review - stage 2 - alignment date 2026-06-29 - document tier
Draft Stonk Moore Positioning
Framework findings review for the final selected $positioning framework. This page renders the non-canonical working packet at research/_working/preliminary-moore-positioning-research.md and asks for approval before the parent writes research/positioning-moore-positioning.md.
Unified research/positioning.md remains out of scope until all selected framework intermediates are approved and $positioning --synthesize runs.
Loop Status
Parent State
The approved framework-selection YAML has been consumed into research/_working/positioning-run.yaml. The selected frameworks are JTBD Positioning, Strategic Canvas, and Moore Positioning.
This Framework
current moore-positioning is the only selected framework whose canonical intermediate is still absent.
Gated Output
The proposed canonical intermediate is research/positioning-moore-positioning.md. The active working packet is research/_working/preliminary-moore-positioning-research.md.
Boundary
No GitHub Actions workflows are created, changed, or suggested. This work is research-only and does not write unified research/positioning.md.
Executive Finding
Draft Stonk's strongest Moore hypothesis is deliberately narrow: a social fantasy stock draft game for U.S. finance-curious social retail players and fantasy-sports-adjacent friend groups who want to settle stock takes without risking money, managing portfolios, or receiving investment advice.
For U.S. finance-curious social retail players and fantasy-sports-adjacent friend groups
who want to settle stock takes without risking money, managing portfolios, or giving/receiving investment advice,
Draft Stonk is a social fantasy stock draft game
that turns a market opinion into a quick, fair contest with equal-dollar standings and bragging-rights payoff.
Unlike portfolio simulators, stock-picking prize contests, spreadsheets, watchlists, or group chat,
Draft Stonk makes the first game action a compact snake draft, keeps the experience no-money/no-prize/no-brokerage/no-advice, and makes "who picked better" visible before the spark fades.
Why It Wins
It is specific enough to preserve the approved ICP and product boundary while staying legible through the "fantasy football, but for stocks" metaphor.
Category Traps Avoided
"Stock simulator" sounds too trading-like, "financial literacy game" sounds too classroom-heavy, and "stock-picking contest" invites prize/subscriber/advice-risk comparisons.
Evidence Strength
moderate Local research aligns strongly, but there is no customer feedback, user interview, analytics, or tested copy evidence.
Source Basis
Local Sources
| Source | Observation Used | Role In Moore Template |
|---|---|---|
README.md | First loop: understand, make first stock pick, finish compact snake draft, see equal-dollar standings, then replay, share, or invite. | Defines product category, benefit, and reason to believe. |
concept.md | Turns market opinions into a fast fantasy game and excludes real money, prizes, brokerage links, buy/sell copy, and full league scope before first-loop proof. | Defines differentiation and non-goals. |
research/icp.md | Primary ICP is U.S. finance-curious social retail players, with fantasy-sports-adjacent friend groups and college finance clubs as wedges. | Defines target customer. |
research/competitive-analysis.md | Alternatives cluster around simulators, education games, fantasy sports, publisher events, brokerage/research tools, spreadsheets, group chats, watchlists, and doing nothing. | Defines the "unlike" set. |
research/journey-map.md | Critical moments are concept recognition, trust resolution, first pick, equal-dollar standings, and social payoff. | Defines need, benefit, and lifecycle risks. |
research/positioning-jtbd-positioning.md | Primary job is turning a market take into a quick, fair game with friends or peers without money, trading, or advice. | Sharpens the need/opportunity. |
research/positioning-strategic-canvas.md | Blue-ocean wedge is speed, draft clarity, trust boundary clarity, equal-dollar fairness, and private rivalry, not simulator realism or prizes. | Supports category and differentiation choices. |
research/_working/interrogation-positioning-handoff.md | Confirms market-positioning mode and no real-money stake, cash prizes, pooled entry fees, pick-specific purchase instructions, brokerage API before legal review, or investment-advice positioning. | Sets the trust and language boundary. |
Current Source Checks
| Source | Observed Category Signal | Moore Implication |
|---|---|---|
| Financial Times Stock Picking Game | Subscriber virtual portfolio season, real market movements, leaderboard, GBP 1,000 prize, and no-investment-recommendation statement. | Validates stock-picking contest legibility, but prize/portfolio framing should not define Draft Stonk. |
| Wall Street Survivor | USD 100,000 virtual money, paper trading, courses, monthly contests, prizes, private contests, trading ideas, and delayed/no-advice footer language. | Strong adjacent alternative; "stock simulator" category would be a bad anchor. |
| Investopedia Simulator | Buying/selling mechanics, portfolio tracking, simulator games, private games, leaderboards, date ranges, starting cash, and delayed data. | Portfolio mechanics and games are substitutes, but not the desired first-loop frame. |
| Sleeper Fantasy Football | In-app chat, talk, draft and mock-draft entry points, scoring customization, league reports, and friends. | Supports the social fantasy draft mental model without making sports the product category. |
| The Stock Market Game | Grades 4-12 online simulation and nearly 20 million students served since 1977. | "Financial literacy game" would invite classroom expectations too early. |
| HowTheMarketWorks | Classroom and club stock contests with custom dates, balances, rules, commissions, reading assignments, and privacy posture. | Good club/class substitute, but setup and education framing are heavier than Draft Stonk's first loop. |
Candidate Moore Hypotheses
recommended Hypothesis A: Social Fantasy Stock Draft
For U.S. finance-curious social retail players and fantasy-sports-adjacent friend groups who want to settle stock takes without risking money, managing portfolios, or giving/receiving investment advice, Draft Stonk is a social fantasy stock draft game that turns a market opinion into a quick, fair contest with equal-dollar standings and bragging-rights payoff. Unlike portfolio simulators, stock-picking prize contests, spreadsheets, watchlists, or group chat, Draft Stonk makes the first game action a compact snake draft, keeps the experience no-money/no-prize/no-brokerage/no-advice, and makes "who picked better" visible before the spark fades.
This is strongest because it preserves the primary ICP, names the behavior, uses the fantasy draft category, includes equal-dollar proof, and preserves the trust boundary.
Hypothesis B: Private Stock-Picking Challenge
For stock-curious friend groups and college clubs who want a lightweight way to compete on public market calls, Draft Stonk is a private stock-picking challenge that lets groups compare picks on a shared leaderboard without real money. Unlike spreadsheets or manual group chats, Draft Stonk automates rules, scoring, and standings with clear no-advice framing.
Rejected because it pulls toward FT, Wall Street Survivor, MarketWatch-like virtual exchanges, prizes, and contest rules while underplaying snake draft mechanics.
Hypothesis C: Financial Literacy Draft Game
For college finance clubs and finance-curious beginners who want to learn how markets move through hands-on play, Draft Stonk is a financial literacy draft game that makes stock performance easier to understand through fantasy-style picks and standings. Unlike classroom stock simulators and trading courses, Draft Stonk is fast, mobile-first, social, and entertainment-led.
Rejected because it moves education from byproduct to lead promise and invites curriculum, privacy, teacher-dashboard, and institutional proof expectations.
Hypothesis D: Market Instincts Arena
For finance-curious retail users who follow market stories who want a safer place to test instincts, Draft Stonk is a market instincts arena that turns gut calls into a no-money competition. Unlike broker paper trading or serious market simulators, Draft Stonk keeps the experience playful, social, and non-advisory.
Rejected because "arena" is less self-explanatory than "fantasy stock draft" and can sound more public or gambling-adjacent than the approved private/no-prize posture.
Evidence Map For Recommended Hypothesis
| Moore Element | Recommended Content | Evidence Source | Confidence | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Target customer | U.S. finance-curious social retail players and fantasy-sports-adjacent friend groups | research/icp.md; research/journey-map.md; JTBD positioning | Moderate-high | No customer interviews or live usage evidence confirms segment pull. |
| Need/opportunity | Settle stock takes without risking money, managing portfolios, or giving/receiving advice | ICP trigger events; journey moments; interrogation handoff; README and concept non-goals | High for approved boundary, medium for user demand | No tested language for "settle stock takes" versus alternatives. |
| Product category | Social fantasy stock draft game | README/concept fantasy stock draft framing; Sleeper fantasy mechanics; strategic canvas draft-ritual wedge | Medium | Category phrase is hypothesized; user comprehension tests may prefer simpler metaphor. |
| Key benefit | Turns a market opinion into a quick, fair contest with equal-dollar standings and bragging-rights payoff | README first loop; concept value proposition; journey aha moment; JTBD outcomes; strategic canvas fairness factor | Moderate-high | Equal-dollar standings comprehension remains untested. |
| Competitive alternative | Portfolio simulators, stock-picking prize contests, spreadsheets, watchlists, group chat, and doing nothing | Competitive analysis; Wall Street Survivor; Investopedia; FT game; ICP current alternatives | High | MarketWatch/Wealthbase and app-store/social direct competitor checks remain source gaps. |
| Differentiation | Compact snake draft, no-money/no-prize/no-brokerage/no-advice boundary, and visible comparison before the spark fades | README first loop; concept constraints; interrogation handoff; strategic canvas Four Actions; Sleeper fantasy mechanics | Moderate-high | No prototype test proves first-pick speed, replay, share, or invite payoff. |
Weakest Link Analysis
Weakest element: product category.
Why: "Social fantasy stock draft game" is strategically precise but not yet market-validated language. "Fantasy football, but for stocks" is instantly legible for sports-adjacent users, but it may be too analogy-dependent for non-sports finance-curious users. "Stock game" is too broad and pulls toward simulators. "Stock-picking contest" is legible but invites portfolio/prize/advice comparisons.
How To Strengthen It
- Run copy tests comparing "fantasy football for stocks," "social fantasy stock draft," "settle stock takes," and "market instincts game."
- Test whether first-time users can explain the product after one sentence without assuming real money, prizes, brokerage linkage, or investment advice.
- Validate whether users understand "draft stocks" as picking companies/tickers in a game, not receiving recommendations.
- Keep the category statement paired with trust copy until a shorter phrase proves safe and clear.
Risk if unresolved: Draft Stonk may be miscategorized as a portfolio simulator, classroom stock game, betting/prize contest, or investment-advice product. Any of those frames would distort onboarding, prototype scope, compliance posture, and competitive expectations.
Recommended Hypothesis And Rationale
The recommended Moore template is Hypothesis A, the social fantasy stock draft frame.
Target Discipline
Preserves the approved primary ICP instead of overfitting to clubs, educators, creators, or serious traders.
Need Discipline
Names the trigger and social goal instead of leading with broad finance education or generic practice trading.
Category Discipline
Anchors the category in draft-game mechanics rather than simulator realism.
Reason To Believe
Uses compact snake draft, equal-dollar standings, and boundary copy as proof points.
Competitive Contrast
Contrasts against formal simulator/contest alternatives and informal substitutes.
Trust Boundary
Keeps no-money/no-prize/no-brokerage/no-advice in the differentiator, not just a footer.
What Remains Unproven
- Whether the category phrase works with real users.
- Whether equal-dollar standings are understood without explanation.
- Whether no-prize private rivalry generates enough urgency and replay behavior.
- Whether local, mock, delayed, or clearly labeled data preserves trust.
- Which share/invite result creates the strongest social payoff.
Alternative Hypotheses Considered
| Hypothesis | Category Frame | Why It Was Rejected | Where It May Still Help |
|---|---|---|---|
| Private Stock-Picking Challenge | Private stock-picking challenge | Too close to FT, Wall Street Survivor, MarketWatch-like virtual exchanges, prizes, and contest rules; underplays draft ritual. | Group and club landing-page sections after first-loop proof. |
| Financial Literacy Draft Game | Financial literacy game | Pulls toward SIFMA, Rapunzl, StockTrak, HowTheMarketWorks, curriculum, privacy, and institutional proof. | Later educator or club packaging if demand appears. |
| Market Instincts Arena | Market instincts game | Less self-explanatory than fantasy stock draft; may sound public or gambling-adjacent. | Supporting copy: "compare market instincts" or "settle market takes." |
Assumptions And Confidence Register
| Assumption | Confidence | What Would Change It |
|---|---|---|
| Social comparison is a stronger lead than education or practice trading. | Medium | Interviews or prototype tests show users primarily want learning outcomes or simulator realism. |
| "Fantasy football for stocks" remains the fastest comprehension bridge. | Medium-high | Non-sports users misunderstand the metaphor or assume sports-style betting/prizes. |
| "Social fantasy stock draft game" is a usable category phrase. | Medium | Copy tests show it is too abstract, too jargon-heavy, or less clear than alternatives. |
| Equal-dollar standings can carry the fairness proof. | Medium | Usability tests show users misunderstand normalization or distrust mocked/delayed prices. |
| The no-money/no-prize/no-advice boundary increases willingness to try. | Medium | Copy tests show the boundary feels intimidating or removes too much excitement. |
| Private rivalry can replace prize urgency for the first loop. | Medium | Replay/share tests show low motivation without tangible rewards. |
Source Coverage Gaps
- No active
research/customer-feedback.md. - No user interviews with finance-curious retail players, fantasy-sports-adjacent friend groups, or college club organizers.
- No prototype analytics for time-to-first-pick, draft completion, standings comprehension, replay, share, or invite.
- No copy test for category language or trust-boundary language.
- No direct usability test of equal-dollar standings.
- No legal review; this packet preserves the approved no-money/no-prize/no-advice posture but does not provide legal advice.
- Current direct competitor evidence remains incomplete: FT is current but portfolio/prize/subscriber based; MarketWatch and Wealthbase remain source gaps; Wall Street Magnate is historical.
Proposed Canonical Intermediate
After approval, the parent $positioning loop should write this framework output to research/positioning-moore-positioning.md. The canonical intermediate should preserve:
- Recommended Moore hypothesis.
- Evidence map by Moore element.
- Weakest link analysis.
- Alternative hypotheses considered.
- Assumptions and source gaps.
- Implications for final positioning synthesis.
It should not write or overwrite research/positioning.md. Unified positioning remains gated until all selected framework intermediates are approved and $positioning --synthesize runs.
Implications For Final Positioning Synthesis
| Synthesis Element | Moore Input |
|---|---|
| Target | U.S. finance-curious social retail players, with fantasy-sports-adjacent friend groups and college clubs as acquisition/retention wedges. |
| Category hypothesis | "Social fantasy stock draft game" internally, "fantasy football for stocks" as a first-touch comprehension bridge, and "settle stock takes" as job language. |
| Competitive frame | Avoid anchoring as a stock simulator, portfolio practice product, classroom financial-literacy game, or prize contest. |
| Differentiator | Compact snake draft plus equal-dollar standings plus visible no-money/no-prize/no-brokerage/no-advice boundary. |
| Reason to believe | A user can move from market spark to fair social comparison faster than with group chat, spreadsheets, watchlists, or portfolio simulators. |
| Validation priority | Category-language copy tests, first-pick comprehension, equal-dollar standings comprehension, trust-boundary comprehension, and replay/share/invite proof. |
Build-In-Public Checkpoint
Status: Not applicable for this specific framework review.
This Moore page is an internal research intermediate and has not yet been approved into a canonical artifact. Public-safe Build-In-Public content should be reconsidered after the unified research/positioning.md synthesis is approved.
Approval Gates
Recommended Hypothesis
Does Hypothesis A correctly represent the Moore positioning frame that should become the approved framework intermediate?
Weakest Link
Does the product-category phrase correctly stand out as the weakest Moore element to strengthen next?
Research Completeness
Is the evidence sufficient for a provisional Moore framework intermediate, given that Draft Stonk is pre-product?
Artifact Destination & Proposed File Changes
Should the parent write the approved canonical intermediate to research/positioning-moore-positioning.md, archive the working packet, and leave unified research/positioning.md untouched until synthesis?
Compile Responses
Compile partial feedback or final framework-findings approval YAML. The YAML routes back to the parent $positioning command; do not invoke the child framework directly.
Required questions remaining: 4