The trust-seeker · been burned
Carries a past bad experience with tradespeople. The dread of being ripped off again is the dominant emotion, and structural advocacy is the answer.
How to read this. One of eight plausible buyer profiles, mapped proposition-out from Homesy’s offer rather than from demographics. Affluence appears here only as an attribute and an affordability filter, never as the defining cut. Held as hypothesis, built to be tested — see the overview for method and the full set.
The person behind the profile
Has been overcharged, mis-sold, or let down — and it stuck. Now approaches any home job with suspicion and stress. Wants someone provably on their side, not another gamble.
Bad experiences aren’t means-tested. The binding trait is a trust injury, not a class.
The needs Homesy meets for them
Primarily 2 (don’t let me get ripped off) — the defining need — and 6 (one trusted person), with 8 (predictable).
Needs fingerprint
Propensity signals and triggers
Volunteers past-bad-experience stories; reads reviews obsessively; values guarantees and transparency; slow to commit, loyal once won.
A new job they’re dreading; a fresh bad experience elsewhere; a friend’s horror story.
The part of the proposition that lands
Structural advocacy — “no margin, so no reason to talk you into work you don’t need” answers their exact fear at the root. This is the profile Homesy’s model was almost designed for; the cost-price structure is the trust proof.
Could they actually buy?
Strong yes on need, but slow to trust — the sale is real but the conversion is gradual, won by proof not promises. High loyalty once converted.
How much to trust this profile
Reasoned from the trust-deficit signal that runs through the documents; not a standalone named segment.
Whether the structural-advocacy message is believed — a burned customer is sceptical of all claims, including ours, so the model has to be provable, not just stated.