schwartz (awareness)
+
+---
+
+## Lead Magnet Types by Awareness
+
+| Awareness | Best Lead Magnet | Why |
+|-----------|-----------------|-----|
+| Unaware | Quiz / Assessment | Reveals a problem they didn't know they had |
+| Problem Aware | Guide / Checklist | "Here's why [symptom] happens" |
+| Solution Aware | Comparison / Case Study | "Here's which approach actually works" |
+| Product Aware | Free Trial / Demo | "See it work for yourself" |
+
+## Structure
+
+```
+1. HOOK (Halbert)     - Curiosity + specificity in the headline
+2. ENTRY (Collier)    - Meet them where they are mentally
+3. VALUE (Kern)       - Deliver a real result in advance
+4. BRIDGE             - Connect the free result to the paid offer
+5. CTA                - Simple next step to continue the journey
+```
+
+## Lead Magnet Quality Criteria
+
+| Criterion | Check |
+|-----------|-------|
+| Delivers ACTUAL result (not just information) | [ ] |
+| Specific to ONE problem (not comprehensive) | [ ] |
+| Consumable in under 15 minutes | [ ] |
+| Creates desire for the paid offer naturally | [ ] |
+| Title uses curiosity + specificity | [ ] |
+| Demonstrates expertise through RESULT | [ ] |
+| Landing page passes Halbert specificity test | [ ] |
+
+## Quality Checklist
+
+- [ ] Awareness level diagnosed
+- [ ] Lead magnet type matches awareness
+- [ ] Title has Halbert-level specificity
+- [ ] Opens by entering the reader's conversation (Collier)
+- [ ] Delivers a genuine quick win (Kern results-in-advance)
+- [ ] Natural bridge to paid offer (no hard pivot)
+- [ ] Opt-in page has 3+ specificity elements
+- [ ] Follow-up sequence planned (Chaperon soap opera)

package/framework/copy-squad/tasks/logo-test-verification.md

@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+# Task: Logo Test Verification
+
+> **Primary Expert:** David Ogilvy (brand-specific advertising)
+> **Supporting:** Todd Brown (mechanism differentiation)
+
+---
+
+## Process
+
+### Step 1: Competitor Swap Test
+For each section of copy, ask:
+"Could [Competitor A] use this WITHOUT changing it?"
+
+| Section | Swappable? | Why/Why Not |
+|---------|-----------|-------------|
+| Headline | YES/NO | |
+| Lead | YES/NO | |
+| Problem | YES/NO | |
+| Mechanism | YES/NO | |
+| Solution | YES/NO | |
+| Proof | YES/NO | |
+| Offer | YES/NO | |
+| CTA | YES/NO | |
+
+### Step 2: Identify Weak Points
+List every "YES" (swappable) section. These MUST be rewritten.
+
+### Step 3: Add Differentiators
+For each weak section:
+- Add proprietary mechanism name: ___
+- Add specific proof (name, number, date): ___
+- Add unique origin story element: ___
+- Add brand-specific language: ___
+
+### Step 4: Re-Test
+Repeat Step 1 after changes. All sections must be "NO" (not swappable).
+
+## Quality Checklist
+
+- [ ] Every section tested individually
+- [ ] Zero "YES" sections remaining
+- [ ] Proprietary mechanism name present in 3+ sections
+- [ ] Specific numbers appear (non-round)
+- [ ] Origin story referenced
+- [ ] Copy is unmistakably THIS offer

package/framework/copy-squad/tasks/manifest.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,144 @@
+# Copy Squad Tasks Manifest v2.0
+# Shared task library for all production agents
+# Created: 2026-02-23
+
+tasks:
+  # Original 10 tasks
+  - id: headline-testing
+    file: headline-testing.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: John Caples
+    use_in: [production, review]
+
+  - id: bullet-writing
+    file: bullet-writing.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: Gary Halbert
+    use_in: [production]
+
+  - id: offer-stack
+    file: offer-stack.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: Alex Hormozi
+    use_in: [production]
+
+  - id: story-framework
+    file: story-framework.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: Andre Chaperon
+    use_in: [production]
+
+  - id: lead-generation
+    file: lead-generation.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: Gary Bencivenga
+    use_in: [production]
+
+  - id: email-sequence
+    file: email-sequence.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: Andre Chaperon
+    use_in: [production]
+
+  - id: cta-framework
+    file: cta-framework.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: Dan Kennedy
+    use_in: [production]
+
+  - id: guarantee-framework
+    file: guarantee-framework.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: Jay Abraham
+    use_in: [production]
+
+  - id: urgency-framework
+    file: urgency-framework.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: Robert Cialdini
+    use_in: [production]
+
+  # New 10 tasks (Upgrade 2)
+  - id: sensory-scene-builder
+    file: sensory-scene-builder.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: Gary Halbert
+    use_in: [production]
+    description: Build scenes with 5 senses for visceral copy
+
+  - id: dre-escalation
+    file: dre-escalation.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: Gary Halbert
+    use_in: [production, briefing]
+    description: Escalate DRE from level 1 to 5
+
+  - id: mechanism-naming
+    file: mechanism-naming.md
+    category: briefing
+    primary_expert: Todd Brown
+    use_in: [briefing]
+    description: Generate Sexy Cause and Gimmick Name candidates
+
+  - id: future-pacing
+    file: future-pacing.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: Andre Chaperon
+    use_in: [production]
+    description: Create positive and negative future pacing
+
+  - id: tribal-exclusivity
+    file: tribal-exclusivity.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: Robert Cialdini
+    use_in: [production]
+    description: Activate tribal exclusivity and in-group identity
+
+  - id: proof-stacking
+    file: proof-stacking.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: Claude Hopkins
+    use_in: [production]
+    description: Stack proof types in persuasion order
+
+  - id: objection-demolition
+    file: objection-demolition.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: Dan Kennedy
+    use_in: [production]
+    description: Anticipate and demolish objections from VOC
+
+  - id: urgency-injection
+    file: urgency-injection.md
+    category: creation
+    primary_expert: Dan Kennedy
+    use_in: [production]
+    description: Inject natural urgency without marketing speak
+
+  - id: voc-language-check
+    file: voc-language-check.md
+    category: validation
+    primary_expert: Andre Chaperon
+    use_in: [production, review]
+    description: Verify copy language matches VOC
+
+  - id: logo-test-verification
+    file: logo-test-verification.md
+    category: validation
+    primary_expert: David Ogilvy
+    use_in: [review]
+    description: Apply Logo Test to all copy sections
+
+total_tasks: 20
+
+routing: contextual
+routing_note: |
+  v2.0: Tasks now support contextual routing via chefe-de-copy.ts.
+  Each task has multiple experts ranked by nicho, DRE, and historical performance.
+  Primary expert is the default; contextual routing picks the best match.
+  Run: bun run ~/.claude/scripts/chefe-de-copy.ts --task <id> --offer <path>
+
+categories:
+  creation: 16
+  briefing: 1
+  validation: 3

package/framework/copy-squad/tasks/mechanism-naming.md

@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
+# Task: Mechanism Naming (Sexy Cause + Gimmick Name)
+
+> **Primary Expert:** Todd Brown (mechanism framework)
+> **Supporting:** Eugene Schwartz (naming), Sabri Suby (gimmick names)
+
+---
+
+## Process
+
+### Step 1: Generate 5+ Sexy Cause Candidates
+
+| # | Name | Transmissible? | Curiosity Score | Notes |
+|---|------|---------------|-----------------|-------|
+| 1 | | YES/NO | /10 | |
+| 2 | | YES/NO | /10 | |
+| 3 | | YES/NO | /10 | |
+| 4 | | YES/NO | /10 | |
+| 5 | | YES/NO | /10 | |
+
+**Test:** "Would someone tell a friend about this at dinner?"
+
+### Step 2: Generate 5+ Gimmick Name Candidates
+
+| # | Name | Sticky? | Linked to Hero? | Score |
+|---|------|---------|-----------------|-------|
+| 1 | | YES/NO | YES/NO | /10 |
+| 2 | | YES/NO | YES/NO | /10 |
+| 3 | | YES/NO | YES/NO | /10 |
+| 4 | | YES/NO | YES/NO | /10 |
+| 5 | | YES/NO | YES/NO | /10 |
+
+**Test:** "Is it sticky AND linked to the hero ingredient?"
+
+### Step 3: RMBC Score
+
+| Criterion | Score (1-10) | Threshold |
+|-----------|-------------|-----------|
+| Digestible (1-2 sentence explanation) | | >= 7 |
+| Unique ("never heard that before") | | >= 7 |
+| Probable (intuitive sense) | | >= 7 |
+| Connected (links to avatar emotion) | | >= 7 |
+| **Average** | | >= 7 |
+
+### Step 4: Build Solution Hook
+```
+"Have you heard about this [GIMMICK NAME] that [ORIGIN STORY] are using
+secretly to [DESIRE]? They're already calling it [AUTHORITY HOOK]."
+```
+
+## Quality Checklist
+
+- [ ] 5+ Sexy Cause candidates generated
+- [ ] 5+ Gimmick Name candidates generated
+- [ ] Transmissibility test passed for winner
+- [ ] Sticky + Hero-linked for gimmick
+- [ ] RMBC average >= 7
+- [ ] Solution hook formula completed
+- [ ] Logo Test: competitor can't use this name

package/framework/copy-squad/tasks/objection-demolition.md

@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+# Task: Objection Demolition
+
+> **Primary Expert:** Dan Kennedy (overcoming objections)
+> **Supporting:** Gary Halbert (preemptive strikes), Alex Hormozi (value framing)
+
+---
+
+## Process
+
+### Step 1: List Top 10 Objections (from VOC)
+
+| # | Objection | Source | Frequency | Severity |
+|---|-----------|--------|-----------|----------|
+| 1 | | VOC/assumption | High/Med/Low | Deal-killer/Concern |
+| 2 | | | | |
+| ... | | | | |
+
+### Step 2: Categorize
+
+| Category | Objections | Strategy |
+|----------|-----------|----------|
+| Price | | Value reframe |
+| Time | | Speed proof |
+| Trust | | Authority + social proof |
+| "Will it work for me?" | | Variety proof |
+| "I've tried everything" | | Mechanism differentiation |
+
+### Step 3: Write Demolition for Top 5
+For each:
+1. **Acknowledge** the objection (empathy)
+2. **Reframe** why it exists (mechanism)
+3. **Prove** why it doesn't apply here (evidence)
+4. **Redirect** to desire (future pace)
+
+## Quality Checklist
+
+- [ ] Objections sourced from VOC (not assumed)
+- [ ] All deal-killers addressed
+- [ ] Each demolition has acknowledge + reframe + prove + redirect
+- [ ] "Tried everything" objection explicitly addressed
+- [ ] Price objection reframed as value (not discounted)