Offers
Corey HainesCommunityCreated by Corey Haines
- Skill
- Guidelines
- Business and productivity
- MIT
- No issues found
AutoGineer summary
Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author
This skill provides a structured approach to offer design, emphasizing that conversion issues are often rooted in the offer itself rather than the copy. It utilizes the Value Equation—Dream Outcome, Perceived Likelihood, Time Delay, and Effort & Sacrifice—to diagnose and improve the core components of an offer. The framework guides users through auditing their current offer, identifying the weakest lever, and systematically adding components like bonuses, guarantees, and scarcity to increase perceived value and conversion rates.
What it does
- Diagnoses the binding constraints of an existing offer using the Value Equation.
- Provides a six-part anatomy for building complete, high-converting offers.
- Offers strategies for designing effective guarantees and risk-reversal mechanisms.
- Guides the creation of bonus stacks that address specific customer objections.
- Helps structure pricing and payment plans to maximize conversion.
- Identifies when to use offer-design tactics versus pricing or copywriting strategies.
When to use it
- When an existing offer is failing to convert despite having decent traffic.
- When you need to build a new offer for services, courses, coaching, or high-ticket B2B.
- When you want to increase the perceived value of your product without simply lowering the price.
- When you need to address specific customer objections through strategic bonus stacking.
- When you are transitioning from selling time to selling productized services or outcomes.
Advantages
- Focuses on the structural integrity of the offer rather than just surface-level copy.
- Provides a clear, actionable diagnostic loop to identify the biggest lever for improvement.
- Uses a proven, logic-based framework to increase value perception.
- Helps avoid common pitfalls like manipulative scarcity or over-promising guarantees.
- Standardizes the components of an offer to ensure nothing critical is missing.
Usage examples
- “My agency retainer isn't converting. How do I improve the offer?”
- The agent will guide you through identifying your business type, scoring your current offer against the Value Equation, and pinpointing which of the six offer components is missing or weak.
- “How can I add bonuses to my course without making it look like cheap padding?”
- The agent will help you design a bonus stack where each item specifically targets a known customer objection, such as lack of time or fear of getting stuck.
- “I want to offer a guarantee for my coaching program but I'm afraid of refunds.”
- The agent will help you design a conditional guarantee that provides risk reversal for the client while protecting your business model and reputation.
- “Why is my high-ticket B2B offer not getting any bites?”
- The agent will audit your offer's anatomy, likely focusing on whether your dream outcome is clearly defined and if your perceived likelihood of achievement is supported by sufficient proof.
Install
Download the skill as a ZIP:
https://autogineer.com/agent-skills/coreyhaines31/offers/downloadUnzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:
mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip offers.zip -d .agents/skills
Documentation by Corey Haines
Offer Design
You are an expert in offer construction. Your goal is to help the user build offers that move — not by writing better copy on a worse offer, but by improving the offer itself.
Before Starting
Check for product marketing context first:
If .agents/product-marketing.md exists (or .claude/product-marketing.md, or the legacy product-marketing-context.md filename, in older setups), read it before asking questions. Use that context and only ask for information not already covered or specific to this task.
Core Philosophy
The offer is the thing, not the page. Better copy on a weak offer compounds slowly. A stronger offer with average copy converts immediately. Most "we need better copy" requests are actually "we need a better offer" requests in disguise.
This skill exists because the rest of the repo handles the expression of an offer — copywriting writes the sales page, cro optimizes the conversion path, pricing sets the tier structure, launch orchestrates the moment, paywalls shapes the upgrade prompt. None of them ask the deeper question: is the offer underneath any of that actually good?
When this skill matters
You sell:
Services — consulting, freelance, agency retainers, productized services
Courses — async, cohort-based, live
Coaching — 1:1, group, mastermind
Info products — guides, swipe files, templates, communities
High-ticket B2B — $5K+ ACV with a sales conversation
Direct-response — e-com promo offers, infomercial-style, paid-traffic-to-VSL
When pricing does more of the work
You sell:
Self-serve SaaS with tiered subscriptions — the levers are mostly tier structure, value metric, and packaging; offer construction (bonuses, guarantees) is secondary
Marketplaces — the offer is structural, not constructed
Skim this skill in those cases for the value equation framing, then go to pricing.
The Value Equation
The single most useful frame for offer design. Originally from Alex Hormozi's $100M Offers — internalized broadly across direct-response and creator-economy training since.
Dream Outcome × Perceived Likelihood of Achievement
Value = ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Time Delay × Effort & SacrificeYou move the four levers like this:
| Lever | What it means | How to increase value |
|---|---|---|
| Dream outcome ↑ | What the customer actually wants | Connect to the bigger goal behind the surface ask. Specify and name it. |
| Perceived likelihood ↑ | Do they believe they'll get it | Proof (case studies, named customers, data), guarantees, methodology specificity |
| Time delay ↓ | How long until result | Faster onboarding, faster first win, faster end-to-end timeline |
| Effort & sacrifice ↓ | What it costs them in time/work/risk besides money | Done-for-you, simpler process, fewer decisions, lower learning curve |
Implication for offer construction: most "lower the price" requests are actually "raise the numerator or lower the denominator" requests. Price is the comparison, not the value.
For the full framework, examples, and how to diagnose which lever is broken: see references/value-equation.md
The Anatomy of a Complete Offer
A complete offer has six components. Skip any one and conversion suffers.
| # | Component | Question it answers |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Core deliverable | What do they get? |
| 2 | Bonus stack | What else do they get that makes the core feel undervalued? |
| 3 | Guarantee | What happens if it doesn't work? |
| 4 | Scarcity / urgency | Why now, not later? |
| 5 | Name | What is this thing called? |
| 6 | Price + payment structure | What do they pay and how? |
Most weak offers fail on bonuses (none), guarantees (none or wrong type), or scarcity (none, or fake). Most aggressive-to-the-point-of-cringe offers fail on guarantee (over-promising) or scarcity (fake countdown timers).
For the full anatomy with worked examples: see references/offer-anatomy.md
Reference Library
| Reference | When to read |
|---|---|
| value-equation.md | Diagnosing which lever is broken on a stuck offer |
| offer-anatomy.md | Building a complete offer from scratch |
| guarantee-design.md | Picking the right type of guarantee for your business model |
| bonus-stacking.md | Adding bonuses that raise perceived value without devaluing the core |
| scarcity-urgency.md | Creating real scarcity (and avoiding the fake patterns that destroy trust) |
| offer-formats.md | Format playbooks by business type — service, course, coaching, info product, SaaS lead magnet, agency retainer, high-ticket B2B |
| saas-offers.md | SaaS specifically — the discount trap (why discounting to acquire backfires) + four SaaS worked offers (AudienceTap, SaberSim, Teachable, Kit) |
| examples.md | Anonymized worked examples — before/after for each business type |
The Diagnostic Loop
When the user says "my offer isn't converting" or "I want to improve my offer":
Identify the business type — service, course, coaching, info product, SaaS, agency, B2B. The right playbook is type-specific.
State the current offer in plain language — name, price, what they get, guarantee, deadline. Write it down even if it lives in scattered places now.
Run the value equation — score each of the four levers 1–10. The lowest is the binding constraint.
Audit the anatomy — which of the six components is missing or weak?
Pick one lever to fix this iteration — don't rebuild everything. The biggest lever is usually the one currently scoring lowest.
Draft the changed component — new bonus, new guarantee, new scarcity, new name, new payment plan
Project the lift, honestly — plan on 10–40% relative lift from one component change. Multiply the lifts, don't add them: +20% then +30% =
1.20 × 1.30 = 1.56(2% → 3.12%, +1.12 percentage points). Two iterations rarely reach 2–3x; anyone promising 5x is selling something. Confirm the combined offer with a test (see ab-testing).
When NOT to Use Offer-Design Tactics
Some offer patterns work but cost more than they're worth:
Manipulative scarcity — fake countdown timers, "only 3 spots left" lies. Short-term lift, long-term trust collapse. Don't.
Over-promising guarantees — "double your revenue or refund + $1,000." Refund risk eats margin; the few cases that fail nuke your reputation publicly.
Bonus inflation — stacking $50K of "bonuses" on a $497 product so it "feels like a steal." Sophisticated buyers see this. Treat bonuses as additive, not exaggerated.
Course-bro aesthetic on a serious product — Gold logos, "secret method," fake urgency. Pattern-matches to scam. Wrong room.
Discounting to acquire — discount-askers churn at ~2× the rate of full-price customers, and a coupon anchors the product as cheap. Discount only for upgrades/cross-sells (rewarding existing customers) or real seasonal windows — never to win a new one. Raise value with an offer instead. See saas-offers.md.
The repo voice: opinionated, but honest. Building offers well doesn't mean building offers loud.
Banned Vocabulary
When drafting offer language (sales pages, emails, headlines), avoid:
"Game-changing," "revolutionary," "disruptive," "next-level," "10x" — pattern-matches to AI slop / course-bro
"Secret," "hidden," "what they don't want you to know" — clickbait
"Limited time" with no actual time limit — lying
"Worth $X" or "$Y value" with no comparable — inflation
"100% guaranteed" without specifying conditions — legally and brand-wise risky
Use specific numbers, named customers, concrete outcomes, real timelines. Specificity beats superlatives.
Related Skills
pricing — for price levels, tier structure, value metric, packaging, freemium
copywriting — for the page that presents the offer
cro — for optimizing the conversion path the offer travels through
launch — for the moment you ship the offer
paywalls — for in-app upgrade-prompt versions of an offer
sales-enablement — for the deck and one-pager that carry the offer into a sales conversation
emails — for the email sequence that warms up the offer
marketing-psychology — for the cognitive biases that make offers land or bounce
Files
- ATTRIBUTION.mdAdded by AutoGineer873 B
- LICENSELicence file added by AutoGineer1.0 KiB
- SKILL.md9.9 KiB
- evals/evals.json3.1 KiB
- references/bonus-stacking.md7.6 KiB
- references/examples.md10.0 KiB
- references/guarantee-design.md8.0 KiB
- references/offer-anatomy.md8.6 KiB
- references/offer-formats.md10.4 KiB
- references/saas-offers.md7.7 KiB
- references/scarcity-urgency.md6.9 KiB
- references/value-equation.md7.7 KiB
references/bonus-stacking.md
Bonus Stacking
How to add bonuses that raise perceived value without devaluing the core offer.
What bonuses actually do
Three jobs at once:
Raise perceived value of the total offer
Lower perceived risk — even if the core underdelivers, "I still got X for free"
Close specific buying objections — each bonus can target one objection
The third job is the underrated one. Most weak bonus stacks throw four generic "extras" at the buyer. Strong bonus stacks read the buyer's specific hesitations and close them in order.
The core principle: bonuses-as-objection-handlers
For each major objection your buyer has, add a bonus that closes it.
Common objections → matching bonus
| Objection | Targeted bonus |
|---|---|
| "I don't have time to implement this" | Done-for-you setup, week 1 |
| "I don't know which tools to use" | Pre-vetted tool stack with discount codes |
| "What if I get stuck?" | 30-day async Slack support |
| "I'm not sure my team will buy in" | Stakeholder pitch deck |
| "I've tried something like this before and it didn't work" | Case study from someone in your exact situation |
| "What about [edge case in my industry]?" | Industry-specific bonus reference doc |
| "Will I have to learn a bunch of new tools?" | Pre-built templates for the tools we recommend |
| "What if I don't finish it?" | 1:1 accountability check-in at day 30 |
| "My situation is more complex than the average buyer" | 1:1 onboarding call to customize the plan |
| "Will this work in [region/language]?" | Localized version or addendum |
A 4-bonus stack that closes 4 specific objections converts massively better than a 4-bonus stack of generic "extras."
How to find your buyer's actual objections
Read every refund-request email and sales-call transcript from the last 6 months
Read your own sales page out loud and write down every doubt that surfaces
Ask 3 recent buyers: "What almost made you not buy?"
The answers cluster around 3–6 objections. Build a bonus for each.
The math of bonus value
Each bonus has a stated value (what it would cost if you bought it separately). Bonuses should:
Have a stated value the buyer can verify. Compare to a comparable product or service. "$497 value — that's what the standalone template pack costs" beats "$5,000 value." (Standalone? Compared to what?)
Total to less than 2x the price of the core offer. A $1K offer can comfortably have $1.5K in bonuses. A $1K offer with "$25K in bonuses" reads as a scam.
Be things you'd actually sell separately. If you'd never sell the bonus as a standalone product, the stated value isn't real. Sophisticated buyers can tell.
Each have a specific named outcome. "Bonus: marketing toolkit" is weak. "Bonus: 12 pre-built Notion templates for your first 90 days, valued at $297 because that's what the standalone template pack sells for at [link]" is strong.
The 4-bonus pattern that works
Most strong offers stack exactly 3–5 bonuses. More starts to feel like padding; fewer leaves objections un-closed.
A common structure:
| # | Type | Purpose | Typical value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Speed bonus | Removes time-delay objection | Templates, swipes, accelerators |
| 2 | Trust bonus | Removes likelihood-of-failure objection | Case study, methodology doc, examples library |
| 3 | Stuck bonus | Removes "what if I get stuck" objection | Office hours, Slack, on-demand support |
| 4 | Decision bonus | Removes "I have to choose between X and Y" objection | Tool stack with discount codes, pre-vetted recommendations |
| 5 (optional) | Bigger-than-you-asked bonus | Adds dream-outcome surface area | Adjacent deliverable, related framework, partner offer |
Example for a $2K B2B copywriting course:
| # | Bonus | Closes |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | "30 winning sales page templates (last updated 2026-Q2)" — $297 value | "I don't have time to write from scratch" |
| 2 | "9 case studies from agencies that hit $250K MRR using these frameworks" — $0 (proof, not a saleable asset) | "Does this actually work for my situation?" |
| 3 | "60-day Slack access with weekly office hours" — $497 value | "What if I get stuck on a specific project?" |
| 4 | "The tool stack: 5 tools we use + discount codes (saves ~$1,200/yr)" — $1,200 value | "I don't know what to use" |
| 5 | "Bonus session: How to charge $5K+ per project" — $297 value | Pricing confidence (adjacent dream outcome) |
Total stated value: ~$2,300 in bonuses on a $2K core. Math checks out (under 2x). Each bonus closes a real objection.
When bonuses backfire
Inflated values
"$50,000 in bonuses included today only!" on a $497 product. The asymmetry is the tell — every sophisticated buyer's bullshit detector fires.
Stated values must be defensible. If you can't point to a comparable price, don't quote the value.
Bonuses that devalue the core
If your core offer is "I'll write your sales page for $5K" and your bonus is "PLUS — bonus sales page edits for free for life!" — the bonus implies the core is incomplete. Now the buyer wonders why they should buy without the bonus.
Bonuses should be additive to a complete core, not patches on an incomplete one.
Bonus-stack-as-substitute-for-core
A weak core surrounded by amazing bonuses converts at the moment of sale but produces angry refund requests. The buyer bought the bonuses, got the core, felt cheated.
Order: strong core first, then bonuses to address specific objections.
Stacked too high
5+ bonuses with high stated values starts to read as a course-bro funnel. Premium buyers ignore the bonus list entirely; mid-market buyers feel they're being upsold; new buyers get confused.
3–5 bonuses, each with a specific purpose. Cap it.
Same-as-everyone-else bonuses
"BONUS! Private community access!" on every course in your category isn't a bonus, it's table stakes. If every competitor offers the same bonuses, none of them are differentiators.
Find bonuses that are specific to your buyer's situation. A SaaS bonus for a SaaS-focused buyer beats a generic "private community" every time.
Bonus delivery: timing matters
A bonus delivered on day 1 closes "what if I never use it?" risk. A bonus delivered at week 4 maintains momentum. A bonus delivered at completion rewards finishing.
Mix the timing intentionally:
Day 1: speed bonuses (templates, swipes, toolkit)
Week 2–4: support bonuses (Slack, office hours, check-ins)
Completion: identity bonuses (certificate, alumni access)
A buyer who gets all bonuses up-front is more likely to abandon (they got what they wanted, lost incentive to finish). A buyer who gets some bonuses at completion is more likely to finish (and refer).
The audit
For each existing bonus on a current offer, ask:
What specific buying objection does this close? If you can't name one, it's filler.
What's its defensible stated value? If you can't point to a comparable price, drop the dollar amount.
Does the buyer get it on day 1, or at a meaningful point in their journey? Timing should support the customer outcome, not just the conversion event.
Is this bonus specific to my buyer, or could any competitor offer the same thing? If it's generic, replace it.
Is the bonus strong enough that the offer would still convert without the core? If yes, the core is weak. Fix the core, don't lean on the bonus.
Most stuck offers have either zero bonuses or too many generic ones. The right move is usually: cut to 3–5 specific objection-closing bonuses, name each one clearly, and put defensible values on them.
Requirements and compatibility
Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta
“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.
Security
No issues found by our static scan· No issues found
A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.
Attribution and licence
- Created by
- Corey Haines
- Publisher
- Corey Haines (Community)
- Source
- coreyhaines31/marketingskills · skills/offers · commit 96798cf
- Licence
- MIT License (redistribution allowed)
- LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE)
- ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
- Synced
AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by Corey Haines or Corey Haines.
Download ZIP
The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download offers.zip