Skip to main content

One-Page Plan

Can an investor or board member understand the bet, inspect the proof trail, see the economics, compare alternatives, and take the next action from one page?

The one-page plan is not a mini business plan. It is the compression artifact between source instruments and the investment package.

Primary audience: Investor / Board.

Founder/operator adaptation: keep the same structure, but replace investor language with the internal decision owner, resource ask, operating milestone, and stop rule.

Instrument Flow

Upstream

These instruments feed the one-page plan. Do not invent material on this page.

Adjacent

These instruments strengthen, challenge, or qualify the plan.

Sibling — Venture Proposal Set

These four pages and the one-page plan together form the canonical venture proposal set. Each page does a different job for a different reader; cross-link from each so the reader can route to the right depth.

Downstream

These instruments consume the one-page plan.

Source Map

One-page sectionPrimary source instrumentSupporting instrumentDownstream consumer
ProblemIdea CaptureICPPitch Deck
CustomerICPGTM StrategyLead Magnet
SolutionIdea CaptureModel SelectionPRD Spec
Why NowOpportunity ScannerAI SWOTVenture Presentation
MarketGTM StrategyInvestor MapPitch Deck
ModelModel SelectionUnit EconomicsData Room
Proof / TractionScorecardLead MagnetData Room
CompetitionPositioning StatementPortfolio ReviewPitch Deck
NumbersUnit Economics / Cash Flow / ROICap Table / Valuation CompsData Room
AskInvestor MapCap TablePitch Deck
Kill SignalScorecardCash FlowPortfolio Review

Claim Tags

Every major claim must carry one tag:

  • FACT: observed, evidenced, or contractually true.
  • ESTIMATE: calculated from known inputs.
  • ASSUMPTION: required belief that has not been proven.
  • UNKNOWN: open issue that affects the decision.

Use the tag inline: [FACT] 14 paying customers as of 2026-05-01, from Stripe export.

Number Rules

Every number needs:

  • source instrument or source file
  • source date
  • confidence: high / medium / low
  • status: proven / projected / inferred

Number format:

[ESTIMATE] CAC: $180 | source: Unit Economics | date: 2026-05-01 | confidence: medium | status: projected

Procedure

  1. Pull from completed source instruments. Do not write from scratch.
  2. Keep each section to one tight sentence, one short list, or one number block.
  3. Tag every major claim as FACT, ESTIMATE, ASSUMPTION, or UNKNOWN.
  4. Give every financial number source, date, confidence, and status.
  5. Include direct competitors, indirect alternatives, and the status quo.
  6. Make the ask decidable: amount or commitment, use of funds or resources, milestone unlocked, terms or decision owner, and deadline.
  7. Make the kill signal falsifiable and name what happens if triggered.
  8. Test: can a reader decide whether to take the meeting, fund the stage, or request the data room in 60 seconds?

The One Page

1. Company Purpose

[One sentence: why the company exists and what future it is trying to make real. Source: Idea Capture. Tag each claim.]

2. Audience + Decision

[Who is reading, what decision they must make, by when, and what happens next. Source: Investor Map or internal decision map.]

3. Problem

[Who has the problem, what it costs, and why current workarounds fail. Source: Idea Capture + ICP.]

4. Customer

[Primary buyer, user, urgency trigger, and budget owner. Source: ICP + GTM Strategy.]

5. Solution

[What the product/service does differently and what changes for the customer. Source: Idea Capture + Model Selection.]

6. Why Now

[Timing force: market, regulation, technology, distribution, cost curve, or behaviour shift. Source: Opportunity Scanner + AI SWOT.]

7. Market / Opportunity

[Reachable opportunity, not generic TAM. Include the segment, channel, and buying path. Source: GTM Strategy + Investor Map.]

8. Business Model

[How money flows, pricing, gross margin logic, and scaling constraint. Source: Model Selection + Unit Economics.]

9. Proof / Traction

[Evidence that the problem, solution, distribution, or economics are real. Source: Operations Scorecard + Lead Magnet Strategy.]

10. Competition / Alternatives

[Direct competitors, indirect alternatives, and status quo. Source: Positioning Statement + Portfolio Review.]

11. Numbers

MetricValueSourceDateConfidenceStatus
Price / ACV$Unit EconomicsYYYY-MM-DDhigh / medium / lowproven / projected / inferred
Gross margin%Unit EconomicsYYYY-MM-DDhigh / medium / lowproven / projected / inferred
CAC / payback$ / monthsUnit Economics / ROI AnalysisYYYY-MM-DDhigh / medium / lowproven / projected / inferred
LTV:CAC / benefit:costratioUnit Economics / ROI AnalysisYYYY-MM-DDhigh / medium / lowproven / projected / inferred
Break-evenmonthCash Flow ProjectionYYYY-MM-DDhigh / medium / lowproven / projected / inferred
12-month revenue or benefit$Cash Flow ProjectionYYYY-MM-DDhigh / medium / lowproven / projected / inferred
Total investment needed$ROI Analysis / Cap TableYYYY-MM-DDhigh / medium / lowproven / projected / inferred

12. Team / Edge

[Why this team can win: unfair access, expertise, distribution, data, speed, trust, or operational advantage. Source: Idea Capture + Positioning Statement.]

13. Ask

[Amount or commitment, use of funds/resources, milestone unlocked, terms or decision owner, and deadline. Source: Investor Map + Cap Table.]

14. Kill Signal

[Falsifiable stop rule, measurement date, owner, and consequence. Source: Operations Scorecard + Cash Flow Projection.]

15. Next Action

[The next concrete action: meeting, diligence request, data room access, vote, pilot approval, or stage gate. Source: Ask + downstream consumer.]


Do Not Include

  • Generic TAM with no reachable segment or buying path.
  • "No competitors."
  • Unsupported ROI, payback, or margin claims.
  • A vague ask.
  • Hidden assumptions.
  • Numbers without source, date, confidence, and status.
  • A kill signal that cannot actually kill the bet.

Scoring Rubric

Score each dimension from 1 to 5.

Dimension135
AttentionGeneric and slow.Clear enough to keep reading.The bet is visible in the first 10 seconds.
Decision clarityNo explicit decision.Decision named but weakly framed.Reader knows exactly what to approve, reject, or request.
ProofClaims are mostly unsupported.Some claims link to evidence.Every major claim has a tag and source trail.
EconomicsNumbers are missing or decorative.Core numbers present.Economics are sourced, dated, confidence-rated, and decision-useful.
RiskRisks are softened.Main risk named.Alternatives, assumptions, and kill signal are explicit.
ActionNext step is vague.Next step exists.Next action has owner, deadline, and trigger.

Investor/board standard: no dimension below 4.

Gold Standard

TradeBooks

1. Company Purpose

[ASSUMPTION] TradeBooks exists to make bookkeeping disappear for small NZ trade firms so owners can spend Friday on jobs and family instead of coding bank lines.

2. Audience + Decision

[FACT] This page is for angel investors deciding by 2026-06-15 whether to fund a $85K pre-seed stage that must prove 50 paying customers before a larger seed round.

3. Problem

[ESTIMATE] NZ trade business owners with 5-20 staff lose one working day per month on bookkeeping because horizontal tools do not understand trade-specific transactions.

Source: ICP + Idea Capture | date: 2026-05-01 | confidence: medium | status: inferred

4. Customer

[FACT] The first buyer is an owner-operator of a plumbing, electrical, or building firm in NZ who uses Xero and either does the books personally or pays at least $500/month for help.

Source: ICP interviews | date: 2026-04-28 | confidence: medium | status: proven

5. Solution

[ASSUMPTION] TradeBooks is an AI bookkeeper trained on trade-specific bank patterns: it reads the feed, codes transactions, flags anomalies, and exports to Xero.

Source: Idea Capture + Model Selection | date: 2026-05-01 | confidence: medium | status: projected

6. Why Now

[FACT] Small firms already trust Xero as the accounting system of record, and AI classification quality now makes narrow transaction coding cheap enough to test in a focused vertical.

Source: Opportunity Scanner + AI SWOT | date: 2026-05-02 | confidence: medium | status: inferred

7. Market / Opportunity

[ESTIMATE] Reachable wedge is 1,200 NZ trade firms with 5-20 staff reachable through trade associations, accountants, and Xero-adjacent referrals.

Source: GTM Strategy + Investor Map | date: 2026-05-02 | confidence: low | status: inferred

8. Business Model

[ESTIMATE] SaaS subscription at $99/month per business with no setup fee and an 88% projected gross margin after AI processing and support costs.

Source: Model Selection + Unit Economics | date: 2026-05-03 | confidence: medium | status: projected

9. Proof / Traction

[FACT] 14 owners joined the waitlist from two trade association posts; 6 completed discovery interviews; 3 shared anonymised bank exports for testing.

Source: Operations Scorecard + Lead Magnet Strategy | date: 2026-05-04 | confidence: high | status: proven

10. Competition / Alternatives

[FACT] Direct competitors are bookkeeping automation tools; indirect alternatives are outsourced bookkeepers and accountants; status quo is owner-coded Xero reconciliation after hours.

Source: Positioning Statement + Portfolio Review | date: 2026-05-02 | confidence: high | status: proven

11. Numbers

MetricValueSourceDateConfidenceStatus
Price$99/monthUnit Economics2026-05-03mediumprojected
Cost per account$12/monthUnit Economics2026-05-03mediumprojected
Gross margin88%Unit Economics2026-05-03mediumprojected
CAC$180Unit Economics2026-05-03lowprojected
LTV:CAC8.2:1ROI Analysis2026-05-03lowprojected
Break-evenMonth 9Cash Flow Projection2026-05-03mediumprojected
Total investment needed$85KROI Analysis + Cap Table2026-05-03mediumprojected

12. Team / Edge

[FACT] The founding team combines trade operating experience with accounting automation skill, giving it faster access to real bank patterns than a horizontal SaaS entrant.

Source: Idea Capture + Positioning Statement | date: 2026-05-01 | confidence: medium | status: inferred

13. Ask

[ESTIMATE] Ask is $85K for 9 months of runway to ship the Xero-connected MVP, onboard 50 paying customers, and reach Month 9 break-even; proposed terms are 15% equity, decision by 2026-06-15.

Source: Investor Map + Cap Table | date: 2026-05-05 | confidence: medium | status: projected

14. Kill Signal

[ASSUMPTION] If TradeBooks has fewer than 20 paying customers after 6 months of active sales, stop new product spend, return unused capital, and convert the learning into a services-only bookkeeping automation offer.

Source: Operations Scorecard + Cash Flow Projection | date: 2026-05-05 | confidence: medium | status: projected

15. Next Action

[FACT] Send the data room by 2026-05-20, hold a 45-minute investor diligence call by 2026-05-27, and request written soft commitments by 2026-06-05.

Source: Investor Map + Data Room | date: 2026-05-05 | confidence: high | status: proven


That example is assembly, not invention. Every claim points backward to a source instrument and forward to a decision artifact.

Questions

  • Which claim carries the most risk if it is wrong?
  • Which number would a sceptical investor challenge first?
  • Which alternative would the customer choose if this did not exist?
  • If the kill signal triggered tomorrow, would you actually stop?