Sales kit
Everything for the conversation itself: who to walk away from, a twenty-minute discovery call, a demo built on a real brief-to-article run, the objections you will actually get with answers you can say out loud, a five-touch outbound sequence with the copy written, and what to do about references when you have none.
Two sentences to open with
"We turn a brief you approve into a finished article, and a professional editor at Proofed edits every one before you see it. Ten of them, in thirty days, for $2,500."
That is the whole offer. Everything else on this page is defending it.
The qualification gate
Do not spend a demo on someone who fails this. Ask all five in the first five minutes.
| Ask | Pass | Fail, and what to do |
|---|---|---|
| "How many articles do you publish a month, and how many would you like to?" | Publishing 1 to 4, wants 8 or more | Publishing 20 already with a team: they need software, not a service. Sell Pro. Publishing zero and wanting zero: end politely |
| "Who writes them today?" | Nobody, an overloaded marketer, or freelancers being chased | A happy in-house content team of three: not your buyer. Ask for an introduction to a peer instead |
| "Is there a budget for content this quarter, and whose is it?" | They name a number or a person without hesitating | "We would need to find budget": nurture, do not demo. Send the gap report and come back next quarter |
| "If we delivered ten good articles next month, who has to approve them?" | One or two named people, one of whom is on the call | A committee, a legal review and a brand team: it is a six-month sale. Qualify it as such or drop it |
| "Have you tried an AI writing tool already? What happened?" | "Yes, and the output was unusable" is the best possible answer | "We are not allowed to use AI at all": ask whose rule it is and whether an edited, disclosed article is covered. If it truly is banned, end it. That is a real answer, not an objection |
The disqualifier nobody likes. A prospect who wants to talk about price before they have described the problem is not buying an outcome, they are shopping a commodity, and you will lose that on price to Byword at $3.96. Ask the five questions anyway; if the answers are all about cost per article, sell them Starter and move on.
The twenty-minute discovery call
1
Minutes 0 to 2: what you are
"We are a content engine with an editorial firm behind it. Austen writes from a brief you approve, and Proofed's editors edit every article. I want to understand what you publish before I show you anything."
2
Minutes 2 to 8: the five qualification questions
Ask them in order. Write down the exact words they use for their audience and their category. Those words go into the briefs later, and quoting them back is the cheapest credibility available.
3
Minutes 8 to 13: the shape of the problem
"Which three queries would you most like to own?" "Who are your two closest competitors on content?" "What happened the last time you tried to fix this?" "What would make you say this worked, in ninety days?" Write the last answer down verbatim. It is the acceptance criterion for the whole pilot.
4
Minutes 13 to 17: the offer, once
"Ten briefs you approve, ten finished articles, every one human-edited, in thirty days, $2,500. One payment, nothing to cancel." Then stop talking. Do not add the subscription tiers here.
5
Minutes 17 to 20: the next step, dated
"I will run a content gap analysis against the two competitors you named and send it by Thursday, free either way. Can we book twenty-five minutes next week to look at it and at a real article?" Book it in the call, not afterwards.
Never demo on a discovery call. The gap report is the reason for the second meeting, and it costs you almost nothing to produce. Giving away the demo removes the reason to meet again.
The thirty-minute demo, on a real brief-to-article run
Do not click through screens. Run one article end to end, on their subject, and let the artefacts do the talking. Prepare the first two steps before the call so nothing is waiting on a queue while they watch.
| Minute | Show | Say |
|---|---|---|
| 0 to 4 | The gap report you already sent, on screen | "These are the three subjects your competitors rank for and you have nothing on. We crawled their sites to get this. Every article today comes from this map, not from a brainstorm." |
| 4 to 8 | Brand voice: the project, the tone-of-voice profile inferred from their own site, and the style guide if they gave you one | "This came from your published pages. If it is wrong, correct it here, once, and everything after this inherits it." |
| 8 to 13 | Draft a brief live from one gap. Show the angle, audience, search intent, structure and word budget | "This is the only place in the process where disagreeing with us is cheap. Nothing gets written until you approve it. Change something now so you can see how it works." |
| 13 to 18 | Kick off generation on that approved brief. While it runs, show a finished article from a prepared project | "It takes five to fifteen minutes, and Austen emails when it is done. Meanwhile, here is one that finished earlier. Notice the two scores at the top: one for search, one for AI answer engines. The draft was improved against both before anyone saw it, and if either is below target it says so." |
| 18 to 23 | The tracked changes from a Proofed edit, on a real article, with the editor's comments | "This is the part nobody else in the category has. A professional editor worked on this file. You accept or decline each change, and the editor's notes sit alongside. You are not being asked to trust the machine, you are being shown the edit." |
| 23 to 26 | Come back to the live article if it has finished; if not, show its progress and send the link when it lands. Show the finished piece against the brief they approved earlier in the call | "That is from the brief you changed. Compare it to what you asked for." |
| 26 to 30 | "Improve an existing article" on one of their existing pages, and the publish destination | "We can also point this at pages you already have: a light polish or a thorough optimisation as tracked changes on the original, or a refresh or rewrite from a brief you approve. Refreshing what already ranks is often quicker to pay off than writing new. And it sends straight to WordPress, as a draft by default, or you take the files." |
Three demo rules. One, always have a prepared finished article and a prepared tracked-changes file, because a live generation that stalls in a queue costs you the meeting. Two, never show the admin area, the model bench or the costs panel, no matter how interesting they are. Three, if a live article comes out badly, say so and show why: "that heading is weak, and this is what the improvement pass and the editor would do to it." Honesty here converts better than a rehearsed run.
Objections, and what to say
| They say | Say |
|---|---|
| "AI content hurts SEO. Google penalises it." | "That is worth getting exactly right, so here is Google's own page. It says generative AI 'can be particularly useful when researching a topic, and to add structure to original content'. What it penalises is scaled content abuse: using any tool to generate many pages without adding value in order to manipulate rankings. It is production-method neutral, so a human writing thin pages at volume breaks the same policy. The same page says 'sharing information about how a piece of content was created can help give your readers more context', so disclosure helps rather than hurts.S36 Ten researched, briefed, professionally edited articles a month is the opposite of what the policy targets. I will send you the link rather than ask you to take my word for it." |
| "We already use ChatGPT." | "Good. Keep using it. If your assistant takes connectors, Claude among them, connect it to us: Austen has an MCP server, so the same request produces a researched, scored article saved in your Austen account, ready for a professional edit, instead of a draft in a chat window.S6 The difference is not the model, it is the four things around it. A brief you approved before anything was written. Live research rather than recall. Two published scores, with the article improved against its own scorers before you see it. And a professional editor's tracked changes on the finished piece. What you have today is step three of seven. What is missing is not intelligence, it is the process and the person at the end of it." |
| "It is expensive. Byword is four dollars an article." | "It is, and Byword is very good value for drafts. Nobody there edits your article, researches it against live sources or approves a brief with you. The comparison that matters is a freelancer at $225 to $450 for 1,500 wordsS23 or an agency retainer averaging $3,209 a month.S26 We are $250 a finished article. If you can publish an unedited draft, buy the draft. Most people cannot, which is what the price is for." |
| "How do I know it will not read like AI?" | "Three things, and one of them is a hard rule. There is a tell gate that removes AI writing phrasing before delivery. Em dashes and en dashes are stripped by code, enforced by tests, because they are the most common giveaway. And a professional editor reads every piece. If something still reads wrong to you, flag the phrase in the editor and it is banned for your project immediately." |
| "Will it be plagiarised?" | "Articles are generated, not assembled from copied text, and research sources are used as grounding rather than pasted. We do not run a plagiarism report by default. If you need one, tell us at kickoff and we will build it into the process and price it. What we will not do is claim a guarantee we do not measure. See Chapter 10." |
| "Who owns the content?" | "You do, on payment, outright, including the briefs. We keep no right to reuse it. It is in the pilot agreement in plain words (Chapter 12)." |
| "Do we have to tell people it was AI-assisted?" | "That is your call and we will support either. Google says disclosure adds context for readers.S36 If you sell content onward, check your own client contracts: Fiverr, for example, requires disclosure on request and requires a buyer's no-AI instruction to be honoured.S31 We will write the disclosure line for you if you want one." |
| "Our subject is too technical." | "Sometimes true. The fix is not a better prompt, it is better source material: give us a recorded engineering webinar, a customer call or a conference paper and the article is written from your team's own arguments, transcribed. Then a person edits it. Try one piece and judge it, rather than deciding in advance." |
| "We are hiring someone to do this." | "Hire them. They will not publish for three or four months. The pilot costs less than one month of the salary you are advertising and gives your new hire a working engine and ten published articles on day one." |
| "Can we just buy the software?" | "Yes. Starter is $99 a month for 15 articles, Pro is $299 for 50, human editing is available on any plan at $55 per 1,000 words.S1S2 If you have someone who will run it, that is cheaper and I would rather you did that than buy a service you do not need." |
| "Who else uses it?" | "Nobody I can name, because we are early and I am not going to invent a customer. What I can tell you is who edits it: Proofed, whose own site names SoFi, Pinterest, Emeritus, Samsung, Substack, Forbes Books, the Financial Times, Fujifilm and JP Morgan Chase as clients of its editing business.S29 You would be early on Austen, and we structure the pilot accordingly." |
| "What if we do not like the articles?" | "Tell us during the pilot rather than at the end of it. Brief approval and tracked-changes editing exist precisely so nothing arrives as a surprise, and we keep working on a piece until it is right. The acceptance criteria are written down before we start (Chapter 12)." |
| "Where does our data go?" | "What we write from goes to the model: your brief, your brand voice, and any recording, document, existing page or Search Console figures you ask us to work from. Editing goes to Proofed under the same terms as any Proofed job. Card details go to Stripe and never touch us. The full answer, in the form procurement will ask for, is Chapter 10." |
| "Can you do it cheaper?" | "Not for ten. I can do five for $1,500 if the budget is the constraint. What I will not do is the same work for less, because the editing is a real cost and you would end up with an unedited draft, which is not what you are buying." |
The five-touch outbound sequence
Rules: one idea per message, a specific observation about them, one ask, no attachment on the first touch, plain text. Five touches over fifteen working days, then stop and park the account for a quarter. Two contacts per account, always.
Planning assumptions, not benchmarks. Nothing below is measured on Austen. Published outbound statistics come from vendors selling outbound tools. The figures here are deliberately conservative planning numbers and every one of them should be replaced with your own after the first hundred accounts.S40
| Touch | Day | Channel | Job |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Day 1 | The trigger and one specific observation. No attachment, no link to a pricing page | |
| 2 | Day 3 | LinkedIn connection, no note | Puts a face next to the name in the inbox |
| 3 | Day 6 | The free gap report, delivered whether they replied or not. This is the touch that works | |
| 4 | Day 10 | Email to the second contact at the account | Different person, different angle, referencing nothing about the first email |
| 5 | Day 15 | The short close-out. Give them an easy no and leave the door open |
Sequence A: Head of Content at a B2B SaaS company hiring a content marketer
Subject: your content marketing manager advert
[Name], I saw you are hiring a content marketing manager. Two thoughts, and neither is a pitch.
Whoever you hire will not publish anything meaningful for three or four months, between notice, onboarding and learning your category. That gap is the expensive part, not the salary.
We produce finished articles from briefs you approve: researched, written in your voice, scored for search and for AI answer engines, and edited by a professional editor before you see them. Ten of them in thirty days for $2,500, which is less than a month of the salary on that advert.
Would a look at three subjects [competitor] ranks for and you do not be useful? I will run it either way.
Simon Minton
Austen, austenapp.com
Subject: the three gaps
[Name], the gap analysis I mentioned, no strings.
We crawled [competitor one] and [competitor two] and compared their coverage to yours. Three subjects they both rank for and you have nothing on:
1. [gap one] - [competitor] has [n] pages on it, you have none
2. [gap two] - the query that feeds it gets asked in AI assistants constantly and neither of you answers it well
3. [gap three] - you have one page, published [year], outranked by both
Full report attached. It is yours to use whether or not you talk to us.
If you want the articles written and professionally edited rather than just the list, that is the ten-article pilot: $2,500, thirty days.
Simon
Subject: closing this out
[Name], I have sent you a gap report and not much else, so I will stop here.
If content capacity stops being a problem the moment your new hire lands, ignore this and good luck with the role.
If it does not, reply to this and the offer does not change: ten finished, human-edited articles, thirty days, $2,500.
Either way, the gap report is yours.
Simon
Sequence B: Founder of a content or SEO agency advertising for writers
Subject: your freelance writer advert
[Name], you have a content writer role open, which usually means delivery is running ahead of capacity rather than that you want another person to manage.
We sell finished articles, white-label: brief approved by you, written in the client's voice, scored for search and AI answer engines, and edited by a professional editor at Proofed. $250 a finished article, ten in thirty days.
You would buy at roughly 16.7 cents a word with the editing and the coordination already inside it, and bill at your normal content rate.
Worth twenty minutes on one client account?
Simon Minton
Austen, austenapp.com
Subject: a gap report for one of your clients
[Name], rather than describe it, here is one.
I picked [client] from your work page and ran a content gap analysis against their two closest competitors. Three subjects both rivals rank for and [client] has nothing on, with the queries and the page counts. Attached.
That report takes us minutes and costs nothing, which is the point: on a white-label arrangement you get one of these per client per quarter as part of the work.
If the trial is useful, it is ten articles for one client account at $2,500, invoiced to you, your name on everything.
Simon
Subject: last one
[Name], I will leave it there.
Two things worth keeping in mind for later. One, we invoice you and never your client, and that goes in writing. Two, the offer does not expire: ten finished, professionally edited articles for one client account, $2,500, thirty days.
If you would rather test it on your own site before a client's, say so and we will start there instead.
Simon
Warm introduction request, to a Proofed account manager
Subject: one client worth a sentence
[Name], I think [client] is a fit for the content engine, on the basis that they publish regularly and have mentioned writing capacity.
If you agree, would you mention it on your next scheduled call rather than emailing? One sentence is plenty: we now write the first draft too, edited by the same team, and there is a fixed pilot if they want to try it.
I will send you what happened either way, within a week.
Simon
References, and the six months before you have one
You have no Austen customer you can name. Say so. The ladder below is the order in which credibility becomes available, and each rung is real.
| Rung | What you can say | When |
|---|---|---|
| 0. The editorial bench | "Proofed's own site names SoFi, Pinterest, Emeritus, Samsung, Substack, Forbes Books, the Financial Times, Fujifilm and JP Morgan Chase as clients of its editing business."S29 Never say or imply they use Austen | Today |
| 1. The artefact | A real gap report about their own site, and a real finished article with its tracked changes. Specific, checkable, produced in front of them | Today |
| 2. The honest position | "You would be early, and we structure the pilot accordingly." Then say what that means: brief approval, one edit included, and we keep working on a piece until it is right | Today |
| 3. An unnamed result | "A UK agency ran ten articles for one client in a month." Only once true, only with the customer's permission, and never with a number you did not measure | After pilot one |
| 4. A named quote | One sentence, attributed, approved in writing by the person who said it | After pilot two or three |
| 5. A reference call | A customer willing to take fifteen minutes with a prospect. Ask at delivery, when they are happiest, not at renewal | Month 4 onward |
| 6. A written case study | With real before-and-after numbers you recorded on day one of the pilot. This is why you record the baseline at kickoff | Month 6 onward |
The rule that protects everything. Never type a customer name into an email, a deck or a page unless they have signed and have agreed in writing to be named. No invented statistics, no "used by leading brands", no logo wall of companies that are Proofed's editing clients. In a category full of overclaiming, being the one person who says "you would be early" is a competitive advantage.
After the sale
The champion
Give them something to forward: the gap report, the before-and-after visibility comparison, and a one-page internal summary. In professional services and education the internal document is what actually sells the second deal.
The renewal
Day 21, never day 30. Run the three-message sequence in Chapter 12. Offer the retainer to teams of one, and Pro to anyone with more than two brand voices, because Starter holds two projects.
The churn
When someone leaves, ask one question: "what would have had to be true for this to keep going?" Write the answer down verbatim and put it in the Friday review. Three of those answers will tell you more than the next hundred cold emails.