How we scored them

Sixty-eight opportunities went in. Eighteen came out. Here is exactly how, so you can disagree with the method rather than take the answer on faith.

First, the gates

An opportunity that fails any of these is out, whatever it scores.

Audience. One person has to be able to start and run it. Enterprise services requiring a sales team are somebody else’s business.
Evidence. Only opportunities rated strong or promising become a playbook. The rest stay on the site as short write-ups, so you can see what we looked at and why it did not make the twelve.
Substantiation. If the only way to make an opportunity look appealing is to imply earnings we cannot back up, it is out.
Tool stack. There has to be a real, nameable set of tools. Without one there is no implementation depth and no reason our version beats a chatbot answer.
Platform policy. Anything that depends on behaviour the platforms now penalise is out — which is why “start a faceless channel and upload daily” is not on the list.

Then, the formula

Twelve axes, three sub-scores. Business viability and our ability to explain it well weigh equally. That is a deliberate commercial choice: an opportunity we cannot explain properly never reaches anyone, and one that presents beautifully but does not work destroys the reason to trust us.

BUSINESS = 0.25·demand + 0.20·monetisation + 0.15·scalability
         + 0.15·automation + 0.10·ease of entry
         + 0.10·(11 − competition) + 0.05·(11 − risk)

CONTENT  = 0.35·visual demonstration + 0.30·curiosity
         + 0.20·content potential + 0.15·landing conversion

PLATFORM = 0.45·tool ecosystem + 0.40·affiliate + 0.15·content

COMBINED = 0.40·BUSINESS + 0.40·CONTENT + 0.20·PLATFORM

All of these are an editorial assessment on a fixed rubric — a structured judgement, not a measurement, and labelled that way wherever they appear.

The gap we watch for

When an opportunity’s content score exceeds its business score by more than 2.3 points, its page opens with the objection rather than the opportunity. That gap is the signature of this entire industry: things that look spectacular in a short video and disappoint in practice. Four of the eighteen carry it, and we would rather point at it than hope you do not notice.

Back to the eighteen