Receipts
Sources. Every number on this site, and where it came from.
LAST REVIEWED · · AMENDED ·Most business sites put the numbers on the page and the evidence in a drawer. Mine used to do the same thing: the maths section said the substantiation was "kept on file", "available on request", which is a polite way of saying you would have to ask me for it. So here it is instead, in public. Every figure that appears anywhere on this site is listed below with the exact wording I use, the full name and year of the source, what that source actually says, and where it stops being useful. I have no clients on this follow-up product yet, so I have no results of my own to show you. Publishing my sources is the only honest proof I can offer, and it keeps me straight too: if a number cannot survive being read next to the thing it came from, it does not belong on the site.
Every number, and where it comes from
Two things worth knowing before you read these. Each entry is numbered and each number is a permanent link, so a figure on the site can point straight at the entry that backs it and you can send someone the entry rather than the page. And each entry says whether it rests on a published source you can go and check yourself, or on my own record, which is my word and is labelled as such. Some entries rest on my own record, and each says so. Entries for claims the site no longer makes move to the retired sources page, with the date, so the evidence stays on the file and the claim cannot quietly come back without it.
Entries for claims the site no longer makes are kept in full (three carry a dated note where one word was changed) on the retired sources page.
My own record
ClaimThe prices on the path on the home page, in the line under the first button on the home page, and in the price table on How it works: $1,200 Live Build, $4,900 to install The Desk ($3,700 after the credit), $1,450 a month for the Watch, and $181.25 per half hour for Watch time past four hours a month, agreed in writing first. The payment terms beside them: the install is paid half on signing and half when acceptance checks 1 to 5 are signed, the Watch is billed only once acceptance check 6 passes, and if I rang you first, no payment is taken until ten business days have passed. No fee is contingent on a sale, a job or an appointment. And the credit line beside the Live Build, word for word: "Credited in full against the install if you accept the written install quote within 30 days of its issue date." The ten business days, word for word: beside the Live Build, "If I rang you first, no payment is taken and nothing starts until ten business days have passed."; beside the install, "If I rang you first, no payment is taken until ten business days have passed." The overage beside the Watch, word for word: "Four hours of my time a month; anything past that is agreed in writing first, at $181.25 per half hour."
What it saysExactly what it says. The Live Build is paid once and comes off the install price in full if you accept my written install quote within 30 days of its issue date, which is where the "$3,700 after the credit" figure comes from: $4,900 less the $1,200 already paid. It is arithmetic between two prices on this page, not a discount or a separate offer. The install is a fixed price, not an hourly estimate. The Watch is month to month with 30 days notice on either side, and you can decline it entirely and still own the system. The overage rate is the Watch fee spread over its four hours: $1,450 divided by eight half hours is $181.25. The ten business days apply when I made the first call, so you have time to think before any money moves.
Limitation A price is not a result. Nothing in this structure predicts what your database will produce, and I will not guess it for you. No fee is contingent on a job or a sale, ever. This is a price I set and can change for future clients; anyone already signed keeps the price they signed at unless we agree otherwise in writing. The founding rate carries one stated condition, the written reference, set out in full at S15.
My own record
Claim"Zero third-party requests on this site", "No trackers. No pixels. No dark patterns.", and the session console line "Field names only, never what you type. Nothing leaves this page until you press send, and you can watch that stay true in your browser's own network tab."
What it saysAt the date of checking, the site made no requests to any third party domain, and the session log in the contact section records field names only, never the values you type, and never sends anything until you press send.
Limitation This is a claim about a specific build on a specific date, and it must be re-verified after any site change. Adding a single analytics tag, embedded map or hosted font would break it. Form submissions are delivered by the site's host, Netlify, which is disclosed in the privacy policy. Re-verified against the 30 July 2026 build: all fonts and assets self hosted, no analytics, no pixels, no content delivery networks, no embeds. The only external strings in the source are the schema.org and w3.org namespace identifiers, which are labels rather than requests. It gets re-checked on every deploy.
Published source
Claim"ABN 19 720 818 025" in the site footer.
What it saysThe number in the footer is the registered ABN for SSJC MEDIA GROUP, and you can check it yourself at abr.business.gov.au in about ten seconds. Registration is not an endorsement of anything. It confirms one thing: there is a real, identifiable, active Australian entity behind this site, and if I ever misled you, you know exactly who to name.
Limitation an ABN proves I exist and can be found. It proves nothing about the quality of the work. Status is re-checked at each review of this page.
My own record
ClaimThe one follow-up in the approval card under "Run it": Sample Plumbing and the contact Jo M. Also the banner "SIMULATED · FICTIONAL CONTACT · NOTHING SENDS · THESE BUTTONS MOVE A CARD ON YOUR SCREEN".
What it saysOne quote follow-up the way the system writes it from its own template in lib/draft-core.mjs, naming the sender and ending with an opt-out line. It is message content, not a call script. The contact and the business are invented; nothing here is a real message or a real figure. Changed : three further cards, including a sample invoice reminder, came off with the section that held them.
Limitation a real follow-up depends on the client’s own export, which supplies the names, the job and the amounts, and on the edits the sender makes before pressing send. The template wording is fixed; what actually goes out is whatever the person sending it approves. The simulation is labelled as such on the page.
My own record
ClaimThe founding rate beside the path on the home page and in the price table on How it works, word for word: "The founding rate, for the first three businesses: $2,400 for the install, all up. If you did the Live Build first, the $1,200 you paid for it counts toward that, so $1,200 remains. The standard install is $4,900. If you choose the Watch, it is $950 a month; the standard rate is $1,450. The $950 holds for as long as you stay, provided the written reference is given within 60 days of install acceptance; if it is not, nothing already paid changes, and the Watch moves to the standard rate only after 30 days’ written notice, which you may decline by ending the Watch. In exchange I ask for a written reference about how it went and permission to name your business. Any numbers in it are counts from your own file, never dollars won or jobs booked, and this trade is disclosed wherever the reference appears. The founding rate ends when three businesses have it or on 10 February 2027, whichever comes first. Pricing in AUD. SSJC Media Group is not registered for GST, so no GST is added."
What it saysThe founding rate is what I charge while I earn the three written references I do not have yet. What I ask back is a written reference about how it went and permission to name your business, and that trade is disclosed beside the reference wherever it is published. It ends when three businesses have it or on 10 February 2027, whichever comes first, and a business signed at it keeps the $950 a month for as long as it stays, provided the written reference is given within 60 days of install acceptance. The $2,400 is the whole install price: if you did the Live Build first, the $1,200 you paid for it counts toward that, so $1,200 remains. Pricing in AUD. SSJC Media Group is not registered for GST, so no GST is added. At the founding rate, Watch time past four hours is $118.75 per half hour, agreed in writing first; that figure is in the Watch terms sheet.
Limitation this is a price I set and can change for future clients. Nothing here is a claim about what you would earn, save or recover.
My own record
No claim. This number was never issued. The register ran S15 straight to S17, and git log -S 'id="S16"' returns no history, so nothing was ever deleted here. It is written down on because the discipline on this page is that a retired entry is marked, never removed, so that the evidence stays on file. A gap in a numbered sequence is indistinguishable, to anybody auditing this later, from an entry somebody quietly took out. Saying so costs four lines and closes that question permanently.
My own record
Narrowed . The booking buttons no longer say "20 minute call". They now read "Request a call" and go to the form. From the button reads "Ask for a free read" and "Request a call" is a text link under it, both to the same form. The introductory call still exists and is still about twenty minutes, but the site no longer names its length, so that half of this entry no longer describes anything on the site. The Live Build half is live and unchanged.
Requoted . Until that date the claim below quoted "The Live Build. 90 minutes, your data, you keep the output.", wording the pages no longer use. It now quotes the Live Build as the pages print it. The length of the session did not change.
Claim"Ninety minutes on your real file: the ranked, tap-to-dial call sheet with the reason beside each name, and a one-page read. You keep both either way." on the home page, and "Ninety minutes on your real file" on How it works.
What it saysThese are the lengths of two appointments I run and control: the Live Build session and the introductory call. They describe how long I will spend, not how long anything takes to work and not what the session produces.
Limitation a session can run over or finish early. Neither figure is a promise about a result, and no fee changes if a session runs long or short.
My own record
Narrowed . The sample demo page is no longer published: the build leaves it out and its address redirects to the home page. The "3,000 people" figure below therefore no longer appears on the site. The card half of this entry is live.
ClaimEvery figure inside the approval card and the sample demo page: the job value $6,400 and the age "11 months since last contact" on the card, and the "3,000 people" user count on the sample demo page.
What it saysThey are plausible-looking numbers chosen so the message reads like real work rather than filler. The card is labelled SIMULATED · FICTIONAL CONTACT · NOTHING SENDS immediately above the card, and the sample demo page is a private link built for one named prospect. Nothing in either is drawn from a client, because there has been no client on this product. Changed : the queue was cut to one card, and Jo’s age moved to the ranker’s own wording, "11 months since last contact".
Limitation they are illustrations of message content, not results. No figure here is an amount anyone recovered, an average job value, or a typical database size, and none of them should ever be quoted as one. They are recorded here so that a sweep of every figure on the site comes back clean, and a genuinely unsourced number cannot hide among nine that are known to be fictional.
My own record
Narrowed . Two of the three sentences this entry quoted came off the site on 29 Sep 2026 with the sections that carried them: the tradie door's "past enquiries, past quotes and past customers under two years old" and the Property door's "past enquiries and past buyers under two years old". The rule itself did not change. It is now quoted where the page still states it, under the price ladder, and on the sample demonstration page.
Rewritten . Until that date this entry quoted the answer under the price ladder, "The system only ever works people your business already has a real relationship with: past quotes, past jobs, past enquiries, under two years old", and said "Contacts older than that are left out". That sentence is off the page, and the statement was wrong about the code, which has never dropped a contact for its age. The earlier version also said the rule was written into the agreement you sign; I have not re-checked that wording, so it is not repeated here. The old text is recorded here rather than deleted.
No longer on the site, . The sample demonstration page that carried the line below is no longer published, so no page now quotes this entry. The free read is four counts, and none of them is an age band. The working rule and the ranking code described here are unchanged, and the entry stays on the record.
ClaimThe contact window, as the site stated it until 11 October 2026: "how many are under two years old" on the sample demonstration page.
What it saysTwo years is a ranking band, not a filter. The ranking scores contacts from roughly three months to two years back highest, peaking at about twelve months; it marks 25 to 36 months as going cold and anything older as likely stale; and it removes nobody for being old. Older contacts stay on the sheet, ranked low and labelled, so your person decides. Leaving them out altogether is not built, and whether to add that cut-off is my decision, not yet made. Anyone who has asked to be left alone is stripped before the list is built rather than filtered afterwards. The sample-demonstration line is a count I report back from your export, which is true as written. You confirm the consent basis in writing before anything is installed, and you are the named sender on every message.
Limitation it binds me, not the market, and it says nothing about what any list will produce. The bands are my judgement, not a statutory threshold, and a contact ranking low is not a reason to ring them or not to. Whether your own records actually establish a business relationship is a question about your records, not about my rule, and if it matters to you it goes to your own solicitor rather than to me. The fourth claim that was bundled into S12, "usually ten minutes of your admin's time", was NOT re-entered here: it was cut from the page on instead. It was a time estimate for a task nobody has ever timed, on software that is not mine, and the honest version says the same thing without a number: "One export from your system."
My own record
Claim"I have been in sales for nine years" on /about.html, and "Nine years in sales" in /llms.txt.
What it saysCorrected 27 August 2026, on Craig's own instruction: the earlier entry said eight years selling property, and that was wrong. The true statement is nine years in sales, alongside a running interest in AI development and cyber security. Craig went full time on this business on 12 August 2026. The 12 August 2026 full-time date is also stated on /about.html. Rests on Craig's own record, as the previous version did
Limitation it is my own record and nobody else is vouching for it. More to the point, years on a phone are not evidence that a piece of software works. It is context for why I think follow-up is where the money leaks, and that is the whole of what it is.
My own record
Claim"A free 20-minute call." on the build request page, and the budget bands in its form: "Under $2,000", "$2,000 to $5,000", "$5,000 to $10,000" and "$10,000 or more".
What it saysThe call is the time I set aside for a first conversation about a website or a custom AI system, and it is free. The budget bands are not prices. They are the visitor's own rough budget, asked so I can scope the work properly. Every build is quoted after the call, as a fixed price.
Limitation none of these figures is a price, an estimate or a promise about what anything will cost. A band tells me what you have in mind, not what the work is worth, and a call can run shorter or longer than planned.
My own record
ClaimEvery figure in the two pieces of sample data on the home page, all of them invented. The sample list the demonstration under "Run it" works on, every row marked SAMPLE: the quote values $4,850, $980, $5,100, $3,200, $12,300 and $1,740 in the list as it arrives; the call sheet ranked from it, with $980, $5,100, $12,300, $100, $1,740 and $3,200 against its rows, "7 of 10 rows ranked" and "$23,420 of quotes on the sheet"; and, once Run is pressed, the export file exactly as it is written, which carries $4,850.00 and $12,300.00 in that form and the values 2,400 and 600 on the opted-out and landline rows. The call sheet beside the headline, tagged Sample data: the ages 11 months, 9 months and 8 months, with the ranker’s reasons "11 months since last contact", "9 months since last contact", "8 months since last contact" and "had a quote or job value on file". The same five export lines and three ranked rows are repeated as fragments in the explainer on How it works.
What it saysNone of these people exist and none of these amounts is anyone’s money. Every row of the list says SAMPLE on its own face, and the call sheet beside the headline carries a Sample data tag. The figures are there so the ranking has something shaped like a real export to work on: a value on file lifts a contact up the sheet, and an age decides which band they fall in. The two totals on the ranked sheet are counted from those invented rows, not measured from anything.
Limitation they show how the ranking reads a file, not what any file contains. No figure here is a typical quote value, an average database or an amount anyone recovered, and none should ever be quoted as one. They are entered so that a sweep of every figure on the site against this page can come back clean, and a genuinely unsourced number cannot hide among the ones known to be invented.
Published source
Claim"no further marketing email is sent after five business days at most", on the privacy policy.
What it saysWhen somebody uses the unsubscribe facility in a commercial message, the withdrawal of their consent takes effect at the end of five business days from the day they sent the request. Five business days is the outer limit the Act sets, not a target, and it is the most the privacy policy allows itself.
Limitation the rule is in the Act, and the report is one ACMA investigation that sets it out; neither is legal advice about your list. Nothing reads replies on its own: a stop reaches my do-not-contact list when I put it there. Anything turning on your own records goes to your own solicitor.
My own record
ClaimEvery figure in the sample data on How it works and Trades, all of it invented: the sample counts 196 went quiet, 38 duplicates, $96,400 total quoted on the quiet ones and a Yes on whether anything is worth building; and the ages 11 months, 9 months and 8 months on the three sample call sheets on Trades, with their sample job types.
What it saysNone of these businesses, people or counts exists. Each figure carries a Sample tag on its own face. The counts show what a free read returns: how many went quiet, how many are duplicates, the total quoted on the quiet ones, and a plain yes or no on whether anything is worth building, and nothing else. The sheets show how the ranking reads a file and words its reasons.
Limitation They show the shape of the output, not what any file contains. No figure here is a typical database size, a share of quotes that go quiet, or a result, and none of them should be quoted as one.
My own record
Claim"$7,500 to $14,000 per white-label build for agencies and bookkeepers, optional $900 a month. Your code, their brand, they keep the client."
What it saysThe price for a white-label build, quoted to the agency or bookkeeper in writing, not to their client. It is a price I set, and it is not pitched on any sales page: no sales page on this site quotes it. It appears here, in the retired entry S04 on the sources archive, and in a written quote. The earlier wording, "$7,500+ fixed, per build", is retired at S04.
Limitation This is a price I set and can change for future work. Nothing about it predicts what a build earns the agency, the bookkeeper or their client.
Published source
Claim"weekdays 9am to 8pm, Saturdays 9am to 5pm, never on Sundays or national public holidays, in your local time", on the privacy policy; and "weekdays 9am to 8pm, Saturday 9am to 5pm, your local time, never on a Sunday or a national public holiday" on the two pages a form lands on once it is sent.
What it saysTelemarketing calls may be made on weekdays from 9am to 8pm and on Saturdays from 9am to 5pm, and not on Sundays or national public holidays.
Limitation the hours were taken from the Register’s summary of the Standard; the instrument itself was not re-read when this entry was made. The Standard sets hours for calls. Keeping texts inside the same hours is my own rule. None of this is legal advice about any list, and anything turning on your own records goes to your own solicitor.
What I deliberately do not claim
- No income, earnings or revenue promise. You will not find "3x your conversions", "40 per cent more bookings", "60 per cent fewer no-shows" or "100 per cent of calls answered" anywhere on this site as my result, because I do not have that number and neither does anyone honest who has not yet run the system on your database. Capability statements like "prepares a message for every contact on the list" describe what the system does. They are not forecasts of what it earns.
- No results I have not earned. No case studies, no testimonials, no client logos, no averages, no star ratings, no "trusted by" strip. I have no clients on this follow-up product yet, so I have no results of my own to show you, and the site says so. When the first reference exists, it describes the process and the experience, names the business with permission, and carries no client results or figures.
- No borrowed case studies. I will not run a customer's aggregate, an overseas business's screenshot or somebody else's win and let it read as mine. Third party research is always named on the page, with the source visible, so you can tell instantly whose evidence you are looking at.
- No invented scarcity. Two things on this site are limited and both are facts rather than tactics. I install and support these systems myself, so the number I can carry at once is finite. And the founding rate is for the first three businesses, because what I am buying with it is three written references I do not have yet; once I have them there is nothing left to buy. It also ends on 10 February 2027 if three businesses have not taken it by then; that date is when the prices are reviewed, and it is printed in full beside the founding rate. Nothing here says "offer ends Friday" and no countdown counts down to a fake deadline.
- No promise of a job or a sale, and no fee tied to one. Every fee is a fixed price for work I do: the Live Build, the install, and the monthly Watch, plus Watch time past four hours a month, which is agreed in writing first at the half-hour rate on S03. Nothing I charge attaches to an appointment, a job or a sale, ever.
How this page is kept honest
Amended , AEST, for the enquiry forms and the privacy policy: S26 came back onto the site, on the privacy policy, and S29 was added for the calling hours printed on the privacy policy and on the two pages a form lands on. No number elsewhere on the site changed. Amended , AEST: no price changed. The free read wording changed to the counts it now returns, so S27's sample counts were redrawn to match and the old ones are quoted in its entry. S28 was added for the white-label price, which appears on this page and in a written quote only, never on a sales page. The wording beside the prices was rewritten on the home page, How it works and /llms.txt, so S03 now quotes the new Live Build credit line and covers the overage rate, the payment terms and the ten business days for calls I make first, and S15 now quotes the founding rate in full, with its duration, its reference condition, its end date of 10 February 2027 and the GST line. The old wording of both is quoted in their entries. S07 now records the GST status read on ABN Lookup the same day. Amended : the retired entries moved to their own page, S03, S05, S13, S15, S19, S20, S21, S25 and S26 were updated to match the site, and S27 was added for the sample data on How it works and Trades. The same day the sample demo page stopped being published, which is noted on S20, S21 and S26. Last reviewed , AEST. On that date the wording about what you keep at the end of an install was corrected on the home page, /why.html and /llms.txt, and the old wording was entered as S24 and marked retired. The same day S23 was added for the new build request page: the length of the free call, and the budget bands in its form, which are the visitor's own rough budget and not prices. On that date the home page was also cut back to one offer: the leak section, the seven-question check, the Delivery Arm rung and the Property door came off, S01, S04 and S17 were marked retired, and S19 and S21 were narrowed to the sentences still on the site. On the maths section, the live-proof section and the time-audit section came off the site, and the entries substantiating them were marked retired rather than deleted, so the evidence stays on the record. Checked against my substantiation file compiled 16 July 2026 and last amended 17 July 2026. The rule this page runs on: it is updated the same day any number on the site changes. If a figure moves, a source goes dead, a check date ages out or a claim is retired, the entry here is edited or removed before the change goes live, or alongside it, never afterwards. Market figures carry the date they were checked because provider pricing pages move without notice, and a stale check date is itself a limitation. If you find a number anywhere on this site that has no entry on this page, treat the number as wrong and tell me: email me. One item is on the fix list before the next review: re-verifying the zero third party requests claim after the next site change. On 30 July 2026 the site was cut back to a single offer and the retired pricing sections came off the page. On 9 August 2026 the offer changed again to The Desk. On 19 August 2026 two entries were removed because the claims they covered are no longer anywhere on the site: the after-hours call demonstration, and the call-day operating thresholds. On 26 August 2026 the interactive database illustration came off the site and S08 and S14, the two assumptions and the day timeline inside it, were marked retired. What replaced it is a self-check that does no arithmetic at all and hands you back your own answers, described at S17. On 27 August 2026 a delivery time was removed for a third time, in words rather than digits; two response-time commitments were confirmed retired and quoted here word for word instead of described, so the check that looks for a retired claim creeping back can actually run on them; the contact window and the National AI Centre figures were found to have been marked retired while still live and were restored to live entries; and two figures that had never had an entry at all, the contact window and my eight years in sales, were given one. S16 was never issued and now says so. Amended , AEST, without a fresh review of every entry: S21 was rewritten because it still said older contacts are left out, which the code has never done, and the sentence it quoted under the price ladder came off the page; S12 gained a dated correction rather than losing its note; S13 and S20 were brought into line with the four follow-ups, which are now the templates’ own output; S25 was added for the sample data on the home page; and S26 was added for the five business days within which an opt-out has to reach the do-not-ring list. Later the same day S03 stopped quoting the line about invoicing that came off the price ladder and now quotes the Live Build credit line word for word; S21 and S26 stopped citing the answer under the price ladder, which came off the home page until a solicitor has read it; and S23 dropped the GST wording, because no GST is charged. Amended , AEST: /llms.txt was rewritten in full, so S22 now quotes its new wording, nine years rather than eight, and S26 no longer names it, because the opt-out paragraph came out of that file. No number on the site changed.