BTG · Market Entry Consultant · Leave-behind

Test adjacent markets the hard way — attractiveness first, then demand from real conversations.

14th & Co. helps an industrial services business rank adjacencies, validate demand through customer and stakeholder contact, and decide — not desktop research alone.

Status · CONDITIONAL · Lean yes with caveats Final call · Corey Shape · Hybrid Houston + U.S. travel · ~2–3 days/week Entity · 14th & Co. Engagement lead · TBD

Criteria before miles

Write attractiveness and in/out scope first so travel buys decisions.

Conversation-led demand

Customers, prospects, blockers — secondary research supports, it does not replace.

Kill is a success

Ranked markets with kill / pilot / later and an honest entry-mode recommendation.

Claim: we can help test adjacent markets the hard way — attractiveness first, then demand validated through direct conversations — not research theater.

Caveats (surface, don’t hide)

Houston / U.S. travel capacity unknown until [AVAILABILITY — principal] + Corey gate
Hybrid / travel / BD-vs-analysis expectations must be clarified with BTG before locking tone
Adjacent-market and demand-testing examples still [PROOF — needs human fill]
Ops / last-mile background = domain adjacency shape — not automatic specialty claim

Why us (careful)

Fit that is already strong

People + ops DNA in large-footprint, logistics-adjacent environments
Prefer direct stakeholder truth over pure secondary research
Senior attention + written attractiveness criteria before travel burn
Entity ready: 14th & Co. LLC

Where thin

Honest gaps before strongest outbound

Adjacent-market + outreach examples still [PROOF]
Supply-chain specialty not attested — adjacency only
Corey go/no-go + Houston cadence open
Rate · [FEE — Deal Desk] · listing $1,300/day ≠ quote

Approach

First 30 / 60 / 90 days

Days 0–30

Attractiveness · demand start

Define “adjacent” + in/out scope
Criteria workshop + scorecard
Secondary scan → 3–5 candidates max
Stakeholder map + travel plan v0
Outreach + signal log; mid-point kill/narrow

Days 31–60

Recommendation

Attractiveness × demand matrix
Entry options: partner / hire / build / pilot / no-go
Lightweight pilot offer only if earned
Decision memo + next-90 handoff

Days 61–90

Pilot entry or clean no-go

Smallest market test with stop criteria — or defended no-go
Transfer guides, signal log, stakeholder map
Note what ongoing BD would require (separate SOW if needed)

Bar

Market-testing engagement

Ranked markets + kill/pilot/later
Entry-mode memo in 60–90 days
Travel targeted at conversations that change the rank

Bar

Analysis ≠ rainmaking

Pipeline ownership is a different SOW
Standing travel cadence only if BTG makes BD explicit
We will not silently absorb rainmaker scope

Attractiveness scorecard

Dimension	Question
Size / growth	Is the pool real and moving — or a slide TAM?
Capability fit	Where does the client have a credible right to play?
Competitive intensity	Who already owns the buyer relationship?
Buyer access	Can we reach people who buy or block within weeks?
Margin logic	Does the economics survive delivery reality?
Operational risk	Asset, safety, regulatory, channel friction?
Demand signal	What did direct conversations say (fact vs inference)?

Useful early output = decision quality, not a glossy TAM deck. Kill early: markets that fail fit or access even if they look big.

Proof

Verified · inference · open

No invented adjacent-market or demand-testing case studies. Background shape can support conversation; attributable proof needs principal fill.

Claim	Status	Leave-behind treatment
Attractiveness × conversation-led demand method	Verified method	Share freely
30/60/90 plan · analysis≠BD bar	Verified method	Share freely
CONDITIONAL / Corey gate / caveats	Verified process	Keep banner always
Ops / last-mile founding background	Inference	Adjacency shape — not a case study
Supply-chain specialty	Open	Do not claim without proof
Adjacent-market example	[PROOF]	Placeholder
Direct outreach / demand testing	[PROOF]	Placeholder
Houston / travel · rate	[AVAILABILITY] · [FEE]	CONDITIONAL · listing ≠ quote

Needs human fill

Adjacent-market / market-development

Required: market context → role → assessment → demand test → result.

[PROOF — needs human fill]
Ops / last-mile founding background = adjacency shape only until upgraded

Needs human fill

Direct outreach / demand testing

Required: named conversations with people who buy or block — not analysts alone.

[PROOF — needs human fill]
Method (guides, signal log, kill rights) is shareable without inventing instances

Risks & assumptions

What could break the case

#	Risk / assumption	Mitigation
R1	Houston + U.S. travel capacity doesn’t fit 2–3 days/week	Corey gate + [AVAILABILITY — principal] before GO
R2	Role expected as continuous rainmaking	Clarify with BTG; SOW explicit on analysis vs BD
R3	Sponsor won’t share real buyer intros	Stakeholder map week 1; kill if access blocked
R4	Politically favored markets aren’t falsifiable	Ask “what would make this a no-go?” early
R5	Travel economics unclear	Who pays travel — clarify before commit
R6	Supply-chain depth overclaimed	Honest adjacency vs specialty; fill proof or stay narrow

Ask

Internal first, then external

Hold a go/no-go with Corey on capacity and proof. Only if green: advance to a BTG/client clarification call on hybrid Houston expectations, travel load, and BD vs analysis split — commercial terms via Deal Desk.

01
Corey checklist: travel/Houston · proof · BD ambiguity comfort · engagement-lead path · GO / NO-GO / HOLD
02
Proof fills · [PROOF — needs human fill] · or explicit thin-outbound accept
03
Availability · [AVAILABILITY — principal]
04
Commercial · [FEE — Deal Desk] · listing $1,300/day is not settled
05
Human submit only after sign-off — agents do not submit, Slack-lock, or ping Corey/CK/BTG

Questions for BTG / client

1. What does hybrid Houston mean in practice (days/month on-site vs flexible)?
2. Expected U.S. travel load and who pays travel economics?
3. Analysis + recommendation, or ongoing BD / pipeline ownership?
4. Which adjacent markets are already politically favored?
5. Who are the first 10 people we must speak with?
6. What would make a market a no-go in 60 days?
7. How does this role interface with existing sales / corp dev?
8. Supply-chain depth — sector expertise vs structured discovery?
9. Same client as AI Advisor — coordination or separate workstreams?
10. Is $1,300/day a ceiling, and is 2–3 days/week firm?

If both AI Advisor and Market Entry proceed: separate staffing and proof problems. Do not assume one Engagement lead covers both.