Read in full, end to end, for this: all 33 of Jeremy's SOPs (about 172,000 words), his "How To Scale A Call Funnel To $1M/Month" video, the 220-transcript corpus and the persona built from it, the ICP brief, and every script on the hub: the VSL, both call confirmation videos, the webinar confirmation video, the 32-angle call ad bank, the webinar ad bank, both Hammer Them libraries and both nurture sequences. 5 September 2026.
Updated the same afternoon. Harry answered the list: actions 4 to 8 are applied and deployed (each card below says what changed), 3, 9 and 10 are answered in Part 6, 1, 2 and 3 are parked on Harry's call, and the four decisions in 9 are made. Part 5 is new: what ChatGPT and Perplexity say about us today. Later the same day: Harry's ten open comments applied (a41 killed, a43 redone in new-website language, C6 out, the Black Friday line made plain, the outcome added to the VSL hook), and every price line stripped from the webinar Hammer Them pieces.
There is no SDR layer on the hub at all. SOP-32's mechanism is a text from a real phone, sent in the gap between the confirmation page and the first nurture email, offering two named assets and letting the lead pick one and the channel. The assets already exist and only need a one-line pitch each: the Format Leverage study and the case-study page for Curiosity-level leads, the SOURCE deck, the pricing calculator and the new timeline piece for High Interest. Add the selfie video (record once, Descript swaps the name), the "we're all busy" follow-up, the "red flags" text for a lead who has gone quiet, and a ban list for selfish follow-ups ("following up", "still interested?"). AU leads can get this from the closer's own phone today; US leads after 10DLC.
SOP-30 is the SOP that describes what SOURCE actually is: a paid two-day virtual event with a call offer on the back. Its urgency is the price ladder (early bird, extended early bird with a bonus added at each rise, final-week price, a VIP cap), not the ads. Right now nothing on the hub carries the ladder. Put it on the landing page and in the emails, keep the ads price-free. Two more pieces come from the same SOP: a VIP upsell on the confirmation page, which first needs a VIP product to exist (today $7 and $97 are a price test on the same seat, not two tiers), and a workbook, which is a core deliverable and a commitment device; the SOURCE deck and the study are most of one already.
One correction to my earlier notes: live-only with no replay is fine for a paid event, SOP-30 lists it as a sanctioned lever. The best-supported middle is a limited replay, 48 hours for ticket holders, which keeps the pressure and stops writing off the third of registrants a midday Eastern slot will never suit.
The hub covers ads, hammer, confirmation and email, then goes dark at the event itself. SOP-30's architecture for a two-day: day one is framework, problem reframe and proof with no pitch; day two is technical competence, live case analysis, layered social proof (international, local, different verticals, specific numbers), a vulnerability beat, a scripted transition ("now that you understand how much is involved..."), the offer, and a buyer-affirmation moment for the people who say yes. It also wants a cast with intro scripts: Lawrence as product head doing the technical content, Chris as sales head walking through a real audit, an MC managing energy. The in-event call offer needs a scripted moment and a fast-action reason (the SOP's version was a deposit; ours is an onboarding bonus for calls booked in the room).
What changed: the long confirmation video has a new beat 7b, "Go and check us out before we speak", between the call description and the what-to-bring list. It tells them to Google us and ask ChatGPT about us before the call, says what they will find (an Australian company over a decade old, so most reviews and case studies are Australian and the US office is newer; a lot of awards; a Trustpilot page with 3 reviews and one bad one), and then gives the average result and the slow case out loud: not much in month 1, movement by month 3, the fee clearly justified around month 6, the odd one taking most of a year because of a migration. Runtime is now 8:43 over 11 beats. Two lines in it are flagged HARRY, CONFIRM in the direction: the month shape (generalised from Case-Mate at 6 months and Clarks at 9) and whether you say the Trustpilot sentence on camera. The AI-answer check is done and reported in Part 5; it is the reason the Trustpilot line is in there.
What changed: a 2:30 breakout, "How long does it take, honestly", added to the call-side Hammer Them library and to the call film-day board. Months not weeks and why (crawl schedules and what a model re-learns from); the month 1 / months 2 to 3 / months 4 to 6 shape; the two published timeframes as proof (Case-Mate's revenue result measured at 6 months, Clarks' top-three lift over 9); why the start date matters more than the effort; what speeds it up and what slows it down; and a closing instruction to ask for the month-by-month shape in the 90 day plan. Flagged HARRY, CONFIRM on the months, same as beat 7b. It doubles as the SOP-32 asset for a High Interest lead who asks about timing before the call.
What changed: 27 hooks rewritten to under ten words, 16 in the call bank and 11 in the webinar bank; where a clause had to leave the hook it became the second sentence, so no cut lost its argument. a43 was left alone: its opener is a five-word quoted question and my count of 20 was a parser artefact of the quote mark. The webinar bank has five new angles, W41 to W45, in their own section: W41 is SOP-30's Event frame ("two mornings, one room, your category run live"), W42 the Transformation frame ("ranked is what you are, recommended is what pays"), and W43 to W45 are the first hook for each audience segment the SOPs want addressed separately: people already paying for SEO, the marketing lead who has to explain this upward, and the owner past $10M for whom it is a portfolio question. The bank is now 21 angles. Correction to the morning's wording: the live webinar test runs three hooks off that bank; it was never true that the bank only held three. SOP-33's floor is five per segment and these are the first of each, not the five.
What changed:
What changed: the inventory note on the Hammer Them page now lists what exists: the webinar recording (to be cut into 10 to 15 minute chapters, which is the first job because the podcasts are founder-story episodes for an Australian audience), the book, and six podcast guest spots found in a public search: Add To Cart (2022), Digital Agency Accelerator (2023), ...And We Have An Office Dog (2022 and 2024), No Hair Just Finance (2024), The Make It Happen Show, and Road To Growth (2021). That clears SOP-02's floor of five. All three film-day boards now carry "Two cameras, always (SOP-33)" and the refresh cadence for this spend level (every 2 to 4 weeks, 2 to 3 backups ready); the VSL board's "one camera" became "two cameras, teleprompter on A".
SOP-30's scaling rule is blunt: when an event format converts, do not change the content, the pitch or the cast, only the promotion and the number of closers. SOP-33 says the same about ads. The hub's editing layer is good for the build and dangerous after cohort one.
| Asset | Against the SOPs and the ICP |
|---|---|
| VSL (7:06) | Structurally sound (SOP-03). Timing beat 3b is allowed to be firmer: SOP-04 explicitly permits "the window is closing" for an affluent audience and the beat currently refuses it. Beat 3's whitepaper exists and needs to land on the hub (Part 6). Chaptering for the page, which SOP-03 asks for, is not built. |
| Call confirmation, long (now 8:43) | The four "why now" reasons are corpus-true and well argued. Beat 7b now does SOP-28's due-diligence and worst-case jobs. Three beats overlap with the personal video and the hammer pieces (beats 6, 7 and 9, about 1:18 between them); if 8:43 is too long, those are the cuts. Interest-level matching (SOP-32) still argues for a 2 to 3 minute "already convinced" cut alongside it. |
| Call confirmation, personal (about 1:00) | Does the SOP-32 reply-bait move well. Beat 2's client list needs to stay flat or it fights beat 4's "not a pitch". |
| Webinar confirmation (about 1:30) | Good on calendar and prep. The SMS promise is out. No VIP upsell, because there is no VIP product yet (action 2). |
| Call ad bank (31 angles) | Strong and SOP-31 clean; hooks now under ten words. Proof leans e-commerce; the ICP names four verticals and SaaS and professional services have one line between them ("a bookkeeping firm"). No ad speaks to the marketing manager's stated want of higher-quality leads than paid, only cheaper ones. |
| Webinar ad bank (21 angles) | The reasons are good and price-free is right. W41 to W45 add the Event and Transformation frames and one hook per segment; the five-per-segment floor is still ahead. "One cohort a month" compresses SOP-30's eight-week ladder into four; that is a choice, but the ladder still needs writing for it (action 2). |
| Hammer Them, call (32) | Covers the questions the corpus asks, and now the timeline. Several pieces carry a CTA, which SOP-02 says a hammer piece should not (it sells the next step, not the call). The lock-in wording now matches the VSL. |
| Hammer Them, webinar (16) | Well windowed. WH13 and WH14 (the day-one to day-two drop) are the right instinct and SOP-30 confirms it is the steepest drop in the format. WH15 needs your decision (Part 6). |
| Nurture, call | SOP-32 manual touch is in; T-1 hour email, branches and the 60-day email added. Still missing the two-asset offer (action 1) and SOP-13's "here is your own application back" reminder. |
| Nurture, webinar | Cadence is defensible (confirmation plus three reminders), now with T-1 hour on both days, the value trio for early registrants and the branches. Still missing the ladder and the VIP line (action 2). |
Run from a logged-out browser, so this is what a US prospect sees between booking and the call. Gemini and Google's AI Mode were not checked; both needed a signed-in Google account from this machine.
Verdict: "legitimate company: yes. Automatically worth hiring: no, get very clear on exactly what you're buying." It cites Clutch (Premier Verified, 6 reviews at 4.8) and an aggregator at 4.9 from 283 reviews, then Trustpilot at 2.9 from 3 reviews, including a January 2026 complaint alleging promised work was not delivered and there were billing issues. On price it reports we publish no rate card, then quotes Clutch's "$1,000+ minimum project size" and "$150 to $199 an hour" and estimates "$1k to $3k a month" for small work. It notes the no lock-in promise and lists Melbourne, Sydney, London and Atlanta.
"A legitimate SEO agency with multiple client reviews... but user reviews are mixed and some sources flag potential reliability concerns." On price: "bespoke pricing... third-party sources report minimum project sizes around $1,000+ and hourly rates roughly $150 to $199."
The run-of-show is the minute-by-minute script of the two days themselves: who is on screen, what they say, in what order, and where the offer lands. Everything on the hub gets people to the room; nothing on the hub says what happens once they are in it. SOP-30 treats that document as the product, because in its own case study 85% of the money was made inside the event, not in the ads or the emails.
For a two-day it looks like this. Day one: an opening that makes people glad they came (the MC's job, not yours), the SOURCE framework introduced at a high level, the problem reframed (why the green report and the flat revenue are the same thing), categories from the room run live, and the day closed on proof. No pitch at all on day one. Day two: technical competence first (Lawrence walking through a real audit, live, is the SOP's "product head" move), then layered proof (an international result, a local one, different verticals, specific numbers), then a short honest beat about where it has not worked, then the scripted transition: "now that you've seen how much is involved, here's how we do this for clients", then the offer, which for us is the strategy call with a reason to book it in the room rather than next week. Then a moment for the people who booked, so they feel good about it, and a re-pitch for the ones still deciding.
What I would write: a two-column document per day, time on the left, speaker and script on the right, with the cast's intro lines (Lawrence, Chris, whoever MCs), the three transitions, the offer beat word for word, and the fast-action reason. About a day's work once you tell me what the in-room offer is (a bonus for calls booked before day two ends is the obvious one).
Lock-in. Two versions of the same promise are live. The VSL (beat 5) and ad a49 say "no lock-in contract, ever, month to month with 60 days notice". The hammer piece "What working with us looks like" says "no lock-in beyond the initial term". A prospect who watches both, which the funnel is designed to make them do, hears a contradiction on the exact point the ICP is most nervous about. If there is an initial term, say it the same way everywhere: "an initial three months, then month to month". If there is not, the words "initial term" come out of the hammer piece. I would guess the hammer piece is the accurate one and the VSL is the aspiration, but only you know. One line to fix either way.
Founding. Public sources put the founding at 2015, so "11 years" is accurate and "a decade ago" is a rounding. The inconsistency only matters because both appear in the same funnel: the VSL says "a decade ago" and credibility piece C6 says "I started this at seventeen... 11 years later it is 120 people in three countries". You already took "at seventeen" out of the VSL. Recommendation: "over a decade" in every prose mention, and keep "seventeen" and "11 years" only in C6, where the founding story is the point of the piece. Nothing else changes.
WH15. The piece plays to someone who registered and missed day one. It offers two ways out: attend day two on its own, or reply and be moved to next month's cohort at no charge. The move is the right offer and it is what turns a write-off into a show; it is also an operational commitment: someone has to handle the replies, re-date the seat, and the refund policy has to allow a move instead of a refund. On a $7 seat the cost is nil; on $97 it is still small. I would say yes with one condition written into the piece: one move per seat. If you say no, the second option comes out and the piece becomes "day two stands on its own, come to that".
The SOURCE whitepaper. VSL beat 3's direction says "overlay the SOURCE whitepaper as the six are named". There is no whitepaper. The nearest real things are the Format Leverage study (public, real, 1.2 million referrals, but it is about page formats, not the six pillars) and the SOURCE deck's six-pillar slide. Three options: overlay the deck's six-pillar graphic and change the word "whitepaper" to "framework" in the script (an hour, and honest); write a four-page SOURCE whitepaper from the manuscript so the overlay is real and it becomes the SOP-32 asset for the setter kit (half a day, I can draft it); or overlay the Format Leverage study and accept that it does not match the six words being said. I would do the first now and the second before the US launch.
Decided 5 September: no lock-in, so the hammer piece is corrected; "over a decade" in prose, so the VSL is corrected and C6 is out; WH15 stays as it is for now; and the whitepaper already exists, so the only job is getting the PDF onto the hub for the editor.
SOP-30 and SOP-33 both say the same thing from different angles. When something starts working, the instinct is to improve it: tighten a beat, swap a hook, add a day. Jeremy's rule is the opposite. The version that converted is the version you run, unchanged, until it stops converting; the only things you change are the budget behind it and the number of people handling what it produces. His reason is that you cannot tell which part of a working thing did the work, so every "improvement" is a blind change to a winning ticket. The hub is built so that anyone can edit any line in seconds, which is exactly right while we are building and exactly wrong once cohort one has run and the numbers are in. The practical version: pick a freeze date (the day the first cohort's ads go live is the obvious one), and after it, edits go into a "next version" file rather than the live scripts, and only ship as a deliberate new test. The changelog already records everything, so the freeze is a discipline, not a feature.
SOPs 01 Hydra, 02 Hammer Them, 03 Mastering VSLs, 04 Mastering Webinars, 06 If This Then That, 09 A2P 10DLC, 11 Tornado, 12 Venus Fly Trap 2.0, 13 Email Matrix, 14 Venus Fly Trap 1.0, 15 Forester, 16 Deck Sales Letter, 17 Harvester, 18 Show Rate and Connection Rate, 19 What I Wish I Knew, 20 Hooks and Headlines, 21 Perfect Cold Video Pitch, 23 Ideal Client Traits, 24 Thinking Time, 25 Ad Fatigue, 26 Direct Response Ad Creation, 27 TLDR Direct Response, 28 Confirmation Page, 29 Advanced Book Funnel Creative, 30 Challenge Funnel Mastery, 31 Ad Diversification, 32 Setter Pre-Call, 33 Ad Scaling, 34 AI Manipulation (defensive half only; the review-suppression half is not used), 35 Messaging Mastery, 36 Emergency Revenue. SOP-22 is excluded by instruction. Plus the call-funnel video (9,182 words), the persona and its corpus files, the ICP brief, and all 23,891 words of spoken script on the hub.