Mass Rising / prototype: what validates our path?
Define what Mass Rising must prove (supporter formation, community ties, attendance, content) before we scale to eight markets — a go/no-go frame that works for culture-first or community-regional positioning.
The Options
Defined supporter + community metrics by a set date
Explicit targets (e.g. SG formation, recurring attendance, youth partners, digital baselines) with a calendarized review.
Pros
- +Forces honest read on culture thesis feasibility
- +Reduces risk of simultaneous 8-market culture failure
Trade-offs
- −Metrics can be gamed or feel corporate
- −May slow momentum if bar is too high
Proceed regardless; optimize live
Prioritize speed to league formation; treat Mass Rising as marketing lead not a formal gate.
Pros
- +Fastest narrative and fundraising
- +Avoids paralysis by measurement
Trade-offs
- −Higher risk of discovering culture gap after commitments
- −Research warns on multi-market simultaneous launch
Downscope launch breadth if bar not met
Plan A = 8 clubs; fallback = 4–5 strongest markets if prototype signals are weak.
Pros
- +Contains downside
- +Preserves quality bar in weaker cities
Trade-offs
- −Investors may fear “partial league” perception
- −Scheduling and broadcast less compelling with fewer clubs
Pivot positioning if culture does not emerge
If supporter culture does not materialize, shift public thesis toward scrappy community-regional honesty vs European-culture claims.
Pros
- +Avoids lethal “aspiration vs reality” gap
- +Matches feedback on elite language risk
Trade-offs
- −Brand whiplash
- −May alienate early culture-first backers
General Discussion
0 comments
No comments yet — start the thread.