In this episode of The Constraint Call™, Ravi diagnoses the growth ceiling for Dan Tieman, who runs a done-with-you consulting business that helps medical clinics transition from insurance billing to cash pay protocols, doing around $150K per month in revenue.
He came in believing sales efficiency was the constraint, pointing to a low show rate, a low close rate, and a two-call sales process for a $15K price point.
Ravi’s diagnosis was different: the real problem is ad clarity, and the downstream sales friction is a symptom of it.
Ravi recommended simplifying all ad copy to a fifth-grade reading level and eliminating any messaging that forces the prospect to do math in their head to understand the benefit.
He pushed Dan to remove the “additional information” field from the funnel form, install the lead pixel earlier in the flow, and test optimizing for leads rather than schedules.
He advised launching a minimum of ten to twenty new ad creatives biweekly, using a repeatable in-house production system, rather than relying on four or six ads against $30K in monthly spend.
He introduced a lead qualification tier system where hyper-qualified prospects go directly to the senior closer for a one-call close attempt, mid-range prospects follow the two-call process, and low-probability leads are cut from the calendar entirely so the setter can focus on working the qualified pipeline.
He told Dan not to change the pricing structure or add a continuity model yet, because layering new complexity onto a funnel that still has clarity problems will break the system before it has a chance to work.
The overarching lesson: say the same thing a thousand times, and never try to be clever when you could be clear.
Transcript
RAVI ABUVALA: Welcome to the Constraint Call. I’m Ravi Abuvala. I’ve helped thousands of founders doing anywhere from $50K a month to $10 million a month identify the biggest constraint holding their business back. Every week I do this live with one founder on camera in real time.
Dan, thanks for being here. In your own words, can you tell us a little bit about what your business does, where you’re at in monthly revenue, and what you think your biggest constraint is right now?
DAN TIEMAN: For sure. So we work with medical providers to help them insert cash protocols into their clinic to help them eliminate having to deal with insurance. That’s what we primarily focus on. We help them through the exam, consults, and the sales process. We hover around $130K to $150K a month in revenue. The last two months we’re at about $130K. And what was the last one? Sorry.
RAVI ABUVALA: What do you think is the biggest constraint in the company right now?
DAN TIEMAN: The biggest constraint right now is sales efficiency. That’s where we’re hitting a wall.
RAVI ABUVALA: Before I go deeper into that, you cut out right when you were saying who you were serving. Who is it that you’re moving from insurance to cash pay?
DAN TIEMAN: Medical clinics. We work with physical therapists, chiropractors, medical doctors, NPs — anybody who has a medical license — to help them insert these cash protocols.
RAVI ABUVALA: Got it. Sales efficiency — let’s double-click into that. Talk to me about where in the funnel the marketing or sales process isn’t as efficient as it should be.
DAN TIEMAN: Let me tell you about the team first so you can get a feel, and then I’ll dive into the numbers. We have one setter and one and a half closers. Colin is a closer as well as we have a full-time closer too. Colin picks up anything Anthony can’t get to.
With that said, we generate around 227 leads per month at $119 per lead. Demos booked — the last two-month average was 70. On calendar was about 55. They took 38, and they closed seven. We hit a major hiccup last month. January was definitely better overall, but February killed us a little bit. Where I think the efficiency lacks is that we’re generating 225 leads a month and I feel like we could get more booked demos out of that. And we’re also running into some close issues.
RAVI ABUVALA: You said 70 booked calls and 55 on calendar. Where’s the drop-off between the 70 and the 55?
DAN TIEMAN: A delay — they’ll get carried into the next month. We’ll book out on a Wednesday, the month ends, and those are getting pushed into next month potentially due to how our sales team is structured. We’re a two-call close process. They’ll have call one and then go into call two to close. We’re at a $15K price point, and the last two months average about $15K. We’re trying to push closer to $17K to $20K, so we’re testing those waters.
RAVI ABUVALA: What’s the average that you’re collecting upfront?
DAN TIEMAN: Right now the average was right around $11,000 — $10,865, just short.
RAVI ABUVALA: How long is the program? Done for you or done with you?
DAN TIEMAN: Done with you. Six months.
RAVI ABUVALA: Do you offer payment plans into the six months or do they do the $11K?
DAN TIEMAN: We try to get it upfront and then offer a payment plan if they’re not able to. We’ll see what cash on hand is, et cetera.
RAVI ABUVALA: Walk me through the two-call close process. I rarely see that as the route to go, especially on a done-with-you offer. So why do you guys have it, and have you ever tested one-call closes?
DAN TIEMAN: We did one-call closes — I’d caveat that at about 20% — last year during the summer into early fall. Then we reverted back to the two-call process. We hit a lot of people with objections like, “Who are you guys?” especially at our price points. So we’re trying to build trust throughout the process.
RAVI ABUVALA: With 70 booked calls and 55 on calendar — how many hours a day are you guys taking sales calls?
DAN TIEMAN: There’s variance. Some days my closer is booked from 8 AM to 7 PM, and then certain days he has two calls and is doing his own reach outs and follow-ups.
RAVI ABUVALA: How many available slots do you have between Cameron, Colin, and Anthony?
DAN TIEMAN: One-hour slots. He takes calls from eight to eight. We have a sales team meeting in there, so let’s say 10 sales slots for the closer. We only like to book him at six to seven slots. Colin takes maybe one or two a day. So about eight total sales slots per day.
RAVI ABUVALA: The 38 calls that you took — do you know the show rate from call one to call two in the two-call close?
DAN TIEMAN: Yes, we have that. Give me 30 seconds to pull it.
What funnel are you running the ads on?
RAVI ABUVALA: Ads Library. You’ll find it under Daniel Tieman.
DAN TIEMAN: Colin’s actually messaging me right now for that percentage. He monitors it regularly.
Colin said the rolling average might be 40 to 50%.
RAVI ABUVALA: Walk me through how the calls are structured. Is call one purely diagnostic, and do you drop the price on call two?
DAN TIEMAN: We save pricing for call two. Call one is purely diagnostic — where are you at, what’s going on. The majority of our call ones stem from appointments from outbound. We don’t get a lot of directly booked from inbound. Something we’re looking at is a logic step where better leads go directly to a closer’s calendar and people who score lower go to the setter to qualify.
RAVI ABUVALA: When you say you have 227 leads and 70 booking — is that majority from outbound?
DAN TIEMAN: Yes. It’s a 75/25 split, outbound versus inbound. Even when we look at overall closes, our CAC drops significantly on the inbound side. Our CAC on just lead forms is about $2,000. But we keep trying to push this through and get better quality out of it.
RAVI ABUVALA: So you’re getting a lot of people opting in on that first page as a lead and then not booking.
DAN TIEMAN: Yes.
RAVI ABUVALA: First of all — remove that “additional information” field. This destroys more appointments than you could ever imagine. It’s a step where they don’t know what to put, and it kills calls.
In your ads, what are you optimizing for — leads or schedules?
DAN TIEMAN: Schedules.
RAVI ABUVALA: Do you have the lead pixel triggering off the button click? Because I don’t see it on this booking page.
DAN TIEMAN: It’s not triggering there. We have it fully at the end. We didn’t even have the lead pixel in between, which we should.
RAVI ABUVALA: Absolutely set up the lead pixel. There’s literally no reason why not to. We’re spending about $6,000 a day on ads and I’m optimizing for leads — and I have about a 90 to 100% lead-to-book rate. It’s always worth testing optimizing for leads versus optimizing for schedules.
Is the majority of your traffic coming from the instant form or from the funnel page?
DAN TIEMAN: A blend, but we’re running more money into the instant form because that’s where the CAC is lowest.
RAVI ABUVALA: At a $2,000 CAC and $11,000 upfront — $15,000 LTV roughly — why not just double or triple ad spend?
DAN TIEMAN: We’ve tried that and that’s where we fall off, because I don’t think we’re producing enough creatives. We’re trying to solve for that right now using some AI tools and in-house video production.
RAVI ABUVALA: How many ads are you guys launching a month?
DAN TIEMAN: Six.
RAVI ABUVALA: And what’s your spend a month?
DAN TIEMAN: $25K to $30K.
RAVI ABUVALA: That’s pretty low for six ads. Let me watch your ads real quick.
What was the whole point of the beginning of that ad?
DAN TIEMAN: We’re product-focused on the front end. We have a partnership with a sister company called Nerve Reviver. We’re using that as the front end to get people in easily. It’s about neuropathy itself — getting patients in for neuropathy specifically. The doc was willing to talk about the equipment.
RAVI ABUVALA: Okay. Here are a few thoughts. When I see a sales cycle that requires two calls to close, and they’re not self-booking — there’s almost always a clarity issue. And I think that’s what’s happening with your ads right now.
If you own a medical clinic, the primary text hook says “Can I be blunt with you?” and then you’re talking about a 79% increase in neuropathy results. I understand what you’re trying to do — you’re saying, “Here are the results your clients will get if they use our stuff.” That’s good. But you’re making people in a cold ad think way too much.
I would almost put money on this as why your booking rate and content consumption rate aren’t higher. If I had to bet, the setter is doing a lot of work on that first call explaining how they’re going to transition from insurance to cash clients. Is that fair?
DAN TIEMAN: I would say between the setter and the closer on that first call, yes.
RAVI ABUVALA: Here’s what I would do. The ad copy itself is fine — I don’t really have issues with that. I would love to see you take it, put it into Gemini or ChatGPT, and ask it to put it at a fifth-grade reading level. There’s a lot of text, and it feels dense.
Let me show you ours. “A hundred K founders — most of your deals require two or three calls to close? Your system is leaking time and capacity at your level.” Do you see how every single sentence is a couple of words and is a separate paragraph?
They can scan it and understand it in a second. Then when they click, the headline changes to match the ad copy. The ad copy, the funnel headline, and the first few seconds of the video sales letter are all saying literally the same thing. That congruency allows people to understand what this is before they ever get on a sales call, even if they don’t consume the full VSL.
That’s probably one of the first things I’d look at. How do we simplify this text? How do we make the ad creatives match almost word for word what the actual copy says? And I think if you did those changes, you’d not only increase self-booking — I bet you’d start being able to move people into a one-call close, which I think is one of your biggest bottlenecks right now.
To have that much calendar availability every day and be doing $150K a month — you should be doing significantly more. I think it’s because every call is requiring a second call and extending the sales cycle.
DAN TIEMAN: Can I backtrack you for 30 seconds, Ravi? You said we’re spending $25K to $30K and doing six ads — you said that’s not a lot. Did you mean it’s not a lot of money to put toward it, or not a lot of creatives?
RAVI ABUVALA: I’m not going to scoff at $25K to $30K a month in ad spend. I’m scoffing at six ad creatives on $25K to $30K a month. We’ll circle back to that in a second.
To me, that’s not necessarily the constraint, because I think you could still scale the way you have it right now. But for context — I have 27 active ads running right now. Talking head, single image, carousel, video testimonial — all variations.
DAN TIEMAN: Got it. Good question.
RAVI ABUVALA: People on the sales calls — are they saying “Clinic Freedom Project,” or are they referencing Nerve Reviver?
DAN TIEMAN: They’re reverting back to saying Nerve Reviver, but we’re trying to create some form of separation.
RAVI ABUVALA: I like the idea of separation, but I feel like you’re wasting some text. Every single word on your sales page matters. I’ve spent hundreds of hours on our sales page and probably 50% of that has been above the fold.
What I found is that every time you introduce a new concept, a new term, new verbiage — it takes the prospect’s brain in a different direction. I want to say the same thing a thousand times. The “done for you pre-call system built from your recorded sales calls — higher show rates, higher close rates, shorter sales cycles” — that’s also in my ad copy. I’m introducing the least amount of information possible at every step to move them through the funnel.
You want clarity over cleverness. The trademarked words and mechanisms go in the middle of the video sales letter and after they book. So you’re keeping it as simple as possible to get the booking, and then after they book, you start to separate yourself from competitors.
You want them to know exactly why they’re booking and what you’re going to solve for them in literally one sentence. Then in between booking and the call, you can start to differentiate.
DAN TIEMAN: Have you ever tested putting the booking widget directly below the VSL so they don’t have to click anything?
RAVI ABUVALA: No — have you ever tested that? Have you ever tested putting social proof on this page?
DAN TIEMAN: No.
RAVI ABUVALA: Those are two additional tests I would run. Here’s why. Someone lands on your ad — “A hundred K founders, when your sales team closes or if it requires two or three calls to close” — they watch the first five seconds, land on the headline, scroll through testimonials — “went from $150K to $300K a month with the same ad spend, went from 10% to 40% close rate on cold traffic.” Without watching more than 10 seconds of content anywhere, they’re getting the rough idea. That’s what you have to build the funnel for.
Also — remove that additional information field. That destroys appointments.
DAN TIEMAN: I was writing that down and missed the last bit. The video is reintroducing the Nerve Reviver side versus the money side?
RAVI ABUVALA: Exactly. And if people are coming on the call saying they want the Nerve Reviver — double down on that. But if I had to guess, people are probably coming on saying they want to switch from insurance to cash pay and collect more cash. Is that right?
DAN TIEMAN: Yeah.
RAVI ABUVALA: Then don’t be clever. Be simple with that. On the sales call, that’s when you can introduce the Nerve Reviver idea.
COLIN BUTTERFIELD: Ravi, when people are showing up — a good chunk of them basically say what you said. But a large chunk of them put on a front of patient success being why they’re there. Then you peel back one layer and it’s about money and time.
RAVI ABUVALA: Which is fair. We always call them primary benefits and tertiary benefits. The primary benefit is always going to be making more money and collecting more cash. But if somebody comes on the call saying that in the beginning, you can just reframe the call around that. And like you said — all you do is peel one more layer back and you’re on the same conversation everyone else is in.
I would bet money that if you made these changes, you’d not only get self-booking to increase — you’d start being able to move people into a one-call close, which I think is one of your biggest bottlenecks. With that much calendar availability every day, you guys should be doing significantly more money.
The other thing I’d really consider is creating tiers in the qualification process. If somebody is hyper-qualified, they go to the better closer’s calendar and you assume a one-call close. If they’re more borderline — tier two — they go into the two-call close process.
DAN TIEMAN: Would you send anyone to a setter ahead of time — like tier three, the people doing zero to $5K a month — just to hyper-qualify before sending them to a closer?
RAVI ABUVALA: I actually did a YouTube video on this Monday, but I’m not a big fan of that. Here’s why.
The first thing we do with every client is analyze the last 20 to 30 sales calls and the clients they closed, and we identify who the ideal avatar is. An ideal avatar is always on a spectrum. On one end — hyper-qualified, closes on one call, pays in full. On the other end — low-probability closes.
What you need to identify is at what point the book-to-close ratio is no longer worth your time or your setter’s time. Let’s say on one end, 20% of people that book close. On the other end, 1% close. At what point is that book-to-close ratio no longer worth the slot?
Because what a lot of people do is they spend money on ads and want to liquidate every opportunity. So they get a lead we’ve diagnosed as a 3% book-to-close rate — which means roughly 30 calls to close one deal — and those people are taking up calendar slots that should be going to people who close at 10% or 20%. That extends your sales cycle and kills your cash velocity, which becomes a big deal when you’re spending $50K to $100K a month in ads. You need that cash back fast.
The other issue: if you toss unqualified people to the setter, the setter isn’t working the qualified pipeline. Instead of going back and hammering the people we know are qualified but haven’t booked, the setter is trying to get blood out of a turnip with people who aren’t ready. So instead, you cut those people off entirely, and you use that freed-up setter capacity to work the pipeline harder. If the setter starts sitting around, you just increase ad spend and get them more leads. That’s the fix.
Everything I’m saying is based on data. Sit down and look at the last 20 to 30 closes. Figure out that book-to-close rate. Then extrapolate it into the rest of the funnel. There will be certain attributes that define whether someone is tier one, tier two, or disqualified. For us, we ask people what their primary constraint is on the application. People who say “I need more booked calls” tend to need more work and make less money — so they go to tier two. People who say “my close rate is too low” or “my sales cycle is too long” — we love those leads because we can fix that in a week or two. We identified that from the sales calls and pushed it up into the funnel.
For you, it might be how many patients they take, what their percentage of cash versus insurance looks like, and whether they’re already spending money on marketing. Those would determine tiers.
COLIN BUTTERFIELD: I joined a little late — is there a time for questions?
RAVI ABUVALA: Go ahead right now.
COLIN BUTTERFIELD: You brought up one-call close. The show rate from part two for my main closers is awful. My concern — and this might just be a mental thing — is that because our clients are using this on patients, it requires a bit more product education than a typical discovery call. But I would 100% want these to be one-call closes. I just struggle to wrap my brain around it.
RAVI ABUVALA: Good question. The things I’m telling you — you would implement in order. I wouldn’t go from a two-call close to a one-call close right now. That’s not your constraint. Your constraint right now is ad creatives and your self-booking rate. If you solve both of those things, it’s going to help what’s happening down funnel.
For example — if you quadruple the ads you’re putting out, that same person is going to see different ads talking about different angles before they click. They’re getting educated and nurtured before they even get on a call. Because the VSL is clearer, there’s more proof on the page, everything is simpler — the people who self-book already have a rough idea of what this is. You’re going to do less work on the actual sales call.
Those are the first two steps before going from a two-call close to a one-call close. Then you add the qualification tiers — maybe tier one people can one-call close, tier two stays on two calls. Those are the three steps before you change the sales structure. You’re doing $150K a month — I’m not saying change everything on day one.
Getting to a one-call close is absolutely doable. We’ve done it for many clients. The reason a two-call close happens is usually that more education is required on the call than what was built before the call. So how do you solve that?
You could try to force people to watch videos before the call, but I don’t think that would work well in your scenario. What I’d suggest instead is leaning less on the prospect needing to fully understand the product before they move forward.
Here’s an example. One of the things we do for clients is package done-for-you YouTube videos so people consume them before the call. We used to lead with that. People would get on the call asking questions about YouTube, extending the sales cycle. Then I stopped mentioning YouTube in the ad, the sales page, and just put one line in the sales script — “we also do up to four YouTube videos packaged and published on your behalf.” Because I stopped making a big deal out of it, they stopped making a big deal out of it, and they started closing much easier.
Could you maybe make this product component not so much the focal point that they have to have a mastery around it before they move forward? Make it more like, “Yeah, this is just one of the ways we do that.” Then handle any objections once they start onboarding.
The other thing — for us, we offer a seven-day no-questions-asked money-back guarantee. We don’t advertise it on the front end because I don’t want freebie seekers. But on the sales call, if I feel like someone’s on the one-yard line and they’ve just been burned before — I say, “Look, here’s the contract in plain English. As long as you show up to the onboarding call, you can request a money-back guarantee.” We’ve had about 5% of people ask for it, mostly because we don’t advertise it upfront.
That’s another way to shorten the sales cycle. When someone says “I gotta think about it” — which I’ve heard 10,000 times — you ask what they have to think about, and then you say that’s what the seven-day trial is for. Risk goes way down. You might be surprised — you could move 50% to 60% of calls to one-call closes, which would be significant for your cash conversion cycle.
DAN TIEMAN: That makes total sense.
RAVI ABUVALA: Let me go back to ads real quick, and then I’ll open the floor.
Look at all these — I have 27 ads running right now and they all have the exact same copy. Don’t overthink the copy. The real money is in the ad creative. For $30K a month in ad spend, 20% should be going to testing — that’s $6,000 a month in creative testing, minimum.
The nice thing is that even if an ad doesn’t convert, I can’t tell you how many times someone gets on a sales call and says they’ve seen seven of my ads before booking. So you get the omnipresence effect while you’re testing. I’d build a production process for this. We do it with our clients — we build out a Claude project with our 20 best sales call scripts, sales page copy, video sales letter, and winning ad creatives, and we’re launching 10 to 20 ads biweekly. All wholly unique — different angles, different people, different formats. Talking head in my room. White middle-aged man talking about his biggest month ever. Older woman talking about her show rate and close rate increase. Hitting all these different angles.
You can do the exact same thing. I block two hours biweekly. I put it in Claude, get the scripts, use an Osmo Pocket 3. I put the script in the notes app on my phone, set my phone up like this, and go line by line. Look at camera, say the line. Look at camera. I upload in Descript and can get 20 ads done in under two hours and publish them the next day. You’re always infusing new creatives into the system.
Because if we solved everything else but you stayed at four to six ad creatives, your CAC would keep increasing. With 10, 15, 20 winners all running at $500 to $2,000 a day in spend — you get that omnipresence effect across your targeting and you can scale without hitting a ceiling.
DAN TIEMAN: That makes sense.
RAVI ABUVALA: Questions?
DAN TIEMAN: I’ll let the others go first since we dove hard into the marketing side. I have my action items.
COLIN BUTTERFIELD: For a long time I felt our messaging was too complex because we focus on three things: five X-ing the cash per patient, patients doing it at home to free up time, and clinical patient success. I’ve been including all three — basically 33/33/33. We had a call with Eddie Maloof two or three weeks ago and his advice was almost to get rid of the patient success piece entirely and just make it about cash. Nodding at what you’re saying — but wanted your take.
RAVI ABUVALA: He’s a good friend of mine and a smart marketer. Exactly right. The simpler and more stupid-simple I make my top-of-funnel marketing, the higher the conversion is on the entire funnel including the sales calls.
You really want to introduce as little as possible for someone to remember you by. There’s an inverse correlation: the more things you’re trying to say, the less the prospect will remember. You want them to think, “I pay these guys money and they make me more money.” That’s it.
Two things you can play with. One — if you have the data, say something like “our average medical clinic sees a 222% increase in cash pay.” I don’t know your exact numbers, but if you can make a specific data claim like that, you’ll get bookings from that alone.
Two — ad angles. You can have an angle built around patient success where the entire ad is framed around patient success, but it still leads to a VSL about making more cash. Start the ad with something like, “What if I told you there was a way to double the amount of cash you’re making in your medical clinic every single month while increasing patient satisfaction?” That’s an angle. Another angle: “What if you could double the cash you’re collecting while working less?” Different entry points, same destination.
The sales page, VSL, and sales call should all be the same messaging. The ad angles are where you test the different frames you want to play with.
COLIN BUTTERFIELD: That’s super helpful. One more — product education on the sales call. The way we frame it: Dr. Bob conceptualized the program as two columns. Left side is patient success — the protocol, equipment. Right side is patient acquisition. We dive into patient success first because some clients genuinely care about it, and others front with that because they feel guilty about the money piece. So we go through two unique selling points on why this works for patients, each component of the kit, and we show patient case videos — about 45 seconds. Based on what you’ve said, I’m guessing you’d cut the component-by-component walkthrough?
RAVI ABUVALA: Exactly. Every time you say something about patient results, you’re forcing the prospect to do math in their head. “If patients have a better experience, they’ll tell their friends, so I’ll make more money.” Never do that. It should be second-grade simple.
Here’s something my old salesperson used to say — and I’ll give him credit for it: whoever you market to, you’re going to get. If you market to people who want to make more money, you get people who want to make more money. If you market to people who want to see patient success, you get people who want patient success. The problem is when you try to market to both at the same time and then run a process that’s trying to cater to both.
If you marketed solely about making more money, you’d only get on the call with people who want to make more money. You wouldn’t have to do this workaround of “let me prove to you that you should care about your patients.” They already know — there’s an underlying assumption that the only way this works long-term is if you take care of your patients. That’s a baseline. Not worth saying out loud.
COLIN BUTTERFIELD: That makes total sense. Even thinking about it now — the punchline of our sales call could literally be: if Dr. Bob wants to make an extra $20K a month the old way, he needs to see 300 more patients. Or he can get three of these patients.
RAVI ABUVALA: If you watch the constraint call going live tomorrow morning — it’s another person who places virtual assistants for real estate agents — I literally walk through exactly what you said. I show the old way, run the math, show the new way. If you want to make an extra $100K a month the old way, here’s how many hours. The new way, it’s actually fewer hours. And every month you don’t move forward, you’re losing the difference in those two numbers plus the time you’re putting in.
COLIN BUTTERFIELD: Super helpful. Thank you.
RAVI ABUVALA: I have three minutes left. Dan, do you have anything?
DAN TIEMAN: I’m good on my end. I have my action items on the funnel flow. I don’t think operations is part of the problem — it’s fixing this other stuff first. Appreciate your time, Ravi.
COLIN BUTTERFIELD: One more thing. Changing up the pricing structure a bit. We’ve gotten two pieces of advice. One: charge $20K and then start continuity at $2,500 a month starting 30 days later. I got sticker shock around that. The other: just $3,500 a month right away. Dan and I landed on $10K upfront, $2K a month starting in 30 days, then down to $1K at month seven. And our current marketing is positioned around us building out their marketing system in-house — it’s theirs, never going away. The $10K plus continuity format would make them more reliant on us rather than giving them the lifetime thing. Worth flagging: right now about 25% of people are upselling at the end of six months, so we’re losing some there. And we live and die by new sales currently because we’re stacking simultaneously.
RAVI ABUVALA: These are both really good points. Let me end with this.
The show is called the Constraint Call. The thing I talk about, and I’m writing the book on it right now, is that most businesses die of indigestion — trying to solve too many problems at the same time and breaking the entire system.
At $11,000 collected upfront, $2,000 CAC, $15,000 LTV over six months on a done-with-you offer — your problem is not pricing or continuity. If you make all these changes on the marketing and sales side and simultaneously switch to a done-for-you model, add continuity on the backend, and change the pricing structure, the process you just simplified will get confused again. When you were explaining that pricing structure just now, you were tripping over the words a little. You’re still figuring it out, and that’s fine. But now you’re taking a system you just simplified and adding complexity before it’s ready.
If I were you, I would not worry about recurring revenue right now. My main goal would be: how do we get the front end absolutely nailed down — self-booking up, ad spend scalable, sales cycle shorter, cash collections high? Then you think about continuity or a done-for-you model.
Your market is big enough that you could get this to $200K, $300K, $400K, $500K a month with your current offer. Between all the sub-segments you serve. If the goal is just to make more money, do that first.
And if the biggest bottleneck you hit at $300K a month is that you’re making a lot upfront but not keeping it — that’s a different constraint. You hop back on this call and we solve that one.