SUPERSEDED 2026-05-22: Build-and-sell-to-Anthropic positioning was abandoned during parallel session Friday 22 May 2026. New strategic direction is build-as-going-concern — see
[[project-strategic-position-operator-first-2026-05-22]]for current direction. This file preserved for traceability + historical context only. Content below is HISTORICAL — do NOT apply as current direction.
TT strategic direction LOCKED — build-and-sell, not consultancy pivot (SUPERSEDED)
Locked 2026-05-20 in strategy-session context by Rich verbatim: “Decision: we are not going to pivot to consultancy. we are going to build something and sell it to someone.”
Closes the open pivot question that surfaced 2026-05-20T09:40 BST upon recognising the Anthropic Claude for Legal Industry announcement. Supersedes the DEFER position locked 2026-05-20T10:00 BST.
What this resolves
| Question | Status before lock | Status post-lock |
|---|---|---|
| Consultant-pivot path | OPEN (DEFER position; 2-4 week Channon window + 12-24mo Anthropic watch) | CLOSED — not the strategic track |
| Build-and-sell path | One of several options | LOCKED primary track |
| Channon Leg 1 advisory framing | ”Consultant pivot start" | "Relationship-building with prospective acquirer / flagship-customer” — same activity, different strategic role |
| Substrate work continues | Locked 2026-05-20T~10:30 | Confirmed + sharpened — substrate IS the asset being sold (with InheritKit + IAS as commercial wrappers) |
| Acquirer-DD 2026-08-18 trigger | Decision date | Preparation milestone — decision is already made |
| Anthropic in acquirer set | Added | Stays + sharpens — path-(a) risk = path-(a) opportunity under build-and-sell |
Three strategic sub-questions opened by the lock
These anchor every plan-review downstream. Provisional answers below; subject to confirmation in strategy session.
Q1 — What’s the proprietary “something”?
Apache 2.0 INHERIT v2 substrate is open + cannot be sold directly. Real proprietary assets in the sellable package:
- InheritKit SDK (Tier-2 commercial layer above the open substrate; 4-tier framework Free/Pro/Enterprise/AI-Vendor per arch-state)
- IAS app (Tier-1 partner-firm-DD authoring surface; DO-per-firm tenant isolation; Tiptap+Y.js+Hocuspocus)
- Brand portfolio (IW first-launch; MFI comparison-layer; LL; Henry; OI substrate-public-face)
- Team + relationships (Rich + Josh + Matt + MLP partner-firm + Channon-as-Phoenix-CIO + standards-body engagement: OASIS Palmirani + Mishcon Noseda/Sosna/Goldstone + Schulthess + 11-body standards plan)
- Audit-grade discipline — Q-041..Q-044 + MQ-014..MQ-019 + 22 A-21 CI gates + Catala-Mopsa formal verification + 5-closure convergence (this discipline is itself sellable evidence)
- Combined coherence — the whole stack > sum of individual assets
Q2 — Who’s the “someone”?
REFINED Rich-directive 2026-05-20 (strategy session): “i want to ensure the substrate is incredibly good, so anthropic want to buy it - having Farewill as a customer will increase the chances of that”. Anthropic is the PRIMARY target acquirer. Farewill-as-customer is the strategic LEVER (customer-proof signal that strengthens Anthropic-DD).
Empirical candidate set 2026-05-20 (refined ordering):
| Priority | Candidate | Track signal |
|---|---|---|
| PRIMARY TARGET | Anthropic | Path-(a) ontology-build watch; AI lab that needs substrate to power eventual wills/probate plugin; consumer-scale customer-proof (Farewill) is the optimal validation signal for an AI lab |
| STRATEGIC LEVER (customer-proof for primary) | Phoenix / Castelnau / Farewill / Dignity | Channon WhatsApp sent 2026-05-20 ~10:30 BST; Farewill-as-INHERIT-flagship-customer = the validation signal Anthropic needs to see. Phoenix is ALSO a candidate acquirer in its own right but the dominant strategic role is customer-proof |
| Validation evidence | MLP partner-firm-DD pipeline (Stephen Attree + Clio Draft + 3 wills) | Law-firm-scale validation; complementary to Farewill consumer-scale; strengthens overall package |
| Secondary candidates | LexisNexis / RELX | Lexis+ Protégé needs substrate-depth they don’t have; closest taxonomic competitor; viable backup acquirer if Anthropic doesn’t progress |
| Secondary candidates | Thomson Reuters | Integrated with Claude; legal-tech AI race; viable backup |
| Secondary candidates | Wolters Kluwer | Same shape as RELX/TR; viable backup |
| Opportunistic / longshot | Co-op Legal Services / Slater + Gordon / Brewin Dolphin / Quilter | Legacy operators; less likely as substrate acquirers but possible as Farewill-analog customer-proof |
| Opportunistic / longshot (US) | Trust&Will / LegalZoom / Estateably | US analogs |
Strategic implication: optimise for Anthropic-DD readiness. Everything that strengthens substrate-depth + audit-grade discipline + customer-proof matters most. Backup acquirers (Lexis/TR/WK) are catastrophe-insurance, not primary strategy.
Q3 — When?
Target acquisition window pending Rich-confirmation. Provisional:
- 2026-08-18 acquirer-DD trigger = preparation milestone
- 12 months / 18 months / 24 months = candidate target windows
- Affects build-compression-vs-depth trade-off + outreach intensity
- Anthropic 12-24mo wills-entry window is a hard external clock
Strategic plans needing re-orientation under build-and-sell anchor
Tier 1 (most affected):
| Plan | Current version | Re-orientation needed |
|---|---|---|
brand-architecture.md | v1.16 | Brand-stack priorities under “what makes the sellable package strongest”. Different acquirers value different brands (Phoenix values IW/MFI/Farewill-INHERIT-import; Anthropic values substrate-depth + standards credentialing; Lexis/TR/WK values cross-jurisdictional ontology) |
partner-model.md | v2.5 | Partner-firm-DD signals are CUSTOMER-PROOF for acquirers, not long-term services revenue. MLP pilot, Channon Leg 3 (Farewill-INHERIT-import), Schulthess/Switzerland — all sellable evidence |
2026-04-19-inherit-v2-roadmap.md | v1.7 | 24-month roadmap calendar may compress under acquisition urgency. Substrate-depth investment continues but priority may shift to acquirer-DD-package coherence over pure substrate-completeness |
2026-05-05-gary-channon-strategic-options-memo.md | v1.1 (today) | Leg 1 advisory reframes from “consultant pivot start” to “relationship-building with prospective acquirer”. Same activity; different strategic role. May want minor amendment to §3.1 framing line + §14 narrative |
Tier 2 (substrate-continues but priorities may shift):
| Plan | Current | Note |
|---|---|---|
inherit-v2-phase-1-master-plan.md | v1.10+ | Phase-1 build cadence under acquirer-DD pacing |
inherit-v2-standards-engagement-state.md | v1.0+ | 11-body engagement strengthens acquirer-DD case + standards-credentialing matters for all acquirer candidates |
inherit-v2-risk-register.md | v1.2+ | Add path-(a) Anthropic-builds-own-ontology risk; add acquirer-loss risk; add post-acquisition-integration risk |
How to apply
- All plan-review work is now anchored on “what maximises Anthropic-acquirer-DD readiness” — refined target. Substrate quality + audit-grade discipline + Farewill-as-customer-proof are the dominant levers. The previous broader “sellable package” framing is superseded.
- Substrate quality IS the optimisation function — depth + correctness + cross-jurisdictional coverage + audit-grade CI + formal verification + standards-body credentialing. Optimise for what makes Anthropic-DD reviewers say “this is genuinely audit-grade work; we’d rather acquire than rebuild”.
- Existing research library + off-github substrate must be utilised —
~/off-github/library/indexed/(~99 books) + T1-T82 T-files + spike outcomes + cumulative-state docs + Tier-2 pgvector index. Substantial research substrate accumulated; the failure mode is not utilising it. When planning next-substrate-improvement push, walk the inventory FIRST per[[feedback-check-t-files-first-for-any-inherit-v2-work]]. - Planning discipline: sequence + dependencies, NOT hours. Per
[[feedback-planning-sequence-not-hours-capacity-flexible]]— Rich can hire developers; hours-as-budget is the wrong constraint shape. Plans optimise for substrate-quality + dependency-correctness + external-clock alignment, not for “what fits available hours”. - Channon engagement stays high-priority but reframes — relationship-building + Leg 3 Farewill-INHERIT-import = customer-proof for acquirer-DD; Phoenix itself is candidate acquirer.
- Partner-firm-DD via MLP stays high-priority — customer-proof. Phase-1.5+ task-85 Clio Draft import support is acquirer-DD-package-strengthening, not consulting-product-engineering.
- Q-045..Q-049 substrate depth — continue at planned depth; under build-and-sell the question is “does this depth strengthen the package” (yes — cross-asset-class coverage + jurisdictional depth = sellable evidence of audit-grade discipline).
- Standards-engagement (Palmirani / Mishcon / OASIS / W3C / AAIF etc.) — proceed; credentialing strengthens all acquirer candidates.
- MFI / IW / LL / Henry / OpenInherit brands — review priority under “what does each acquirer value”. Different brand-stack shapes work for different acquirers; the question is whether the brand-stack is optimised for the most likely acquirer set.
- When negotiating with prospective acquirers (Channon meeting + future) — do NOT lead with acquisition. The architect-frame still holds; Rich-as-substrate-owner is the position. Acquisition emerges from successful customer-relationships, not from cold acquisition outreach.
Locked decisions from this cluster (2026-05-20)
- Build-and-sell is the strategic track. Not consultant pivot. Not stay-independent-forever.
- Substrate work continues (already locked 2026-05-20T~10:30 BST per
[[project-anthropic-legal-claude-wills-three-entry-paths-2026-05-20]]). - All Tier 1-2 plans need re-orientation review under build-and-sell anchor before next-Q work proceeds at maximum confidence.
- Acquirer candidate set is provisional — to be refined in plan-review session.
- Timing is provisional — to be refined in plan-review session.
Companion artefacts
[[project-anthropic-legal-claude-wills-three-entry-paths-2026-05-20]]— anchor for “Anthropic in acquirer set” thinking2026-05-05-gary-channon-strategic-options-memo.mdv1.1 — Channon track + Phoenix-portfolio framing (needs §14 minor amendment under build-and-sell)standard/orgs/farewill/gary-channon.mdv1.1 — Channon profilebrand-architecture.mdv1.16 — needs re-orientation reviewpartner-model.mdv2.5 — needs re-orientation review2026-04-19-inherit-v2-roadmap.mdv1.7 — needs re-orientation review- feedback-defer-cost-arithmetic-in-recommendations — ω′.1 lens
- feedback-methodology-hot-reload-at-decision-points — ω′.2 discipline