Page last edited: checking…
Artefact 04 · 05

Market & Pricing

Two artefacts on one page. Market sizing decomposes the SG SME AI-workflow opportunity into TAM (every SG SME 5–200 staff that could plausibly deploy an AI workflow product), SAM (the 10–200 headcount workflow-pain ICP where pre-built agentic workflows fit), and SOM (the wedge XinceAI can plausibly capture in 12–18 months given founder-led GTM and JR+ pre-approved status). The pricing strategy half profiles the three Archetype A/B/C buyer personas, surfaces willingness-to-pay bands derived from displaced-spend NBA arithmetic, and recommends three pricing tiers anchored against grant-stacked effective price. Cross-link to competitor analytics, whitespace, JR+ Reframe, design audit, the printable report, the legacy v2 / v1 archives, or the public site.

Market sizing

TAM → SAM → SOM

Strategic implications

What the sizing means

Regulatory landscape

Policies

Pricing strategy

Personas with structured NBA arithmetic

Each persona's nba.monthly_sgd_equivalent is the displaced-spend baseline. The expected WTP must sit between 0.4× and 1.2× that figure (annualised), or the persona is flagged exploratory.

Tier ladder

Recommended pricing tiers

Three tiers, each priced against a single Archetype persona's NBA. JR+ / PSG / EDG / SFEC stacker drops the effective price into the SG SME 'approve without escalation' band — that's the column buyers actually compare against.