Hypothesis 3 — category reviews are sufficiently painful and frequent — has the strongest validation. 14 of 41 prospects confirmed it explicitly, including Olivia H., Alix L., Marcus B., and Dave P. Only one prospect (Sophie F.) weakly invalidated it, citing low review frequency at her company. This hypothesis is holding across both Option A and B cohorts.

Option B leads with the data-to-hypothesis workflow, which maps directly onto the Excel prep pain that 14+ prospects flagged. Option A's deck-builder framing requires buyers to imagine the output benefit first — which works for prospects who've seen a deck, but loses the ones stuck at the data preparation stage. The upstream pain is more universal than the downstream output quality.

Yes — James O. (Crestwood Foods) and Rachel M. (Meridian Health) appear in both high churn risk and tend to invalidate Hypothesis 1. Both have more mature internal data systems and aren't feeling the integration pain as acutely. They're more susceptible to LLM-native alternatives. Worth a direct conversation before their renewal windows.