speckl/docs/strategy.md

Speckl Strategy v2 — Plan D That Feeds B Through A & C

The open standard is the root. Everything else grows from it. Prepared by @cos for Scott Scoble · 2026-04-28

Parent: Greybeard Holdings, LLC Structure: Bootstrapped, Scott is CEO Edge: We don't need a target customer yet — we build the standard first and let the market find us

---

Core Thesis

Plan D (open standard + foundation) is not one option among four. It is the engine. All revenue flies by on the credibility, adoption, and ecosystem that the open standard builds.

The flow: Open standard (D) builds the language and community → hands-on consulting (C) validates the methodology and funds development → SaaS (A) scales it to more teams and generates real provenance graph data → compliance API (B) monetizes that data at enterprise margins.

---

Phase 1 (Now → 3 months) — Establish the Standard (D + C)

Goal: SpeckDL is real, public, and proven in at least one real system.

Plan D Actions

• Open-source SpeckDL under Apache 2.0 or MIT on Forgejo/GitHub
  • Publish the language spec, a minimal reference compiler, and Z3 verification example
  • README: "The spec-first language for auditable software" — includes links to methodology paper
• Publish the Dark Provenance whitepaper
  • Title: "Dark Provenance: Tracing Intent in AI-Augmented Development"
  • Target: arxiv, dev blogs, standards-body working groups
  • Positioning: formal methods for the AI age — when agents write code, you need provenance
• Create a Speckl playground — browser-based where you write a Speck and see the compiled output + provenance graph
• Register speckl.dev / speckl.ai, set up minimal site

Plan C Actions (funds D)

• Sign 1–2 consulting engagements with regulated-industry companies
  • Ideal profile: startup in health-tech or fintech that needs compliance from day 1
  • Deliverable: a functioning Speckl system + trained team + full compliance traceability
  • Price: $25k–$75k per engagement
• Use these to validate:
  • Is SpeckDL expressive enough for real specs?
  • Does the tiered agent harness actually reduce spec-to-ship time?
  • What do compliance auditors actually need?

Phase 1 Budget

Item	Cost
Time (yours)	~20h/week
Hosting/domains	~$50/mo
Open-source infra	$0 (Forgejo/Cloudflare)
Total burn	~$50/mo
Revenue target	$25k–$150k (consulting)

---

Phase 2 (3 → 9 months) — Build the SaaS (A, fed by D + C)

Goal: Self-serve Speckl dev tool with paying users; consulting case studies feeding the marketing engine.

Plan A Launch

• Speckl SaaS — hosted platform where teams write Specks, the agent harness verifies them, and the platform maintains the provenance graph
• Landing features:
  • Speck editor with live Z3 verification
  • Agent harness: Orchestrator → Team Lead → SME tier auto-scaling
  • TillDone condition tracking
  • Provenance graph browser (view the full trace tree)
• Pricing:
  • Free: 3 specs/month, public provenance graph
  • Team: $99/seat/mo, private, unlimited specs
  • Enterprise: custom, on-prem option

How D feeds A

• Open-source SpeckDL means new users arrive already familiar with the DSL
• Community contributors find bugs, suggest features, write integrations
• The playground converts browsers → SaaS signups
• Certification program creates a pipeline of "Speckl Certified" engineers who recommend the SaaS

How C feeds A

• Consulting case studies become the sales deck: "How [client] saved $X in audit prep using Speckl"
• Consulting engagements expose real-world requirements that shape the SaaS roadmap
• Consulting clients become reference accounts and early enterprise SaaS customers

Phase 2 Budget

Item	Cost
SaaS infra (DO/Vercel)	~$200/mo
Domain + certs	~$200/yr
Time (yours + potentially 1 contractor)	~$5k/mo
Total burn	~$5.5k/mo
Revenue target	$0 → $5k MRR

---

Phase 3 (9 → 18 months) — The Compliance API (B, fed by A)

Goal: Enterprise compliance product with real provenance graph data to stand on.

Plan B Launch

• Speckl Compliance API — a standalone API that plugs into existing CI/CD
  • Ingest: spec documents, requirements, code
  • Output: compliance evidence bundles, traceability matrices, audit-ready reports
  • Compliance packs: DO-178C ($500/report), IEC 62304 ($500), SOC 2 ($300), ISO 26262 ($500)
• Pricing:
  • API usage: $0.01/provenance-edge/mo
  • Enterprise: $50k–$100k/yr for unlimited provenance + compliance packs + SLA

How A feeds B

• Every SaaS user generates real provenance graph data — this validates the methodology at scale
• SaaS feature requests reveal what compliance officers actually need to see
• The SaaS pays the bills while B ramps (long enterprise sales cycle)

How D continues feeding

• The open standard is the market's trust signal — "this isn't proprietary lock-in, it's an ecosystem"
• Standards bodies (SAE, IEEE, FDA working groups) adopt Dark Provenance methodology
• Speckl certification becomes a credential, and B product becomes the tool certified teams use

Phase 3 Budget

Item	Cost
Infra (scaled)	~$2k/mo
Team (you + 2 engineers)	~$20k/mo
Compliance partnerships	~$5k/mo
Total burn	~$27k/mo
Revenue target	$15k–$50k MRR

---

Ownership & Governance

Speckl operates as a brand/property within Greybeard Holdings, LLC. Not a separate entity.

• SpeckDL is open-source (MIT/Apache 2.0)
• Dark Provenance methodology is published freely
• Trademark "Speckl" and certification authority held by Greybeard Holdings
• Commercial products (SaaS, API, consulting) are Greybeard Holdings revenue lines under the Speckl brand
• Simple, lean, no overhead. If Speckl grows to the point where separation makes sense (acquisition target, foundation needed for standards-body adoption), we spin it out then

---

Metrics Dashboard

The one number that matters at each phase:

Phase	North Star Metric	Why
1 (D+C)	Specks written on the open standard	Adoption = future revenue
2 (A)	Provenance graphs created (SaaS)	Real usage = product-market fit
3 (B)	Compliance reports exported	Revenue + stickiness

Secondary:

• Community contributors (Phase 1)
• MRR (Phase 2–3)
• NPS among compliance officers (Phase 3)

---

Next Actions (In Motion)

All parameters cleared. Dispatching now:

• @engineering — Set up Forgejo repo sscoble/speckl with MIT license, language scaffold, and README
• @market — Research the regulatory-software landscape, identify where SpeckDL fits, map competitor landscape
• @content — Draft the Dark Provenance whitepaper for publication
• @vault — Index all speckl-related vault notes and build a searchable knowledge base

No customer target needed. We build the standard, publish the methodology, and let the market find us.