You’ve already defined your acquisition motion at the system level.

Now, it’s time to bring that motion to life.

This is where we shift from motion design to channel strategy.

Your job in this chapter is to build a prioritized testing roadmap: a clear, staged plan for which channels you’ll test, in what order, and with what early tactics. By the end, you’ll know exactly where to place your first bets and how to expand from there.

But before we dive into specific channels, there are two things you need to keep in mind:

1. Your constraints and guardrails
   • ARPU, CAC targets, budget, and payback periods will shape which channels are even viable.
   • A high-CAC channel that may work for a $10k ARPU SaaS tool will be impossible for a $50 ARPU consumer app.
2. Your growth stage and goals
   • Early on, you don’t need to “test every channel.” You need to find one that works, repeatably.
   • That means sequencing matters: the order of tests is as important as the tests themselves.

This chapter will give you the frameworks and tools to:

• Evaluate channels based on a 7-point evaluation framework.
• Identify your best-fit channels via a simple prioritization method.
• Build a testing roadmap that accounts for sequencing, constraints, and (potentially) your first action.

Think of this as the connective tissue between your growth engine design and the execution playbooks that live in the library. Here you’ll decide what to test, why, and in what order.

Let’s get into it. First, we’re going to take you through a few simple but important concepts to help you level up as a customer acquisition strategist.

Demand Capture vs. Demand Generation

When it comes to marketing and customer acquisition, you’ll hear a lot of terms thrown around. Performance marketing, direct response, brand marketing, growth marketing, etc. A simpler and more useful way to think about customer acquisition at a high level is through two strategic lenses:

Demand Capture

This means harvesting demand that already exists. You’re finding prospects who are already in market — problem-aware, solution-seeking — and intercepting them with an offer.

• Examples:
  • Running search ads on down-funnel, high-intent keywords
  • Retargeting site visitors and pushing them to convert
  • Using gated lead forms to capture ready prospects
• Advantages:
  • Results can come quickly.
  • Outcomes are easier to measure because user action (sign up, content download) is explicit, but also required.
• Disadvantages:
  • Expensive. Generally involves higher CAC motions like paid or sales.
  • Shallow defensibility. You’re skimming off existing demand, but not building long-term loyalty or trust.

Demand Generation

This means creating new demand. You’re reaching people who aren’t in market yet (or at least not explicitly), educating them, and helping them recognize the problem you solve.

• Examples:
  • Founder-led social media
  • Publishing ungated content (blogs, YouTube, podcasts)
  • Building communities or hosting events
• Advantages:
  • Builds trust and loyalty. Much of the “selling” and education is already done by the time a prospect engages.
  • Often more affordable because it leans on content-led motions.
  • When it starts working, results compound — prospects come in warmer, more serious, and more loyal.
• Disadvantages:
  • Slower to produce immediate results.
  • Harder to measure directly, particularly in the short term.
  • Requires consistent effort to produce high-quality content and foster meaningful relationships.

Balancing the Two

Neither lens is “better.” They play different roles.

• Demand capture can give you quick validation and revenue, but by itself, it won’t create defensibility and leaves a massive part of your market untapped. Even worse, you leave the door open for competitors to slide in and build the relationship before they ever have a chance to discover you.
• Demand generation compounds over time and creates durable advantages, but it takes longer to prove out. Without a demand capture component, you’re missing out on the low-hanging fruit. Much worse, you leave the door open for competitors to capitalize on the demand that you created.

Most startups need both. The right balance depends on your guardrails (ARPU, CAC targets, budget, payback periods) and your stage goals. We’ll revisit this balance as you build your channel roadmap, and later we’ll talk about first actions — demand-gen tactics you can use as a bridge when capture isn’t yet viable.

Sequencing: Mapping Guardrails to Channel Pathways

You’ve already learned about flywheels at the catalyst and motion levels. At the end of the day, a major goal of this program is to help you get a flywheel up and running. But as you’ve learned, flywheels are powerful, but they’re resource-hungry. They require a big investment to get moving.

That means your sequencing decisions must map your guardrails (goals, constraints, and growth economics) to the inherent qualities of channels.

• If your guardrails support it (e.g. ARPU > CAC, sufficient budget, long enough runway), it may make sense to go straight after your acquisition flywheel.
• If your guardrails don’t support it, you’ll need a stepping-stone path. That usually means starting with lower-cost, less scalable channels to generate initial results and revenue.

Guardrail-constrained example:

• A new DTC brand typically only launches with a few products to sell. Meaning their average order value and, more broadly, annual value per customer will be limited. Their constraint is model-channel fit, even if they’re well funded. They’ll need to increase average customer value before they can pursue a paid flywheel, for example.

This leads to an important question, though: is there ever a time to “break the rules” and sprint towards your flywheel even if your guardrails (growth economics in particular) don’t support it in the short term?

Yes. Especially if you’re well-funded. Think about network effects. Super powerful once the flywheel is humming along. User leads to more users, which leads to even more users. But where do those initial users come from? Network effects are fueled by users. Meaning, you need a “feeder” channel to build the initial user base.

Here’s the tricky thing: products with network effects tend to have low ARPU models. Meaning a high-velocity yet moderately high-CAC motion like paid is going to break their growth economics. But, it may be the only option (and a good option at that) depending on the guardrails. If velocity is critical and you can afford it, taking short-term losses to produce the most powerful component of your growth engine may be absolutely worth it.

This is why sequencing matters:

• Kickstarters get the engine turning.
• Linear and booster channels reduce blended CAC and extend your runway.
• Flywheels become the long-term focus — the core of a growth engine.

Your job isn’t to chase every channel at once. It’s to map a path toward unlocking (and sustaining) your flywheel given your current guardrails.

The Bullseye Framework

The Bullseye framework is a simple way to visualize the tradeoffs between intent, scale, and cost across acquisition channels.

Picture your market like a bullseye:

• Inner rings = smaller segments of people with high intent, strong problem/solution awareness, and lower CAC.
• Outer rings = larger segments with weaker intent, lower awareness, and typically higher CAC as you try to scale.

Why inner rings matter first

For most startups, the highest-leverage place to begin is the inner rings. These are the segments where:

• People already understand the problem you’re solving.
• They’re closer to purchase and need less education.
• They can provide sharper feedback because they’re sophisticated buyers.

Starting here lets you find traction faster and refine your value props and messaging before investing heavily in broader, noisier segments.

Sequencing: work inside-out

The Bullseye framework also provides a sequencing heuristic. Unless you’ve got an outsized capital catalyst, most startups should:

1. Max out the inner rings first. Capture the high-ROI demand where conversion cycles are shortest.
2. Use those learnings and cash flow to polish your messaging and value props.
3. Expand outward gradually, reinvesting gains from the inner rings into bigger, lower-intent segments.

By the time you move into the outer rings, you’ll be better prepared — with sharper positioning, more resources, and proven learnings — to compete at higher scale.

The Economics of Scale and Value

• But why does CAC increase as we move to the outer ring?
• At a basic economic level, if a larger segment of the market produces more value, competition drives the price up.
  • Paid media → Larger audiences hold more value in aggregate, so auction dynamics push up CPMs and CAC. e.g. if an audience segment is worth $1B, big advertisers can afford to “buy” that segment for $500M and still turn a profit. Making it extremely expensive to compete.
  • SEO → Keywords with higher commercial value are more competitive, so ranking is harder and more expensive. Again, big players can afford to spend a ton of money to capture and claim those high-value segments.
  • Sales → Moving from small accounts to enterprise means higher contract value, but also higher acquisition costs (longer cycles, more effort, bigger teams).
  • Virality → The same can even be seen within virality-led motions. Think about word of mouth and incentivized virality. Your biggest fans, or power users, derive a significant amount of value from your product. They’re therefore much more likely to share (incentivized or not) with their friends. Who doesn’t want to share something they love with others? Unfortunately, they represent the minority of your user base. If we want to get the rest of our users to spread the word, and they don’t value our product as much, it’s going to cost us more to make it happen. Especially as the total user base scales.
• The inner rings provide a high value per prospect, but the aggregate value of the ring is lower and therefore tends to be more affordable.

The First Action Bridge

Sometimes, your acquisition motion and monetization motion don’t line up neatly. Or your constraints (budget, ARPU, time horizon) make it impossible to go straight at your ideal customer action (e.g. purchase).

That’s where a First Action Bridge comes in.

A First Action Bridge is a lighter-weight step you insert between initial acquisition and your core monetization motion. Instead of pushing prospects directly to buy or sign up for a trial, you give them an easier, lower-friction action:

• Subscribe to a newsletter
• Join a community
• Register for an event

The bridge captures attention (and relationships) at a lower cost, then uses low-CAC nurture channels (email, community, content) to warm prospects until they’re ready for the core conversion.

Why Use a First Action Bridge?

1. When high-intent audiences are too expensive.

• Your ideal market exists, but direct CAC is above what your ARPU can support.
• Example: Search ads on lucrative keywords → too competitive. Instead, use paid ads to drive into a newsletter, nurture, then convert later.

2. When your motions aren’t perfectly aligned.

• Paid acquisition is fast and high-volume but generally lower intent.
• Sales-led monetization is slower and resource-intensive.
• Pair them together, and the high volume of low-intent leads (i.e. needs a lot of education from sales) can clog up the sales motion. Meanwhile, the paid motion flames out because revenue can’t be passed back quickly enough to keep it running.
• A bridge (e.g. webinar sign-ups) lets you capture velocity, then filter and warm leads before they hit sales.

3. When your product is complex, expensive, or novel.

• Long consideration windows or education requirements make “buy now” unrealistic.
• A bridge gives prospects a way to start the relationship without immediate commitment.

4. When your model and channel economics don’t line up.

• You’re stuck in an ARPU–CAC “misalignment zone”:
  • ARPU too high to sustain paid (e.g. it’s unlikely someone buys a $500 product after seeing a couple ads)
  • ARPU too low to unlock sales.
• A bridge unlocks channels you otherwise couldn’t use profitably.

Common Misconceptions

• Not just for B2B. While B2B SaaS often uses bridges, they’re equally useful in B2C. Especially for high-ticket consumer purchases, complex financial tools, or novel products that need education.
• Free tier ≠ no bridge needed. A freemium product may still benefit if the gap between discovery and sign-up is long. A bridge like content or community can shorten the time to trust and product understanding.

Key takeaway:

A First Action Bridge is about sequencing and fit. It’s a strategic workaround when your goals, constraints, or model don’t align with going direct to purchase. Done well, it turns expensive or mismatched motions into sustainable engines by inserting one smart, lightweight step.