format: apply repo prettier (3.8.1) to the folded skills tree
963 markdown files reformatted with the repository's pinned prettier so pnpm format:check covers the folded tree like every other repo file. The formatter's embedded-language pass also normalized code fences (TS semicolons, closed HTML tags in examples, lowercased CSS hex colors, one renumbered list that skipped an index). Alphanumeric token deltas vs the fold commit were audited file-by-file; all are formatter-equivalent markup normalizations plus the four sanitized skills.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ Real-world examples of successful referral programs.
|
||||
**Program:** Give 500MB storage, get 500MB storage
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it worked:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Reward directly tied to product value
|
||||
- Low friction (just an email)
|
||||
- Both parties benefit equally
|
||||
@@ -19,6 +20,7 @@ Real-world examples of successful referral programs.
|
||||
**Program:** Give $10 ride credit, get $10 when they ride
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it worked:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Immediate, clear value
|
||||
- Double-sided incentive
|
||||
- Easy to share (code/link)
|
||||
@@ -29,12 +31,14 @@ Real-world examples of successful referral programs.
|
||||
## Morning Brew
|
||||
|
||||
**Program:** Tiered rewards for subscriber referrals
|
||||
|
||||
- 3 referrals: Newsletter stickers
|
||||
- 5 referrals: T-shirt
|
||||
- 10 referrals: Mug
|
||||
- 25 referrals: Hoodie
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it worked:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Gamification drives ongoing engagement
|
||||
- Physical rewards are shareable (more referrals)
|
||||
- Low cost relative to subscriber value
|
||||
@@ -47,6 +51,7 @@ Real-world examples of successful referral programs.
|
||||
**Program:** $10 credit per referral (education)
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it worked:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Targeted high-sharing audience (students)
|
||||
- Product naturally spreads in teams
|
||||
- Credit keeps users engaged
|
||||
@@ -55,31 +60,34 @@ Real-world examples of successful referral programs.
|
||||
|
||||
## Incentive Types Comparison
|
||||
|
||||
| Type | Pros | Cons | Best For |
|
||||
|------|------|------|----------|
|
||||
| Cash/credit | Universally valued | Feels transactional | Marketplaces, fintech |
|
||||
| Product credit | Drives usage | Only valuable if they'll use it | SaaS, subscriptions |
|
||||
| Free months | Clear value | May attract freebie-seekers | Subscription products |
|
||||
| Feature unlock | Low cost to you | Only works for gated features | Freemium products |
|
||||
| Swag/gifts | Memorable, shareable | Logistics complexity | Brand-focused companies |
|
||||
| Charity donation | Feel-good | Lower personal motivation | Mission-driven brands |
|
||||
| Type | Pros | Cons | Best For |
|
||||
| ---------------- | -------------------- | ------------------------------- | ----------------------- |
|
||||
| Cash/credit | Universally valued | Feels transactional | Marketplaces, fintech |
|
||||
| Product credit | Drives usage | Only valuable if they'll use it | SaaS, subscriptions |
|
||||
| Free months | Clear value | May attract freebie-seekers | Subscription products |
|
||||
| Feature unlock | Low cost to you | Only works for gated features | Freemium products |
|
||||
| Swag/gifts | Memorable, shareable | Logistics complexity | Brand-focused companies |
|
||||
| Charity donation | Feel-good | Lower personal motivation | Mission-driven brands |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Incentive Sizing Framework
|
||||
|
||||
**Calculate your maximum incentive:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Max Referral Reward = (Customer LTV × Gross Margin) - Target CAC
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
|
||||
- LTV: $1,200
|
||||
- Gross margin: 70%
|
||||
- Target CAC: $200
|
||||
- Max reward: ($1,200 × 0.70) - $200 = $640
|
||||
|
||||
**Typical referral rewards:**
|
||||
|
||||
- B2C: $10-50 or 10-25% of first purchase
|
||||
- B2B SaaS: $50-500 or 1-3 months free
|
||||
- Enterprise: Higher, often custom
|
||||
@@ -91,6 +99,7 @@ Max Referral Reward = (Customer LTV × Gross Margin) - Target CAC
|
||||
### Key Metrics
|
||||
|
||||
**Viral coefficient (K-factor):**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
K = Invitations × Conversion Rate
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -99,16 +108,19 @@ K < 1 = Amplified growth (referrals supplement other acquisition)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Average customer sends 3 invitations
|
||||
- 15% of invitations convert
|
||||
- K = 3 × 0.15 = 0.45
|
||||
|
||||
**Referral rate:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Referral Rate = (Customers who refer) / (Total customers)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Benchmarks:
|
||||
|
||||
- Good: 10-25% of customers refer
|
||||
- Great: 25-50%
|
||||
- Exceptional: 50%+
|
||||
@@ -116,6 +128,7 @@ Benchmarks:
|
||||
**Referrals per referrer:**
|
||||
|
||||
Benchmarks:
|
||||
|
||||
- Average: 1-2 referrals per referrer
|
||||
- Good: 2-5
|
||||
- Exceptional: 5+
|
||||
@@ -129,6 +142,7 @@ Program costs = Rewards paid + Tool costs + Management time
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Track separately:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Cost per referred customer (CAC via referral)
|
||||
- LTV of referred customers (often higher than average)
|
||||
- Payback period for referral rewards
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user