You make an electric delivery van. Should you take it into the UK courier market?
Five questions decide it. Below is what each one actually produced — the answer you’d give with nothing behind it, what the work found instead, and the judgement it ends in. Two of the five change the answer in a way nobody expected going in.
Representative, not a real company. Every figure on this page is invented — the shape of a real analysis rather than anyone’s actual numbers.
How each answer is reached is not invented. Each question below names the tools that produce its answer, and says which of them are live today and which are still in build.
- The need
1. Is the need real?
Without evidence: “Couriers obviously want electric — everyone's going that way.”
- 31 fleet managers interviewed across 9 operators.
- Range came fourth. The top unmet need is predictable charging downtime — a van stuck charging mid-shift kills the round, and the round is the unit of work.
- Two operators had already bought electric vans and parked them. Neither cited range.
The obvious assumption was wrong, and it was wrong in a way that changes the product conversation rather than the sales one. You are not selling range. You are selling a shift that finishes.
Clear need 8/10Answered with Needs Analyzer - The market
2. Is the market worth it?
Without evidence: “It's a huge market. Every van on the road, eventually.”
- 48,000 courier vans in the UK, on a six-year replacement cycle — about 8,000 replaced a year.
- Top-down from registrations: £186M a year. Bottom-up from the twelve largest operators' own fleet plans: £179M. The two agree within 4%.
- Realistically winnable at the entry share modelled: £22M.
Two independent methods landing within 4% is the difference between a number you present and a number you defend. £180M a year, and you can show your working for both halves.
Large & healthy 8/10Answered with Market Size Calculator · Value Chain Mapping(in build) · Regulatory Risk Analyzer(in build) - The edge
3. Can we win it?
Without evidence: “We're cheaper to run than diesel. It sells itself.”
- Against the diesel van they would otherwise buy: £4,100 a year cheaper to run, on fuel and maintenance at the operators' own mileages.
- £9,000 more to buy. Payback at 2.2 years, against a fleet holding period of six.
- Two direct rivals already sell into these accounts, both on the same total-cost argument.
The economics work and the sale still does not, because the procurement form asks for the purchase price and not the six-year cost. You win on total cost and lose on the sticker — and the sticker is the field on the form. That is the problem the rest of the decision has to solve.
Adequate 6/10Answered with Competitive Pressure · Value Proposition Builder(in build) · Economic Value Calculator · Qualification & Switching(in build) · Growth Plan Developer(in build) - The build
4. Can we make it?
Without evidence: “Production said they can cover it.”
- The entry plan needs 1,400 units in year two, rising to 2,100 in year four.
- The existing line runs at 3,400 against a nameplate of 5,400 — 2,000 units of headroom on the current shift pattern.
- Year two therefore needs no capex and no second shift. Year four does, and the trigger is written down now rather than discovered later.
Nothing in the plan is waiting on a factory decision. The ramp fits the line you already run, so the entry can be argued on its merits instead of on a capex case nobody has built yet — and the year-four trigger is recorded against the assumption that carried it, so it comes back up when the volume does.
Fits current capacityAnswered as a check against what you already run, with the assumption recorded. - The entry
5. How do we enter?
Without evidence: “Go direct to the big fleets and see how it lands.”
- Three routes costed: direct to the twelve largest fleets, through the existing van dealer network, or via a leasing partner.
- Direct is fastest to revenue and hits the sticker objection head-on. Dealers dilute the total-cost story to people not paid to hear it.
- Leasing converts the £9,000 premium into a monthly line the operator compares against diesel's monthly line — where you are ahead from month one.
Leasing answers the one thing standing in the way. It removes ③’s sticker objection by changing what the buyer is asked to compare — and with ④ already clear, the route in is the last open question rather than one of several. The way in was chosen by the questions, not in spite of them.
◇ Commit · £1.2M to fund the leasing bookAnswered with Growth Plan Developer(in build)
What actually happened here
The market was fine, the economics worked and the factory was clear — and none of those was the decision. The decision turned on a procurement form. Four of the five questions came back strong enough to move on, and the fifth is only answerable because the other four had already said which objection was the one that mattered. That is what asking them in order buys you: not five verdicts, but a shortlist of one.
A sixth question — Is it working? — runs after launch and checks the answers held. It is not part of the go/no-go, which is why it is not on this page. See the method for where it sits.
Now do this on the decision you actually have.
Same five questions, your product and your market — the need evidenced, the size defended, the value priced, the way in costed. An account is what gives the answers somewhere to live.