Seeda Advisory · 11 May 2026

Chapter 1

The Map

15 min · Week in review · The four problems · Kai counter-evidence · Governance timeline

SECTION 01

Week in review · 4–11 May

Sun 3 May

Machine sync + pipeline prep for May 4
Mon 4 May

Martin advisory session · 99 min · Partner crisis named · Vietnam May 18 locked in
Mon 4 May

Spike Analysis launched · Hugh (Tranda) requests 2-pager for ADAD pitch · PMF signal
Mon 4 May

Standup AM · Vincent 1:1 · Albert starts (ML engineer, €60K/yr)
Tue 5 May

Brain refresh · Fathom pipeline fixed · fathom-transcript-puller task created · advisory deck built
Wed 6 May

Spike 2-pager to Hugh (Tranda) · Matt + Barton copy review
Wed 6–Fri 8 May

SVP + Sheet Society demo prep · May 8 offshore payroll (first stress test)
Wed 13 May

Brand identity Workshop #3 (concept lock pending)
Sun 18 May

Vietnam meeting · binary decision · full 6-month commitment OR separation

Delivered this week

Vietnam May 18 locked in (circuit breaker finally acted on)
Spike Analysis launched May 4
ADAD pitch 2-pager request received (Hugh/Tranda)
Fathom transcript pipeline fixed end-to-end
All brain files updated, advisory deck built

Still open / due

Spike 2-pager to Hugh by Wed 6 May
Tom (Supermetrics) approach not yet made
SVP + Sheet Society demos not yet scheduled
Nicole (Nova): 2 articles + next meeting not sent
Comp agreement still unsigned
Dan commission: 0 leads, still on zero-cost

SECTION 02

The four compounding problems · unchanged

Problem 1

Sales · velocity too low

Q2 pipeline $197k ARR vs $250k target. SVP/Sheet Society/Nova are the make-or-break deals. Tom (Supermetrics) commission approach is the best new lever. Dan: 0 leads sustained.

Problem 2

Product · delivery gate blocked

Matt (Adrenalin) denied UAT access to Spike — Elisa perfectionism. MMM at B+ (Kai's impact). Spike launched but key user not embedded. AI assistant, customer emails, notifications: 12+ months unshipped.

Problem 3

Delivery · fragile at current volume

Global Rescue pilot week 5/8 — highest priority. Adrenalin (Spike) second. Coffee Club deprioritised (non-payment). ROLI paused £15K AR outstanding. Elisa controls delivery gating.

Problem 4

People · governance breach

Albert hire: Elisa + Vincent voted against Michael's explicit financial warning. Partners demanding bank access + higher pay. Vietnam May 18 is the forcing function. No forming agreement was ever made.

    The new compounding layer
    The partner governance breach is now compounding all four problems. Until Vietnam resolves the commitment question, it is difficult to drive delivery (Elisa controls product gate), sales (Elisa co-leads demos), and finance (partners controlling spend via Albert hire). Vietnam is not just a "trust circuit breaker" — it is the unlock condition for the other three problems.
  

    Counter-evidence: Kai
    Kai (recent hire under product) drove MMM Dashboard from D- to B+ in weeks. This is direct counter-evidence to the "12-months-no-output" narrative. The right reading: it's not that Seeda can't ship — it's that Elisa's gate slows everyone except Kai who works around it. If Kai can ship at this pace, why can't Elisa's broader function? This is a Vietnam question.
  

SECTION 03

Where the founder's time went · May 4–11

Above the line · customer-facing

Martin advisory session (99 min)
Vincent 1:1 (partner relationship)
Spike Analysis launch coordination
Spike 2-pager for Hugh/ADAD (due Wed)

Below the line · operational

Fathom transcript pipeline fix
Brain files refresh + advisory deck build
Queue CSV maintenance + Chrome fix
Vietnam agenda prep (this week)

"The gap is not incidental. The gap is the cause." Seeda canonical frame · Apr 20 · still true

Note: this week's above-the-line work included the Martin session and Vietnam prep — crisis management, not pure customer acquisition. The gap between customer-facing time and operational time remains structural. Target: 3+ customer conversations this week before Vietnam.

SECTION 04

The governance crisis · how we got here

Jan 2024

Elisa + Vincent join as co-founders. No formal forming meeting. No decision-rights framework agreed. Gap created
Feb–Apr 2026

Michael injects A$86K+ personal cash into Seeda operating account to cover losses. Partners are not aware of the full picture. Transparency gap
Apr 13, 2026

Martin: "Hope is not a strategy." Circuit breaker prescription. Michael defers Vietnam.
Apr 16, 2026

Leadership meeting: Albert hire raised. Michael warns the business cannot afford it. Motion deferred.
Late Apr, 2026

Elisa + Vincent vote to hire Albert (ML engineer, €60K/yr). Cited "moral obligation" — he had left a full-time job. Michael's warning overridden. Authority breach
Apr 2026

Partners demand: full financial transparency (bank accounts + Xero access) AND higher pay. Michael reads this as "buyer's remorse."
May 4, 2026

Martin session: "You didn't have a forming meeting when you all said, okay, let's do it with these two guys, did you?" Vietnam May 18 locked in. Binary decision
May 11, 2026

TODAY: agenda + success criteria for May 18 agreed with Martin
May 18, 2026

Vietnam · binary decision: full 6-month commitment to 12 clients, OR separation

"Do you shut up the shop?" Martin Rippon · May 4 · forcing Michael to name the binary

Chapter 2

Money

20 min · P&L crisis (reconciled) · Cash · Q2 weighted forecast · 12-client math

SECTION 05

May P&L · the crisis numbers

April loss (actual)

-A$7K

May forecast

-A$15K+

Runway

3–6 mo

Albert added cost

~A$6K/mo

Driver	Monthly impact	Notes
Albert ML engineer (EUR)	-A$6,000+	€60K/yr. Voted in by Elisa + Vincent against Michael's warning. Starts May 4.
Base burn (ex-Albert)	-A$7,000	Apr actual. P&L burn rate ~A$8,700/mo YTD.
Rimon R&D rebate (inflow)	+A$50K	FY25 rebate expected May–Jun. One-time. Not recurring.
Recurring MRR	~A$24–25K/mo	Kleva DRTV+Dashboard + INSP + GR + ShipBob + TCC (if paying)

    Michael has personally funded this business · the math
    A$86K injected Feb–Apr 2026 via 12 "personal loan" transfers (~A$28K/mo from Michael). Operating revenue covered ~A$12K/mo. Combined ~A$40K/mo of total outflow. The P&L shows -A$8.7K/mo because revenue is amortising (unearned income coming down) — but the cash reality is harsher: Michael has been the lender of last resort at ~A$28K/mo for 3 months running.
    
      ScenarioBurn/moCash A$40KRunway

      If Michael stops injections, no SVP/SS~A$15K (P&L + Albert)—~2.7 months
Mid: SVP closes, Michael holds~A$8K—~5 months
Both close, Rimon arrives~A$0 (breakeven)—Indefinite

Scenario	Burn/mo	Cash A$40K	Runway
If Michael stops injections, no SVP/SS	~A$15K (P&L + Albert)	—	~2.7 months
Mid: SVP closes, Michael holds	~A$8K	—	~5 months
Both close, Rimon arrives	~A$0 (breakeven)	—	Indefinite

SECTION 06

Cash position · Apr 26 snapshot

CommBank operating

A$39,966

Director's Loan (Seeda owes Michael)

A$717,758

Equity (accumulated losses)

-A$824K

Inflow (next 60 days)	Amount	Confidence
Rimon FY25 R&D rebate	~A$50,000	Expected May–Jun
Kleva DRTV + Dashboard	A$6,985/mo	High
Inspirations Paint	~A$7,800/mo	High
Global Rescue	~A$6,500/mo	High
GST refund	~A$11,917	Q4 BAS lodgement
Outflow (next 60 days)	Amount	Timing
Payroll May 8 offshore	~A$15–18K	First stress test
Payroll May 25 leadership	~A$14–15K	Recurring
PAYGW remit	A$55,509	May (Michael)
Super remit	A$25,563	Jaime auto-debit pending

SECTION 07

Q2 pipeline · probability-weighted forecast vs $250K target

Q2 target (ARR)

A$250K

Weighted forecast

A$197K

Unweighted ceiling

A$289K

Deal	Gross ARR (A$)	Probability	Weighted	Status
SVP Worldwide	~A$85K	70%	A$60K	90-day eval; demo env risk
Sheet Society	A$119K	60%	A$71K	AUD lock expired; Bed Threads clone needed
Nova Entertainment	~A$85K	30%	A$26K	Articles + meeting pending
Other (small/long-tail)	A$50K	40% blended	A$20K	ReachOut, partner spike deals
Risk: existing churn (Kleva, ROLI, TCC)	-	—	-A$20K	Coffee Club non-pay; Kleva risk
Net probability-weighted Q2			~A$157K + A$40K AR retention = ~A$197K

    Reading the math honestly
    The A$53K gap exists because we are weighting deals at 60–70%, not 100%. SVP at 70% reflects the demo-env risk and 90-day eval framing. Sheet Society at 60% reflects the AUD lock having expired May 1. The realistic upside is A$220–240K if Q2 execution is clean. The realistic downside is A$140K if either SVP or Sheet Society slips a quarter. Michael needs to decide: do we tell partners the weighted forecast or the unweighted ceiling at Vietnam? Different number, different conversation.
  

SECTION 08

What does "12 clients in 6 months" actually mean?

Martin's framing: full 6-month commitment to reach 12 clients = business viable. But this number has never been math-tested in any session. Let's test it.

Scenario	Avg ARPC (A$/mo)	12 clients MRR	Annualised	Burn covered?
Low mix (small Spike + Dashboard only)	A$3,500	A$42K/mo	A$504K/yr	Yes, but thin
Current mix (avg of GR/INSP/Kleva)	A$6,500	A$78K/mo	A$936K/yr	Healthy
High mix (SVP/Sheet Society size)	A$9,000	A$108K/mo	A$1.3M/yr	Strong · plan target met

    The honest read
    "12 clients" is meaningless without an ARPC assumption. With current 5 paying customers averaging ~A$5K/mo, going to 12 at the same blended ARPC delivers ~A$60K/mo MRR (A$720K/yr). That covers full team comp + reasonable burn but does not fund growth. The number that matters is not "12 clients" — it's "are we adding 7 net-new at A$5K+ ARPC in 6 months?"
  

    The acquisition rate that's required
    7 new clients in 6 months = 1.17 net new/month. Q1 actual: +1 net new (Global Rescue). Q4 2025 actual: 0 net new. The required pace is 5–10× the actual pace of the last 6 months. Without a real change in acquisition velocity (Tom + agency partners + Michael's calendar shift), 12 clients in 6 months is a hope, not a plan. This is what Vietnam needs to commit to changing.
  

Chapter 3

GTM

15 min · Q2 close plan · Tom (Supermetrics) · Spike ADAD signal

SECTION 09

Q2 close plan · three deals, seven days

Deal	Next action	Owner	Risk
SVP Worldwide	Elisa co-lead exec demo. Ensure demo env looks better than last time.	Michael + Elisa	Demo env needs polish
Sheet Society	Clone/anonymize Bed Threads demo. Co-lead with Elisa. Joel Goodsir reference call available.	Michael + Elisa	AUD lock expired May 1
Nova Entertainment	Send 2 articles to Nicole Bence. Request next meeting.	Michael	Low urgency vs above two

    Elisa as co-lead · why this matters
    Making Elisa a co-lead on SVP + Sheet Society directly addresses Martin's Apr 13 question about collective ownership of the sales process. Deals become a shared win, not "Michael's dodgy deal." It also gives Elisa skin in Q2 performance at exactly the moment we're asking for partner commitment at Vietnam.
  

SECTION 10

Tom (ex-Supermetrics) · commission-only approach

Contact

Tom (ex-Supermetrics)

Leads available

1,000

Upfront cost

A$0

Tom is an ex-Supermetrics rep with an existing list of 1,000 Supermetrics leads — these are performance marketers already buying data tools, ideal Seeda ICP. Commission-only means zero fixed cost, which matters given the current burn rate. Leverages the trusted relationship Michael already has with Tom.

    Status
    Approach not yet made as at May 5. Michael to reach out this week. This is a two-week unlock for pipeline without a full-time hire, at the exact moment we need sales momentum before Vietnam.
  

SECTION 11

Spike Analysis · the ADAD PMF signal

Launch date

May 4, 2026

ADAD signal

Top growth agency

Matt UAT access

DENIED

Hugh (Tranda) requested a 2-pager for a pitch to ADAD — a top growth agency — for a product that is not yet fully built. May 4 session · PMF signal definition: "people pitch products that don't exist yet"

Signal	What it means
ADAD pitch request	Top growth agency already wants to sell Spike to clients. This is external validation from a credible market participant.
2-pager requested by Hugh/Tranda	Michael to send by Wednesday May 6. Matt + Barton to review copy/positioning.
Matt (Adrenalin) denied UAT	The key reference user for Spike had no test access before launch. This is a process failure — Elisa's perfectionism drove the decision. Fix this week.

SECTION 12

Broader pipeline posture

Segment	Status	Action
hipages	Lost to Mutinex	Closed. Lesson: category competitor. Mutinex won on speed + leadership push.
ReachOut	Qualified, nurture	Social Impact manager timing the gate. Chase by end of week if silent.
Dan commission	0 leads	Zero-cost contract. Floor or exit decision overdue. Can't stay in limbo through Vietnam.
ROLI £15K AR	Paused	Write-off or chase? Bring with finance refresh.
Coffee Club	Non-payment	Deprioritised. Collections action needed before June.

Chapter 4

Product

15 min · MMM B+ · Spike launched · delivery gate problem

SECTION 13

MMM Dashboard · B+ and climbing

Quality grade

B+

Driver

Kai hire

GR pilot

Week 5 of 8

Customer	Status	Next action
Global Rescue #1 priority	Pilot week 5/8. Highly engaged. Strong UI feedback.	Continue. Leverage engagement for case study.
Adrenalin #2 priority	Spike focus. MMM in background.	Get Matt UAT access to Spike ASAP.
Inspirations Paint #3 priority	Active, 12-mo contract.	Use improved MMM (B+) for re-engagement. Slingshot data refresh.
Coffee Club Deprioritised	Non-payment.	Collections before June or pause service.

SECTION 14

Spike Analysis · launched, but key user locked out

Working

Product launched May 4
Hugh/Tranda ADAD pitch request = PMF signal
2-pager in progress (Matt + Barton reviewing)
Kleva DRTV channel proving the concept

Not working

Matt (Adrenalin) denied UAT access before launch
Key reference user had no hands-on time before May 4
Elisa perfectionism driving gate decisions unilaterally
ADAD pitch requires complete product — not fully built yet

    The UAT failure is a governance signal, not just a process miss
    Who decides when a customer gets product access? Right now that decision sits with Elisa. If the answer after Vietnam is "Elisa continues to control this gate," then Matt's UAT miss will repeat. This needs to be on the Vietnam agenda as a decision-rights question.
  

SECTION 15

The 12-month delivery gap

From the canonical frame: Elisa has shipped zero customer-facing features in 12 months. The features that matter most to customers — email notifications, chatbot, self-serve onboarding, UAT pipeline — remain unbuilt.

The product showcase for Martin and the wider team has not yet been scheduled — it's an action item from May 4 that Michael needs to follow up with Elisa. May 4 action item #1 · timestamp 2:06

Feature	Status	Customer impact
Customer email notifications	12+ months unshipped	Kleva cited as gap before Pro Plan pause
Self-serve onboarding	12+ months unshipped	Blocks scaling to 12 clients without delivery cost explosion
Spike Analysis (DRTV)	Launched May 4	Strong PMF signal. UAT access still an issue.
AI Assistant	In development	Roadmap item. Priority vs. above two unclear.

Chapter 5

People

25 min · Governance breach · Partner demands · Decision-rights framework · Plan C · CPO rethink · Cultural lens

MATERIAL EVENTS · 7–10 MAY

What changed since this deck was last built (6 May)

Sub-L1 content — these events were private to Michael + Elisa + Vincent and did not appear in the L1 leadership deck. Martin sees them via L0 cascade. Three events with direct Vietnam relevance.

Sub-L1 · 8 May · Michael + Elisa (Vincent joined) EFFECTIVE TODAY

Sophia + Anne now report directly to Michael · Elisa exits client management

In a 98-minute 3-way call on May 8, Michael, Elisa, and Vincent agreed: 90% of Sophia's interactions will go through Michael. Elisa retains a 10% product coordination role (daily stand-up, human relationship only). Elisa steps completely out of client management — no customer interface, no delivery oversight. Decision was framed as "Elisa cannot do both product and client management." Vincent agreed in the call.

Vietnam implication: The CPO rethink (Ask 2 below) has been partially resolved — Elisa's scope is already being narrowed. Vietnam is no longer about "wrong people in roles" as an abstract question; it is about whether the narrowed scope is sustainable at current comp.

Michael's lean: The restructure was the right call and happened with full partner consent. The question for Martin: does this change what a "yes" looks like at Vietnam — is it commitment in the new roles or commitment to the old scope?

Sub-L1 · 8 May · Comp dispute crystallized

Elisa named three paths · ~$17K AUD retroactive gap claimed · deferred to Vietnam

Elisa believes her contract (10% revenue bonus, never formally replaced) creates a ~$17K AUD retroactive gap Jan–May 2026. Michael's position: Jan 2026 budget replaced the revenue bonus with salary growth tied to revenue milestones. Neither view is settled in writing.

Path AHonour contract · pay the ~$17K gap

Path BAlternative comp for the gap (equity, deferred, other)

Path CReduce scope to part-time (~$3K USD/mo)

Michael committed: send financial clarity by Wed 20 May (post-Vietnam). Ask for Martin: which of A/B/C does Martin think is the most defensible frame given the Vietnam outcome? If partners commit (yes), Path A or B. If not (separation), Path C or mutual release.

Pipeline · 8 May · #1 deal MEETING TODAY 3PM AEST

Rip Curl (KMD Brands) now #1 deal · Amy Stewart GM eCommerce · meeting 4.5 hrs after this session

Amy Stewart (GM eCommerce, KMD Brands — parent of Rip Curl, Kathmandu, Oboz) accepted a meeting for Mon 11 May 3:00pm AEST. Two paths: AUD 25K pilot (current FY close) or AUD 100K full retainer (FY27). This is Michael's most immediate above-the-line commercial opportunity and lands on the same day as this advisory session.

Context for Martin: Michael will need to be fully present and sharp for a CEO-level commercial conversation at 3pm. This session should end with Michael clear on his top 2–3 conversation points for Amy — ICP fit (omni-retail, offline TV + digital), Kleva DRTV proof point (closest comparable), and the pilot structure.

SECTION 16

The governance breach · what happened and why it matters

    The Albert hire vote
    Michael warned the team the business could not afford a new hire. Elisa and Vincent voted to hire ML engineer Albert (€60K/yr, starting May 4) anyway, citing a "moral obligation" — he had left a full-time job to join. The effect: May loss forecast doubles from -A$7K to -A$15K+. Michael's financial authority was overridden by majority vote. There was never a founding agreement that defined how financial decisions are made.
  

Martin's question

"You didn't have a forming meeting when you all said, okay, let's do it with these two guys, did you?"

The implication

Without a forming agreement, there is no agreed decision-rights framework. The Albert vote is its first visible consequence — and it won't be the last.

The Michael factor

Michael has personally injected A$86K+ into the business since Feb 2026 to cover losses. This is the context for the partner demands for transparency and higher pay.

SECTION 17

Partner demands · the pre-Vietnam posture

Demand	Michael's read	Planned response
Bank account access	Buyer's remorse. Trust crisis driven by visible losses.	Share Jan 25+ cash flow proactively before May 18.
Xero access	Reasonable given the financial deterioration — they have a right to understand the state.	Present 18-month financial view as part of Vietnam prep.
Higher pay	Timing is the problem. Business is losing A$15K+/mo. Paying more now = shorter runway.	Tie to Vietnam outcome. Pay increase tied to commitment + 12-client plan.
Comp agreement signed	Framework drafted, not signed. Has been pending since April 13 prescription.	Decision: sign before Vietnam (reduces negotiating lever) or defer to Vietnam outcome?

"Are you prepared to take a candle that we're actually going to crack the code over the next six months?" Martin Rippon · May 4 · the question for Elisa and Vincent

SECTION 17B

The forming agreement we never had · proposed framework

If Vietnam produces a "yes," it must include a written decision-rights framework. Without one, the next Albert-style override happens in 60 days. Proposed structure for Martin to react to:

Decision class	Threshold	Who decides	Override
Hires > A$2K/mo cost	Any	CEO (Michael)	CEO veto absolute
Hires < A$2K/mo cost	Any	Functional lead	CEO informed, no veto
Customer pricing > A$10K commitment	Any	Joint (CEO + product lead)	CEO veto on commercial terms
Product roadmap priority	Quarterly	Joint (CEO + product lead)	CEO veto if cash < 3mo runway
Bank account / Xero access	Read-only	Granted to all 3 partners	No veto · transparency unconditional
Bank account write access	Any	CEO + bookkeeper only	CEO sole signatory
Comp changes (own salary)	Any	Joint board agreement	Tied to milestones, not requests

    The principle
    Transparency = unconditional. Authority = conditional and tiered. Partners get to SEE everything (defuses the secrecy accusation). Partners do NOT get to override financial decisions above a threshold (prevents another Albert hire). This is the trade Michael offers in exchange for the 6-month commitment.
  

SECTION 17D · ADDED 6 MAY

The CPO question · wrong people in product seats?

Michael asked Elisa to be CPO with Vincent's support. Both are data scientists, deep in marketing measurement. The general product-leadership role keeps surfacing as the problem — and the same problem keeps showing up in different sections of this deck.

Surfacing as	Section	Common root
12 months no customer features shipped	S15	Product direction unclear
Matt (Adrenalin) denied UAT — Elisa perfectionism	S14	CX gating decisions sit with wrong owner
ADAD pitch on a not-fully-built product	S11	Product polish lagging market signal
PMF gap (5 customers, none "love us")	S02	Customer-happiness function under-owned
Albert ML hire (more data science capacity)	S04, S16	Adding to the strength, not the gap

    The reframe
    The Vietnam binary as currently framed is "are you in or out for 6 months?" The CPO-rethink reframe is: "are you in for 6 months in your real roles?" Hire an experienced product designer + customer-experience professional to own product direction and customer-happiness. Return Elisa + Vincent fully to marketing measurement and data science — what they actually excel at. The Albert hire then makes more sense (it strengthens their function, not the gap).
  

    The trade-off to surface at Vietnam
    A product/CX hire adds ~A$8–15K/mo at exactly the moment we're firefighting -A$15K/mo May losses. The trade: better product + retained partners + clearer roles vs more burn. With SVP + Sheet Society pipeline at A$197K weighted Q2, the additional cost can be absorbed if both close. Without those closes, this is unaffordable. So the CPO hire and the Q2 pipeline outcome are linked — they sequence together.
  

    The risk
    Elisa may read "you're not the CPO" as demotion rather than realignment, even when paired with explicit data-science ownership. How this is framed at Vietnam matters as much as the substance. (See S17E for cultural lens on this.)
  

SECTION 17E · ADDED 6 MAY

Cultural ownership lens · Irish/UK vs Parisian on public mistakes

Michael's instinct on partner accountability comes from an Irish/UK register: name the mistake publicly, own it publicly, that is how trust gets rebuilt. Vincent (French/Parisian) operates in a different register where public mistake-acknowledgment carries more weight, more risk to standing, more shame.

Behaviour observed	Read 1: governance failure	Read 2: cultural register mismatch
Albert hire override against Michael's warning	Authority breach	"Moral obligation" framing protects standing publicly
Vincent secrecy accusations (April 8, 10pm)	Trust deficit	Pre-emptive defence to avoid being publicly wrong-footed
Dismissal of Michael's weekend builds as "demoralising"	Engagement gap	Public criticism easier than private acknowledgment
Resistance to bank/Xero transparency	"Buyer's remorse"	Public visibility of partner financial position is uncomfortable

    If Read 2 is operative — implications for Vietnam agenda
    The current Vietnam agenda (S21) has a "Their turn · Elisa + Vincent respond" block with everyone in the room (1:30–2:15). In the cultural-mismatch frame, that's a public-acknowledgment moment that may not land. Alternative: private 1:1s with each partner first (Michael + Elisa, then Michael + Vincent), then convene as a group to lock the decision. Same outcome. Different route. More likely to produce a real "yes" rather than a saved-face "yes."
  

    What this is NOT
    This is not Michael excusing partner behaviour or rationalising the governance breach. The Albert override is a real authority breach regardless of cultural lens. But how it's addressed at Vietnam may benefit from a frame that protects partner standing publicly while being binding privately — that's what the decision-rights framework (S17B) does, and the agenda design can reinforce it.
  

SECTION 17C

Plan C · what does separation actually look like?

Martin asked on May 4: "What do you do without a lease from Vincent?" If Vietnam produces a "no" — or a fake yes — Michael needs a documented plan, not an emotional response. Sketch:

Asset / function	Current state	Without Elisa + Vincent
Vietnam team (offshore eng)	Vincent runs day-to-day; Anh manages	High risk · Anh + Kai become primary; need transition plan
VN office lease	Vincent signatory	Need separation · either Vincent retains lease + sub-contracts team, or Seeda re-papers
Product gate / delivery	Elisa controls	Re-org · Kai + Peter step up; Michael owns delivery cadence
Customer relationships	Mostly Michael; some Elisa (Kleva, INSP)	Manageable · 90% Michael-fronted already
Equity / cap table	3-way split (uncatalogued)	Legal · need clean buyout / share repurchase plan
Albert (just-hired ML eng)	Reports to Vincent	Decision needed · keep + reassign, or part ways immediately

    The blunt assessment
    Separation is operationally feasible — Michael fronts most customer work, Kai + Anh + Peter can absorb delivery, IP/ownership is clear. The risk is in two places: (1) the Vietnam team transition (Vincent personally holds key relationships there), and (2) the cap table cleanup (no forming agreement = messier separation paperwork). Michael needs to walk into Vietnam with this plan known but unstated — confidence that there is a Plan C is what makes a real "yes" possible.
  

Chapter 6

Asks

45 min · Open items · 7 decision-forcing asks · Vietnam agenda draft · Pre-Vietnam checklist

SECTION 18

Open items · status as at 11 May

#	Item	Priority	Status
1	R&D tax rebate (Rimon)	Passive	Expected May–Jun. ~A$50K inflow. Process passive.
2	Vietnam May 18 · binary decision	Urgent	LOCKED IN. Agenda structure to agree today.
4	Written comp agreement (Elisa + Vincent)	Urgent	8 May update: Elisa named 3 paths (A: pay gap, B: alt comp, C: reduce scope). Comp deferred to Vietnam outcome. See material events block above.
5	Dan commission decision	High	0 leads sustained. Floor or exit — decision overdue.
7	Tom (Supermetrics) commission-only approach	High	Not yet made as at May 10. Outreach must happen this week.
9	Albert hire governance breach	Urgent	Must surface at Vietnam without becoming blame conversation.
10	Partner financial demands (bank + Xero)	Urgent	Not yet done. Must send Jan 25+ cash flow before May 18. Tuesday May 12 is the window.
11	Spike 2-pager to Hugh (Tranda)	Overdue Wed 6	Status unconfirmed as at May 10. Confirm with Michael: sent or not?
12	SVP + Sheet Society demos	High	8 May update: Elisa exits client management effective today. Demo co-lead model may need to be revisited. Michael likely solo on these now.
13	Vietnam agenda document	Due today	Draft + agree structure + success criteria with Martin at this session.
NEW	Rip Curl (KMD Brands) · #1 deal · meeting today 3pm	Today	Amy Stewart (GM eCommerce) meeting at 3pm AEST. AUD 25K pilot or AUD 100K FY27 retainer. 4.5hrs after this session.

SECTION 19

Decisions from May 4 · retrospective

#	Decision	Martin's input	Status
1	Vietnam May 18 · binary decision meeting	Shaped the binary: full 6-month commitment to 12 clients OR separation	Locked in
2	Tom (ex-Supermetrics) commission-only approach	Pursue lowest-cost path to pipeline	Not yet made
3	Michael + Elisa co-lead SVP + Sheet Society demos	Fix the sales undervaluation theme — Elisa as co-owner	Co-lead model revised · May 8: Elisa exits client management. Demo structure may revert to Michael solo. Demos still unscheduled.
4	Client priority locked: GR #1, Adrenalin #2, INSP/TCC #3	Agreed prioritisation	Agreed
5	Spike 2-pager to Hugh by Wed + Matt + Barton copy review	Act fast on PMF signal	In progress
6	Share Jan 25+ cash flow + 18-month financials with partners	Proactive transparency defuses secrecy accusation	Not yet done

May 8 sub-L1 decision (not in May 4 log): Sophia + Anne moved to report directly to Michael. Elisa exits client management completely. Agreed 3-way (Michael + Elisa + Vincent) in 98-min call. Effective today. This is the structural decision that landed.

    Pattern from the decisions log
    Structural decisions from Martin's sessions land (Vietnam locked in, client priority set, and now the client management restructure made on May 8). Behavioural + operational decisions lag (Tom not approached, financials not shared, demos unscheduled). The pattern is consistent across three consecutive sessions.
  

Ask 1 of 5 · Strategic · 12 min · LEAVE WITH A DECISION

Vietnam structure · which of these four agenda shapes do we use?

This is not a discussion. By the end of this ask, Michael leaves with one chosen agenda shape and Martin's reasoning. The agenda draft (S22) is then edited to match.

(a) Money first Open with full financial reality (cash, runway, A$86K injection). Force partners to react. Then ask the commitment question with the numbers in their hands.

(b) Commitment first Open with "I need to know if you are in for 6 months." Get a position before the numbers. Then walk through finance after.

(c) Story-arc Walk back to the forming-meeting gap. Frame Albert as symptom, not cause. End on the forward proposal (decision-rights framework + 6-month plan).

(d) Split-room Michael + Martin frame for 30 min. Then Michael leaves the room for 1 hour. Elisa + Vincent decide privately. Reconvene to hear their answer.

Ask 2 of 7 · UPDATED 10 MAY · HIGH PRIORITY · 8 min

CPO role rethink — wrong people in product seats?

10 May update: The client management dimension of this question was resolved on May 8 — Elisa has stepped out of client management, effective today. The remaining open question is specifically about product leadership: is Elisa (data scientist) the right owner for product direction, or should Seeda hire an experienced product designer + CX professional? The Vietnam frame has shifted: not "wrong roles" broadly, but "wrong product owner specifically."

The pattern surfaces in S02, S11, S14, S15, S17D: data scientists asked to drive general product/CX, product/CX keeps coming up short. Michael's lean is to hire an experienced product designer + CX professional, return Elisa + Vincent to pure data science. Now that the client management piece is settled, this ask is purely about the product ownership question.

(a) Reframe validity Is the role-fit lens a clean way to address the partner crisis without forcing a full break, or is Michael avoiding the harder commitment question?

(b) Vietnam sequencing Bring the product/CX hire proposal to Vietnam as part of the package, or hold in reserve depending on the partner response in the room?

(c) Cost vs benefit Adds ~A$8–15K/mo at peak burn. Closeable only if SVP + Sheet Society both sign Q2. Worth the trade?

(d) Demotion risk Elisa may read this as demotion regardless of how it's framed. How does Martin recommend introducing it without that read landing?

Ask 3 of 7 · NEW · 6 min

Cultural ownership lens — Irish/UK vs Parisian on public mistakes

Michael's instinct on partner accountability is Irish/UK: name + own publicly. Vincent's register may be Parisian: public ownership carries more shame, more risk to standing. Some of what we read as governance failure (Albert override, secrecy accusations, transparency resistance) may be cultural register mismatch. See S17E for the matrix.

(a) Frame validity Does Martin agree the cultural lens is operative here, or is Michael being too generous?

(b) Agenda design If yes — does the Vietnam "Their turn" block (1:30–2:15) need to become private 1:1s before group convene?

(c) Language Is there language Michael should/shouldn't use in the room that lands harder or softer in a French context?

(d) Binding-but-private Should the comp/decision-rights framework have a non-public version that protects partner standing while still being binding?

Ask 4 · 4 min · BINARY

Partner financials: share Jan 25+ cash flow before May 18, or in the May 18 room?

Michael's lean: BEFORE. Pre-empts the "secrecy" accusation, gives partners 5 days to absorb the numbers, removes emotional shock from the Vietnam room. Martin: confirm or counter, then we send Tuesday May 12.

Ask 5 · 4 min · BINARY

Albert: do we name the override directly in Vietnam, or let the decision-rights framework speak for itself?

Michael's lean: name it directly. Without naming it, the framework reads as Michael being controlling. Naming it as "the moment that proved we needed this" turns it from blame into evidence. Martin: confirm framing or propose alternative.

Ask 6 · 4 min · BINARY

Comp agreement: sign before May 18, or make it a Vietnam outcome?

Michael's lean: make it a Vietnam outcome. Signing before reduces the negotiating lever and rewards partners before they've committed. After Vietnam yes-vote, comp is signed within 48 hours. Martin: confirm or counter.

Ask 7 · 4 min · BINARY

Spike UAT / Matt: fix this week as one-off, or take it into Vietnam as a delivery-governance question?

Michael's lean: both. Get Matt access this week (immediate). Use the UAT failure as a concrete example in Vietnam of why the decision-rights framework matters. Martin: agree, or argue for keeping it tactical only.

Time discipline · 45 min total for asks. Ask 1 (Vietnam structure) is the deep one (12 min) because it sets the agenda shape. Asks 2–3 (CPO rethink + cultural lens) are NEW high-priority items added 6 May (8 + 6 min) because they may reshape the Vietnam approach itself. Asks 4–7 are 4 min each — Michael states the lean, Martin agrees or pushes, decision recorded. If Martin wants to discuss longer than 4 min on any of 4–7, that's a signal we have the wrong frame.

SECTION 21

Vietnam agenda draft v0 · Martin edits this live in the room

This is the deliverable Michael takes into Vietnam on May 18. Martin's job today is to edit, reorder, or rewrite this. Print this page and mark it up.

Vietnam · 18 May 2026 · 3-hour session

Attendees: Michael, Elisa, Vincent (Martin remote dial-in optional)
Goal: Binary commitment to a 6-month plan with documented decision rights, OR clean separation.
What Michael walks out with: A signed page with each partner's name, "yes/no," and date.

Time	Block	Owner
0:00–0:15	Frame. Why we're here. The Albert hire surfaced a gap we never closed. Today fixes it or ends it.	Michael
0:15–0:45	Reality. Walk through Jan 25+ cash flow. A$86K personal injection. May -A$15K+. The next 12 months requires either commitment + structure or a clean exit.	Michael (numbers pre-shared May 12)
0:45–1:15	Proposal. The 6-month plan: 12 clients, decision-rights framework, transparency-unconditional + authority-tiered. What Michael commits to. What partners commit to.	Michael
1:15–1:30	Break · 15 min · everyone steps outside.	—
1:30–2:15	Their turn. Elisa + Vincent respond. What's missing. What they need. What they will NOT accept.	Elisa + Vincent (Michael listens)
2:15–2:45	Negotiate or decide. Either we agree on amendments, or we acknowledge we're not aligned.	All three
2:45–3:00	Sign or part. Each partner names their position in writing on a single page. No soft "we'll think about it." A written yes/no with date.	All three

    The success criterion (Martin verbatim · May 4)
    "What would success look like for you coming out of the Vietnam meeting?"

    Michael's draft answer: A signed page with each partner's name and either "I commit to the 6-month plan as written" or "I am exiting." No third option. No soft maybe. The fake yes is the failure mode — a written commitment removes that option.
  

SECTION 22

Between today and Vietnam · Michael's 7-day execution checklist

Day	Action	Owner / dependency
Mon 11 May (today)	10:30am: Finalise Vietnam agenda + decision-rights framework with Martin (this session) 3:00pm: Rip Curl (KMD Brands) — Amy Stewart · #1 deal · AUD 25K pilot or AUD 100K FY27 — above-the-line commercial conversation immediately after this session	Martin's edits at 10:30am · Amy Stewart at 3pm
Tue 12 May	Send Jan 25+ cash flow + 18-month financial view to Elisa + Vincent (no commentary, just numbers + 1-page narrative)	Michael (Adeel + Ibrahim verify)
Tue 12 May	Reach out to Tom (ex-Supermetrics) re commission-only role	Michael
Wed 13 May	Brand identity Workshop #3 (Elisa + Vincent in person · pulse-check on engagement)	Michael + Jason + Martin
Wed 13 May	Spike 2-pager confirmed sent to Hugh (Tranda); Matt + Barton review complete	Michael (already due Wed 6)
Thu 14 May	SVP exec demo (demo env polished) · Note: Elisa exits client management effective 11 May — confirm whether Michael leads solo or Elisa still co-presents	Michael (Elisa participation TBC)
Fri 15 May	Sheet Society demo (Bed Threads anonymised clone)	Michael (Elisa participation TBC)
Fri 15 May	Print + finalise Vietnam agenda + 6-month plan + decision-rights framework (one binder Michael flies with)	Michael
Sat 16 May	Travel to Vietnam	Michael
Sun 17 May	Final pre-meeting call with Martin (confirm framing, last-minute adjustments)	Michael + Martin
Mon 18 May	Vietnam · 3-hour session · binary outcome documented	All three partners

The discipline test: If by Wed 13 May any of: Tom not contacted, financials not sent, demo env not polished — those are signals Michael is reverting to "below the line" execution while Vietnam looms. Martin: please call this directly if it happens, including via Slack DM.

"What would success look like for you coming out of the Vietnam meeting?" Martin Rippon · May 4 · answered today, executed by May 18

Seeda Advisory · 11 May 2026 · Woollahra Library, Double Bay · 10:30am – 12:30pm
Level 0 · Michael Kingston + Martin Rippon only · Never deploy to deck.seeda.io or any public URL
Built: 5 May · v2 chairman-grade revision · v3 added 6 May (CPO rethink S17D, cultural-ownership lens S17E, asks 2+3 high priority) · smart-merged 10 May: 3 material events (May 8 restructure + comp dispute 3 paths + Rip Curl #1 deal) · Source: brain/ files + May 4 session + May 8 sub-L1 transcript + pipeline.md