Client Project
Market Strategy · 2024
Turning four possible markets into one entry strategy — and a defensible price — for an EEG-controlled training game.

View case study
01
Overview

Interactive
Vertical Opportunity Assessment Summary
Role
Market Strategy Consultant — Sports Training vertical lead
Team
10-member cross-functional consulting team
Timeline
8 weeks · 2024
Tools
Miro
Excel
PowerPoint
ChatGPT / Claude
How I Used AI
ChatGPT and Claude accelerated two parts of this project: synthesizing interview notes into themes, and mapping a 15+ competitor landscape far faster than manual search allowed.
Every AI-surfaced claim about a competitor or study was verified against the primary source before it entered analysis.
02
Executive Summary
The challenge
A product with real neuroscience behind it but no obvious shelf: is an EEG-controlled training game an edtech tool, sports equipment, a mental health intervention, or an elder care product? Each answer implies a different buyer, price anchor, evidence bar, and competitor set — and a startup can only afford one first bet.
The task
Evaluate all four verticals on a common framework rigorous enough to support market entry, positioning, and fundraising conversations with the executive team.
STRATEGY 01
Score every vertical on the same dimensions, so the recommendation would rest on comparison, not enthusiasm.
STRATEGY 02
Within sports, find the entry point with the lowest evidence barrier.
03
Context
Brain-training products have a credibility problem. Thynk had a real answer to it.
The category is crowded with apps making broad cognitive claims backed by thin evidence. Thynk's EEG hardware gave it a real differentiator: the game responds to measured brain activity, not taps on a screen. However, a differentiator only matters relative to a specific market's alternatives and skepticism.
The business problem
Four plausible markets. Spreading effort across all of them meant winning none.
04
Research
My Focus
The sports training vertical
I investigated whether athletes and coaches saw real value in EEG-based cognitive training: where it could fit into existing training routines, and what it would take for them to actually buy it.
How I gathered input
Interviews with athletes and coaches on training routines, mental-performance needs, and willingness to pay.
Competitive analysis across brain-training, sports-tech, and mental-performance products.
Review of scientific literature on EEG-based cognitive training.
Used AI LLMs to synthesize interview notes and accelerate competitive scans, validating every finding against primary sources.
Research snapshot
4
Markets evaluated on a common framework
15+
Competitors reviewed
8
Scientific studies examined, spanning 337 participants
What athletes and coaches told us (paraphrased from interview notes):
"I would need to see how this translates into performance on the field"
"This would make sense during the off-season, when we have more time to introduce something new."
"At that price, it would only appeal to serious individual athletes or specialized programs, not an entire team."
"Athletes won't use another training tool unless they can see measurable improvement."
05
Insights
01
Coaches and athletes were open to cognitive training, but wanted clear, sport-specific evidence before adopting. Generic "brain training improves focus" claims carried no weight. That set the adoption barrier higher for team-level sales than for individuals.
02
Selling to teams meant convincing coaching staff, budget owners, and skeptical athletes all at once. Individual athletes and off-season programs could adopt on personal conviction: a faster, cheaper path to reference customers whose results become the sport-specific evidence teams demand.
03
Research indicated an expected range of $600-$750. Buyers compared the product against specialized training programs and equipment, not $10/month brain-training apps. Positioning determines the price ceiling.
Where buyers shelved the product
~$10/mo
Brain-training apps
(Wrong anchor)
$600-$750
Skylar's Run
$$$
Specialized training programs & equipment
06
Recommendation
01 · Go First
02 · Expand
Evaluated
Evaluated
It was the only market where evidence, access, and economics all pointed the same way.
A
B
C
D
E
The Honest Part
Education
Sports
Evidence
Five measurable studies
No sport-specific proof yet
Buyer
Clear hierarchy: district → school
Fragmented: athlete, parent, coach, trainer, team
Traction
Pilots planned & supported
Interest, not yet commitments
Path to scale
One contract → hundreds of users
One athlete at a time, then up-market
07
Results
Presented to Thynk's CEO and executive team.
Our recommendations were structured to support four decisions the company faced: market-entry sequencing, product positioning, expansion planning, and the market narrative for future fundraising.
08
Reflection
I spent eight weeks building the case for sports training, and the framework we built showed education was the stronger first market. Holding the analysis above the attachment is the entire value of this project: it made the final recommendation something the executive team could trust, because no vertical lead could argue their market in on enthusiasm alone.