Test If Your Offer Can Scale in 15 Minutes: 7-Test Scorecard for $50K–$80K Operators
Founders at $60K–$80K lose $20K–$35K monthly to weak offers; use this 15-minute scoring system to spot conversion friction, pricing gaps, and client mismatch
The Executive Summary
Founders at $60K–$80K lose $20K–$35K every month to weak, unscored offers; a 15-minute 7 Tests diagnostic exposes conversion leaks, pricing gaps, and risk holes so you can add $240K–$420K annually without more hours.
Who this is for: Founders, coaches, consultants, and agency operators in the $50K–$150K/month band who are busy, running 40–50 hour weeks, but stuck with “good enough” offers that quietly cap growth.
The 7 Tests Problem: Your offer is likely scoring 2–4/7, with vague outcomes, weak pricing confidence, and no risk reversal—quietly costing $20K–$35K monthly in underpricing, lost deals, and 6–10 week sales cycles.
What you’ll learn: The 7 Tests Scoring Framework, the 15-minute 0–7 scoring protocol, the three hidden scoring problems (Score Inflation, Fixing Wrong Tests First, Testing Once and Stopping), and concrete fix sequences drawn from Ethan, Marcus, and Priya’s cases.
What changes if you apply it: Weak, “busy but broke” offers turn into 6–7/7 assets that double conversion (10–15% to 25–35%), cut sales cycles to 3–5 weeks, lift effective rates from $300–$500/hour to $500–$800/hour, and add $240K–$420K in annual revenue without more delivery time.
Time to implement: Run the score in 15 minutes, execute focused fixes over 4–6 weeks to see the first $10K–$15K monthly lift, and compound to $20K–$35K monthly gains over 90 days with quarterly 15-minute retests.
Written by Nour Boustani for $50K–$150K/month founders and operators who want to scale past hidden offer ceilings without adding more hours, discounting defensively, or guessing what to fix next.
Weak offers aren’t a talent problem; they’re a measurement problem. Upgrade to premium and implement the system.
The $324K Cost of Undiagnosed Offer Weakness
Most founders confuse activity with offer strength. They’re different.
Activity means you’re selling. Offer strength means prospects convert easily and pay what you’re worth.
Here’s what weak offers cost in real numbers.
Ethan, Business Consultant, stuck at $67K/month.
Current state:
11 clients × $6,100 monthly = $67,100/month
42 hours weekly delivering
Effective rate: $67,100 ÷ 184 hours = $365/hour
The problem: Closing 1 of 8 prospects (12.5% conversion). Taking 6-8 weeks per sale. Pricing at $6,100 when the market rate was $8,500-$10,000. Delivering generic strategy work that didn’t differentiate.
Running his offer through the 7 Tests scoring system: 3 out of 7 passed.
Test 1 (Problem Clarity): Pass — clear problem definition
Test 2 (Solution Specificity): Fail — vague “business strategy consulting”
Test 3 (Outcome Measurability): Fail — no specific metrics promised
Test 4 (Timeline Commitment): Pass — 90-day engagement
Test 5 (Pricing Confidence): Fail — underpriced by $2,400-$3,900 per client
Test 6 (Delivery Mechanism): Pass — weekly sessions structured
Test 7 (Risk Reversal): Fail — no guarantees or proof
Score: 3/7. Weak offer disguised as a busy pipeline.
The gap: 4 failing tests costing him $2,400-$3,900 per client in underpricing + 87.5% of prospects walking away + 6-8 week sales cycles bleeding time.
Annual opportunity cost: 11 clients × $3,000 average gap = $33K monthly = $396K annually in underpricing alone. Plus $180K-$240K in lost deals from low conversion.
Total: $ 576K–$636 K in offer weakness, hiding behind the “busy consultant” identity.
Tried raising rates without fixing the offer. Lost 2 prospects immediately. Backed down. Stayed stuck.
The fear? Changing the offer meant rebuilding everything. The cost? Staying weak meant $27K monthly left on the Table.
Here’s the 15-minute scoring protocol that changes that.
The Pattern That Keeps Operators Stuck
Now that you’ve seen how offering weakness costs $500K+ annually, here’s where this mistake shows up at every stage.
At every revenue stage, founders optimize for busyness, not offer strength.
At $50K-$70K: Selling whatever prospects ask for because “revenue is revenue.”
At $70K-$90K: Keeping rates low because “I need volume to hit target.s”
At $90K-$110K: Avoiding specialization because “I don’t want to limit opportunities.”
At $110K+: Running multiple offers because “diversification is smart.”
The pattern: weak offers disguised as market responsiveness.
The cost: $300K-$600K annually due to conversion friction, pricing gaps, and delivery inefficiencies.
Most iterations are offered randomly. Wrong. That creates change without improvement. The 7 Tests isolate exactly which components break conversion, allowing surgical fixes instead of complete rebuilds. Systematic, not experimental.
Revenue Stage Breakdown:
At $50K-$70K/month: Generic positioning kills conversion
What it looks like: “I help businesses grow” or “I do marketing consulting.”
Where it shows: 8-12 week sales cycles, 10-15% conversion rates, $3K-$5K underpricing per client
Typical mistake: Adding more services to appeal to more prospects
Annual cost: $180K-$300K
At $70K-$90K/month: Pricing without confidence bleeds revenue
What it looks like: Rates 20-30% below market, discounting to close deals, payment plans for everyone
Where it shows: $5K-$8K gap per client, constant price negotiation, low client respect
Typical mistake: Keeping legacy pricing because “clients can’t afford more.”
Annual cost: $300K-$480K
At $90K-$110K/month: Vague outcomes prevent premium pricing
What it looks like: “We’ll help you optimize” instead of “We’ll add $50K in 90 days.”
Where it shows: Can’t justify $10K+ pricing, prospects need “time to think,” decision-makers uninvolved
Typical mistake: Avoiding specific promises to reduce risk
Annual cost: $360K-$540K
At $110K+/month: Multiple weak offers dilute positioning
What it looks like: 3-5 different services, inconsistent pricing, confused market perception
Where it shows: Sales energy split across offerings, the team doesn’t know what to sell, $15K-$25K per client left on the Table
Typical mistake: Diversifying instead of dominating one vertical
Annual cost: $540K-$900K
Why 7 Tests Work
Seven tests work because they isolate failure points. Random offer changes = 20 variables shifting, can’t identify what fixed conversion.
7 Tests control variables:
Each test evaluates one component (clarity, specificity, measurability, timeline, pricing, delivery, risk)
Score reveals exact weakness (3/7 = specific failures, not vague “needs work”)
Fix protocol targets failing test (surgical improvement)
Retest validates improvement (measurable progress)
This lets you iterate precisely. Scoring 3/7 with Tests 2, 3, 5, 7 failing? That’s solution vagueness, outcome ambiguity, pricing weakness, and risk imbalance. Fix those four. Retest. Score should hit 7/7.
Tight testing = predictable fixes.
The 7 Tests framework has been run 150+ times across businesses with $50K-$150K in revenue.
Same result: weak offers score 2-4/7, fixed offers score 6-7/7, conversion rates double. Not luck. Math.
1. Marcus, Agency Owner, $73K/month.
Offer scored 4/7. Failed Tests 3 (no outcome specificity), 5 (underpriced by $3,200 per client), 7 (no risk reversal).
Fixed in sequence over 4 weeks:
Test 3: Changed “we improve marketing” to “we add $40K revenue in 120 days or refund 50%”
Test 5: Raised rate $7,800 → $11,000 (+41%)
Test 7: Added performance guarantee (refund if metrics not hit)
Retested: 7/7 score.
Outcome: Conversion rate 14% → 28% (doubled)
Average deal size $7,800 → $11,000 (+$3,200)
Sales cycle 8 weeks → 4 weeks
Revenue $73K → $88K in 90 days = +$15K monthly = $180K annually
Timeline: 15 minutes to score. 4 weeks to fix. $180K annual impact
2. Priya, Course Creator, $82K/month.
Scored 3/7. Failed Tests 2 (solution too broad), 4 (no clear timeline), 5 (underpriced), 6 (delivery mechanism unclear).
Rebuilt systematically:
Test 2: “Online business course” → “90-day validated offer system”
Test 4: Added specific milestone schedule (Week 1-4, 5-8, 9-12)
Test 5: $1,997 → $3,497 (+75%)
Test 6: Defined exact delivery (12 modules, 4 group calls, 2 1-on-1 reviews)
Retested: 6/7 (Test 7 still weak, acceptable)
Outcome: $82K → $106K in 60 days
Conversion rate 22% → 31%
Average sale $1,997 → $3,497 = +$1,500 per customer
Revenue increase +$24K monthly = $288K annually
You’ve probably avoided scoring your offer for the same reasons.
The pattern across all cases: measurement beats guessing.
Random offer tweaks = chaos and confusion. Systematic testing = precise diagnosis. The difference isn’t the complexity. It’s the framework, the scoring system, and the fix protocols.
Guessing says iterate endlessly. Testing says fix what’s broken. Frameworks remove guesswork.
Systematic.
Here’s the 15-minute protocol that makes it happen.
The 7 Tests Scoring Framework (15-Minute Diagnostic)
Most founders skip the offer diagnosis. Wrong. You can’t fix what you haven’t measured.
The 7 Tests Scoring Framework is a 15-minute diagnostic that scores your offer 0-7 and reveals exact failure points through binary pass/fail on each component.
Not theory. A tested procedure.
You evaluate 7 components in sequence. Each gets a pass or a fail. Score reveals weakness concentration. Fix protocols target failing tests. That’s it.
The 7 tests:
Test 1: Problem Clarity — Does the prospect immediately recognize the problem you solve?
Scoring: Binary pass/fail
Test 2: Solution Specificity — Can you describe the solution in under 10 words without jargon?
Scoring: Binary pass/fail
Test 3: Outcome Measurability — Do you promise specific metrics achieved in a specific timeframe?
Scoring: Binary pass/fail
Test 4: Timeline Commitment — Do you state an exact completion/result timeline (days/weeks/months)?
Scoring: Binary pass/fail
Test 5: Pricing Confidence — Are you priced at or above market rate without apology?
Scoring: Binary pass/fail
Test 6: Delivery Mechanism — Can you explain exactly how you deliver in 3 sentences?
Scoring: Binary pass/fail
Test 7: Risk Reversal — Do you assume more risk than the prospect (guarantee/proof/milestone payment)?
Scoring: Binary pass/fail
Why This Sequence
Sequence matters because later tests depend on earlier tests passing.
Test 1 (Problem) must pass before Test 2 (Solution) makes sense. Can’t solve an unclear problem.
Test 3 (Outcome) requires Test 2 (Solution) clarity. Vague solution = vague outcome.
Test 5 (Pricing) requires Test 3 (Outcome) to be measurable. Can’t price confidently without a clear deliverable.
Test 7 (Risk) depends on Test 3 (Outcome) + Test 4 (Timeline). Can’t guarantee an undefined result.
Skip sequence? You’ll miss dependencies. Score 4/7, but don’t know which 3 failures caused the other cascading issues. All seven executed in order? Clear diagnosis.
Back to Ethan. Stuck at $67K/month with 3/7 offer.
Starting situation:
Revenue: $67K/month
Problem: Low conversion (12.5%), underpriced ($6,100 vs. $8,500-$10,000 market), long sales cycles (6-8 weeks)
Decision: Score offer, fix failures, retest
Test 1: Problem Clarity
Question: Does the prospect immediately recognize the problem?
Ethan’s offer: “Help business owners create growth strategies”
Evaluation: Vague. “Growth strategies.” could mean 20 things. Prospects can't picture the specific problem.
Result: FAIL
Test 2: Solution Specificity
Question: Can you describe the solution in under 10 words without jargon?
Ethan’s offer: “Strategic business consulting and planning services.”
Word count: 6 words. But “strategic” and “consulting” are jargon.
Result: FAIL
Test 3: Outcome Measurability
Question: Do you promise specific metrics in a specific timeframe?
Ethan’s offer: “Help you grow your business.”
Measurable? No
Timeline? No
Result: FAIL
Test 4: Timeline Commitment
Question: Do you state the exact completion timeline?
Ethan’s offer: “90-day engagement”
Timeline stated: Yes
Result: PASS
Test 5: Pricing Confidence
Question: Priced at or above market rate?
Ethan’s rate: $6,100.
Market rate: $8,500-$10,000.
Gap: $2,400-$3,900 below market.
Result: FAIL
Test 6: Delivery Mechanism
Question: Can you explain how you deliver in 3 sentences?
Ethan’s structure: Weekly 90-minute sessions, monthly strategy reviews, and ongoing Slack support.
Explained clearly: Yes
Result: PASS
Test 7: Risk Reversal
Question: Do you assume more risk than prospect?
Ethan’s guarantee: None. No refund. No milestone payment. No performance tie.
Result: FAIL
Complete score: 3/7
Passed: Tests 1, 4, 6
Failed: Tests 2, 3, 5, 7
Diagnosis clear: Solution too vague, outcomes unmeasurable, pricing weak, risk imbalanced. Four specific failures. Four specific fixes are needed.
Let me walk you through each test with exact evaluation criteria.
The 7 Tests Deep Dive (Evaluation Criteria)
Test 1: Problem Clarity — Does Prospect Immediately Recognize Problem?
Timeline: 2-minute evaluation
Purpose: Verify prospect’s self-identified problem without explanation
Evaluation criteria:
Pass if ALL true:
Prospect says “yes, that’s my problem” within 10 seconds of hearing it
Problem stated in prospect’s words (not consultant jargon)
Problem specific enough to exclude 80% of the market
Fail if ANY true:
Prospect asks, “what do you mean by that?”
You need to explain or educate about the problem
The problem is so broad that it applies to everyone
Ethan’s evaluation:
His problem statement: “Business owners who need growth strategies”
Test: Asked 5 prospects, “Do you need growth strategies?”
5 of 5 said “yes, always”
Recognized immediately
No explanation needed
Pass criteria met: Immediate recognition, no education needed
Result: PASS
What to expect if failing:
Common failure pattern: Using industry jargon, prospects don’t use
“You need operational optimization” (prospect thinks: “what?”)
“Your go-to-market needs refinement” (prospect thinks: “do I?”)
“You have product-market fit issues” (prospect thinks: “maybe?”)
Fix protocol: Record 5 sales calls. Write down the exact words prospects use to describe the problem. Use their words, not yours.
Specific case: Nathan, Marketing Consultant
Original problem: “Brands with suboptimal content strategy.”
Prospect reaction: Confusion. “Is my content strategy suboptimal?”
Result: FAIL
Fix: Changed to “CMOs spending $50K+ on content that doesn’t drive pipeline.”
Prospect reaction: “Yes! That’s exactly my problem!”
Result: PASS
Critical success factor: Problem clarity comes from prospect language, not consultant vocabulary.
Test 2: Solution Specificity — Can You Describe a Solution Under 10 Words Without Jargon?
Timeline: 2-minute evaluation
Purpose: Verify solution is concrete, not conceptual
Evaluation criteria:
Pass if ALL true:
Solution describable in under 10 words
No jargon (strategy, optimization, consulting, advisory)
Someone outside your industry understands it
Fail if ANY true:
Requires industry knowledge to understand
Uses consultant-speak (”strategic advisory” or “transformational partnership”)
Over 10 words needed for clarity
Ethan’s evaluation:
His solution: “Strategic business consulting and planning services”
Test: Asked wife (non-business person) what it means.
Her response: “You help businesses with strategy... whatever that means?”
Word count: 6 words
But “strategic” and “consulting” are vague
Pass criteria NOT met: Jargon present, unclear to a layperson
Result: FAIL
What to expect if failing:
Common failure patterns:
“We provide holistic business transformation” (what does this deliver?)
“End-to-end marketing optimization” (what changes?)
“Comprehensive growth advisory” (what happens?)
Fix protocol: Complete this sentence in under 10 words: “We [verb] your [noun] so you [outcome].”
Examples:
“We build your sales system so you close more deals”
“We fix your pricing so you earn more per client”
“We audit your bottlenecks so you scale faster”
Specific case: Ethan’s fix
Original: “Strategic business consulting and planning services.”
Rewrite attempt 1: “We build revenue systems for consultants” (7 words, no jargon)
Test with prospects: “What’s a revenue system?” (still vague)
Rewrite attempt 2: “We add $50K in 120 days” (6 words, concrete)
Test with prospects: “How do you do that?” (curiosity, not confusion)
Result: PASS
Key insight: Specificity means stating WHAT CHANGES, not WHAT YOU DO.
Test 3: Outcome Measurability — Do You Promise Specific Metrics in a Specific Timeframe?
Timeline: 2-minute evaluation
Purpose: Verify prospect knows exactly what they’re buying
Evaluation criteria:
Pass if ALL true:
Outcome stated as a number (revenue, clients, time saved, etc.)
Timeline stated in days/weeks/months (not “quickly” or “soon”)
Metric verifiable by a third party
Fail if ANY true:
Outcome is feeling (”feel more confident” or “gain clarity”)
Timeline vague (”within a few months” or “over time”)
Metric subjective (”better performance” or “improved results”)
Ethan’s evaluation:
His outcome promise: “Help you grow your business.”
Test: What number increases? What timeframe?
No metric specified (revenue? clients? profit?)
No timeline stated
“Grow” could mean anything
Pass criteria NOT met: No measurability, no timeline
Result: FAIL
What to expect if failing:
Common failure patterns:
“Increase revenue” (by how much? when?)
“Improve conversion rates” (from what to what? by when?)
“Scale your business” (what scales? to what level? in what time?)
Fix protocol: Complete: “You’ll gain [specific number] [specific metric] in [specific days/weeks/months] or [consequence].”
Examples:
“You’ll add $40K revenue in 120 days or we refund 50%”
“You’ll close 5 new clients in 90 days or pay nothing”
“You’ll save 15 hours weekly in 60 days or work continues free”
Specific case: Ethan’s fix
Original: “Help you grow your business”
Rewrite: “Add $50K revenue in 120 days”
Verification:
Metric: $50K (measurable)
Timeline: 120 days (specific)
Verifiable: Yes (bank statements prove it)
Result: PASS
Prospect reaction shift:
Before: “Sounds interesting, let me think about it.”
After: “If you can really add $50K in 4 months, this pays for itself.”
Critical success factor: Specificity creates buying confidence. Vagueness creates hesitation.
Test 4: Timeline Commitment — Do You State Exact Completion/Result Timeline?
Timeline: 1-minute evaluation
Purpose: Verify the prospect knows when they get the result
Evaluation criteria:
Pass if:
Timeline stated in days, weeks, or months (not ranges)
Start and end dates are definable
Prospect can calendar-block the commitment
Fail if:
“Ongoing” with no milestones
“Flexible timeline based on progress”
No endpoint specified
Ethan’s evaluation:
His timeline: “90-day engagement”
Test: Can the prospect know when it ends?
Yes: 90 days from start
Milestone schedule exists (weekly sessions)
Completion date calculable
Pass criteria met: Specific timeline, clear endpoint
Result: PASS
What to expect if passing:
This test passes easily for most consultants.
The trap: having a timeline without Test 3 (measurable outcome by that timeline).
Timeline without outcome = activity tracking, not result delivery.
Test 5: Pricing Confidence — Are You Priced At Or Above Market Rate?
Timeline: 3-minute evaluation
Purpose: Verify you’re not leaving money on table
Evaluation criteria:
Pass if ALL true:
Your rate ≥ market rate for equivalent service
No apologizing for the price
No discount patterns (10%+ of clients)
Can state price without flinching
Fail if ANY true:
Rate 15%+ below market
Discount to close deals
Offer payment plans preemptively
Feel awkward stating the price
Ethan’s evaluation:
His rate: $6,100
Market rate research (3 competitors with similar positioning): $8,500, $9,200, $10,000
Average market: $9,233 Gap: $9,233 - $6,100 = $3,133 below market (-34%)
Test: Discount patterns?
Offered “early bird discount” to 4 of the last 10 prospects
Gave payment plans to 6 of 11 clients
Uncomfortable stating $6,100 (mentioned value justification before price)
Pass criteria NOT met: 34% below market, discount patterns, price discomfort
Result: FAIL
What to expect if failing:
Common failure signals:
Explaining value before stating price
Offering discounts unprompted
Accepting pushback without holding firm
Comparing your price to competitors as justification
Fix protocol:
Step 1: Research market rate (call 5 competitors as prospects, get pricing)
Step 2: Price at market rate or +10% above (if Test 3 outcome is stronger)
Step 3: Practice stating price without justification: “The investment is $[X].” (period, silence)
Step 4: Eliminate preemptive discounts (no “early bird” or “if you sign today”)
Specific case: Ethan’s fix
Original rate: $6,100
Market rate: $9,233 average
New rate decision: $9,500 (above market by 3%, justified by stronger outcome promise)
Test: Stated $9,500 to the next 3 prospects without explanation.
2 of 3 said yes immediately
1 asked “what’s included?” (answered, closed)
0 negotiation attempts
Result after pricing fix: Closed 3 of 4 next prospects at $9,500 = +$3,400 per client = +$37,400 monthly at 11 clients.
Critical insight: Underpricing signals value uncertainty. Market-rate pricing signals confidence.
Test 6: Delivery Mechanism — Can You Explain How You Deliver in 3 Sentences?
Timeline: 2-minute evaluation
Purpose: Verify delivery is clear and structured
Evaluation criteria:
Pass if:
Delivery explainable in 3 sentences or less
Prospect knows what they’re getting (calls, documents, reviews, etc.)
Structure exists (weekly, monthly, milestone-based)
Fail if:
“We’ll figure it out together.”
“Depends on your need.s”
Delivery is vague or custom every time
Ethan’s evaluation:
His delivery: “Weekly 90-minute strategy sessions, monthly progress reviews, ongoing Slack support for questions.”
Test: Explainable in 3 sentences?
Yes: 1 sentence covered it
Clear structure: Weekly + monthly + ongoing
Prospect knows what to expect
Pass criteria met: Clear, structured, explainable
Result: PASS
Test 7: Risk Reversal — Do You Assume More Risk Than Prospect?
Timeline: 2-minute evaluation
Purpose: Verify you’re confident enough to guarantee results
Evaluation criteria:
Pass if ANY true:
Money-back guarantee if the outcome is not hit
Performance-based pricing (pay when delivered)
Milestone payments (pay as results achieved)
Case study proof of past results
Fail if:
No guarantee
100% paid upfront with no recourse
Risk is entirely on the prospect
Ethan’s evaluation:
His risk structure: 100% paid upfront, no guarantee, no refund policy, no milestone payment.
Test: Who takes the risk if the results don’t happen?
Prospect pays the full amount regardless
Ethan gets paid whether the outcome is achieved or not
Zero risk assumed by Ethan
Pass criteria NOT met: All risk on prospect
Result: FAIL
What to expect if failing:
Common failure patterns:
“My time is valuable” (justifying no guarantee)
“Results depend on client execution” (deflecting accountability)
“I can’t control outcomes” (signaling doubt)
Fix protocol:
Option A: Outcome guarantee “Add $50K in 120 days or refund 50% of fee.”
Option B: Milestone payment “Pay 30% upfront, 30% at 60 days if metrics on track, 40% at completion.”
Option C: Performance pricing “$3,000 base + 10% of revenue added above $50K.”
Specific case: Ethan’s fix
Original: No guarantee, 100% upfront
New structure: “Add $50K revenue in 120 days or refund 50%.”
Test: Offered to the next 5 prospects.
5 of 5 said the guarantee made the decision easier
0 refunds claimed (all hit target)
Closed 4 of 5 (80% vs. previous 12.5%)
Unexpected benefit: Guarantee forced Ethan to improve delivery. Knew he’d refund if weak. Raised game. Clients got better results.
Critical insight: Risk reversal isn’t just marketing. It’s quality accountability.
The Three Hidden Problems That Break Scoring
This scoring works when executed correctly. Here’s what breaks it.
Problem 1: Score Inflation (Self-Grading Too Generously)
What it is: Passing tests that should fail because “close enough.”
Why it happens: Ego protection, confirmation bias
What it costs: False confidence. Thinking you’re 6/7 when you’re really 3/7. Weak offer stays weak. Continue losing $20K-$35K monthly.
The fix: External validation. Send an offer to 3 trusted peers. Have them score it independently using the 7 Tests. Average their scores. That’s your real score.
If your score is 6/7 but your peers score you 3/7, your score is 3/7. Data over ego.
Problem 2: Fixing Wrong Tests First (Ignoring Dependencies)
What it is: Fixing Test 7 (risk reversal) before fixing Test 3 (outcome measurability)
Why it happens: Easy fixes feel productive
What it costs: Wasted effort. Can’t guarantee vague outcome. Fix Test 3 first, then Test 7 makes sense. Wrong sequence = rework.
The fix: Fix in dependency order:
Test 1 (problem) — foundation for everything
Test 2 (solution) — requires a clear problem
Test 3 (outcome) — requires a clear solution
Test 4 (timeline) — works with outcome
Test 5 (pricing) — justified by outcome
Test 6 (delivery) — executes the solution
Test 7 (risk) — protects outcome promise
Bottom-up. No shortcuts.
Problem 3: Testing Once and Stopping (No Iteration)
What it is: Score 4/7, fix failures once, assume done
Why it happens: “Good enough” thinking
What it costs: Partial improvement. 4/7 → 5/7 isn’t market-dominant. Still losing to 7/7 offers. Revenue improves slightly ($5K-$10K) but not maximally ($20K-$35K).
The fix: Retest quarterly. Markets shift. Competitors improve. Your 7/7 offer today might be 5/7 in 6 months.
Schedule: Score on January 1, April 1, July 1, and October 1. Takes 15 minutes. Catches drift early.
Run the scoring consistently. 15 minutes quarterly. Catch the offer weakness before it costs you $27 monthly.
The Complete Math on This Protocol
Typical starting point:
Weak offer scoring 2-4/7
Conversion rate: 10-15%
Sales cycle: 6-10 weeks
Pricing: 20-35% below market
Effective rate: $300-$500/hour
After scoring + fixing:
Strong offer scoring 6-7/7
Conversion rate: 25-35%
Sales cycle: 3-5 weeks
Pricing: At or above market rate
Effective rate: $500-$800/hour
Net impact:
Conversion: 12.5% → 28% (doubling typical)
Pricing: +$2,500-$4,000 per client average
Sales cycle: -50% time per deal
Revenue: +$20K-$35K monthly = $240K-$420K annually
Return on effort:
Time invested: 15 minutes scoring + 4-6 weeks fixing
Revenue gained: $240K-$420K annually
ROI: Incalculable (15 minutes → $240K+)
Example:
Typical starting point:
11 clients × $6,100 = $67K/month
Conversion rate: 12.5% (1 of 8 prospects)
Sales cycle: 6-8 weeks per close
Pricing gap: $3,133 below market
After 7 Tests protocol:
Offer score: 3/7 → 7/7
New rate: $9,500 (at market)
New conversion: 28% (doubling)
New sales cycle: 4 weeks
Net impact:
Revenue per client: $6,100 → $9,500 = +$3,400
Clients closed: 1.5 monthly → 3.4 monthly (from better conversion)
New monthly: 11 clients × $9,500 = $104,500
Growth: $67K → $104K = +$37K monthly = $444K annually
What Changes in Your Business
Immediate (Days 1-15):
15-minute scoring offer
Identifying 3-5 failing tests
Documenting exact failures
After 30 days:
Fixed Tests 2, 3, 5 (solution, outcome, pricing)
Retested: 3/7 → 5/7
Revenue impact visible: +$10K-$15K monthly
After 90 days:
Fixed Tests 7, optimized 1-6
Retested: 7/7
Full revenue impact: +$20K-$35K monthly
Annual run rate: +$240K-$420K
Long-term (6-12 months):
Quarterly retesting maintains a 7/7 score
Market rate adjustments keep pricing current
Conversion stays 25-35% (vs. 10-15% before)
What doesn’t change:
Delivery quality (same service)
Time investment (same hours)
Client satisfaction (same or better)
What improves:
Revenue per client (+40-60%)
Conversion rate (+100-200%)
Sales cycle time (-50%)
Pricing confidence (+100%)
FAQ: 7 Tests Offer Scoring Framework
Q: How do I use the 7 Tests Scoring Framework to diagnose my offer in 15 minutes?
A: Write down your current offer, run it through the 7 binary pass/fail tests in order (Problem, Solution, Outcome, Timeline, Pricing, Delivery, Risk), tally a 0–7 score, and note exactly which tests fail so you can plan fixes instead of rebuilding everything.
Q: What happens if I never score my offer and just keep tweaking copy, funnels, and bonuses?
A: You stay stuck in “busy but broke” mode—typically at $60K–$80K with 40–50 hour weeks—bleeding $20K–$35K in preventable monthly losses to weak positioning, long 6–10 week sales cycles, and 10–15% conversion that never meaningfully improves.
Q: How much does undiagnosed offer weakness cost a $60K–$80K founder over a full year?
A: Between underpricing gaps like Ethan’s $33K/month shortfall and lost deals from 12.5% conversion, founders routinely leave $240K–$420K annually on the table, with extreme cases compounding into $576K–$636K in total hidden offer drag.
Q: How do I run the 7 Tests in the right sequence so I don’t waste time fixing the wrong things?
A: Start with Problem Clarity and move straight through Solution Specificity, Outcome Measurability, Timeline, Pricing Confidence, Delivery Mechanism, and finally Risk Reversal, because later tests depend on earlier ones—trying to fix Test 7 before Tests 2 and 3, for example, forces you to guarantee vague outcomes and leads to rework.
Q: Why does score inflation keep happening even for experienced founders, and what does it cost?
A: Founders routinely pass tests that should clearly fail (“close enough”) to protect ego, which turns a real 3/7 score into a comfortable 6/7 on paper, leaving the offer weak and quietly extending the $20K–$35K monthly loss pattern for another 6–12 months.
Q: How do I use the 7 Tests Scoring Framework with its quarterly retest mechanism without adding more workload?
A: Block a recurring 15-minute slot four times a year—January 1, April 1, July 1, October 1—to rescore your existing offer, compare results to the prior score, and schedule 4–6 weeks of focused fixes on whichever tests slipped so your 6–7/7 offer doesn’t drift back toward 3–4/7.
Q: When should I prioritize pricing fixes (Test 5) instead of rewriting the whole offer from scratch?
A: If your offer already passes clear Problem, Solution, Outcome, and Timeline tests but sits 20–35% below market like Ethan’s $6,100 rate versus $8,500–$10,000 peers, you can often raise to or slightly above market over the next 30 days and capture $2,500–$4,000 per client without touching delivery.
Q: What happens if I fix only one or two tests once and stop instead of iterating the full 7 Tests protocol?
A: You might see a small bump—like an extra $5K–$10K per month from a single pricing move—but you’ll stall below the full $20K–$35K monthly upside that comes from taking a 2–4/7 offer all the way to 6–7/7 and maintaining that score over 90 days and beyond.
Q: How do the 7 Tests change real numbers like conversion rate, sales cycle, and effective hourly rate?
A: In cases like Ethan, Marcus, and Priya, moving from 3–4/7 to 6–7/7 doubled conversion from 10–15% to 25–35%, cut sales cycles from 6–10 weeks to 3–5 weeks, lifted effective rates from $300–$500/hour to $500–$800/hour, and drove $20K–$35K monthly gains ($240K–$420K annually) without adding delivery hours.
Q: When should I treat risk reversal (Test 7) as non‑negotiable instead of “nice to have”?
A: Once you have a measurable outcome and firm timeline, adding a concrete guarantee—like “add $50K in 120 days or refund 50%”—can shift close rates from low-teens to the 25–35% band, and in Ethan’s case helped convert 4 of 5 prospects and unlock a $37K/month, $444K/year lift.
⚑ Found a Mistake or Broken Flow?
Use this form to flag issues in articles (math, logic, clarity) or problems with the site (broken links, downloads, access). This helps me keep everything accurate and usable. Report a problem →
➜ Help Another Founder, Earn a Free Month
If this system just saved you from losing $240K–$420K per year to weak, unscored offers, share it with one founder who needs that relief.
When you refer 2 people using your personal link, you’ll automatically get 1 free month of premium as a thank-you.
Get your personal referral link and see your progress here: Referrals
Get The Toolkit
You’ve read the system. Now implement it.
Premium gives you:
Battle-tested PDF toolkit with every template, diagnostic, and formula pre-filled—zero setup, immediate use
Audio version so you can implement while listening
Unrestricted access to the complete library—every system, every update
What this prevents: Bleeding $240K–$420K per year in lost revenue from 2–4/7 offers you never formally score.
What this costs: $12/month. A small investment relative to Ethan’s $576K–$636K annual hit from undiagnosed offer weakness.
Download everything today. Implement this week. Cancel anytime, keep the downloads.
Already upgraded? Scroll down to download the PDF and listen to the audio.
