Quibi’s riskiest assumption was that people would pay for a separate subscription service dedicated to short-form videos on their phones when free versions already exist. The cheapest test would be a paid pilot with a small portion of customers. We believe consumers want a standalone subscription for short-form content. To verify, we will launch sample episodes and offer a paid, one-month pilot to 1,000 target customers, and to measure, we will keep track of the percentage who actually pay and continue watching weekly. We are right if at least 10% purchase the subscription and 50% remain active after four weeks.
Humane’s riskiest assumption was that people would prefer a standalone AI wearable over using AI on their smartphones. A cheap test would be a smartphone-connected prototype that simulates the experience before committing to custom hardware. We believe consumers want hands-free AI assistance enough to purchase an expensive wearable and pay a monthly subscription on top of that. To verify, we will give potential customers a wearable prototype connected to an AI assistant for two weeks. To measure, we will track daily and repeat usage. We are right if over half of the participants use it daily and a portion of those place a “deposit.”
Juicero’s riskiest assumption was that people would pay hundreds of dollars for a machine that squeezed juice packets better than doing it by hand. A cheap test would be having participants test if squeezing packets actually was more convenient. We believe consumers value the convenience of a $400 juice press. To verify, we will give potential customers the juice packets and compare hand-squeezing against using the machine. We would measure the juice produced, time saved, and survey participants’ willingness to purchase. We are right if at least half of the participants place a “deposit” at the intended retail price.
