## The short version
I’ve built a premium newsletter that teaches investors how to judge a deal before they put money into it. It runs on a framework I created from scratch based on more than 20 years of experience in commercial real estate.
Here’s what makes it different: most newsletters are lead magnets. You read free content, the writer looks like a thought leader, and then they sell you something else.
This newsletter is the product. It is the thing people pay for. It cannot be built to tee up a future sale. It has to deliver on its own, for the reader. That changes how every piece works.
Success in this job isn’t wordsmithing, efficiency, or matching what you think I subjectively want. It is whether the content solves the reader’s problem.
We have 17 articles to start and will continue publishing after launch. We expect to need multiple writers and editors for this project, so we are building a small, dependable editorial ****team rather than hiring for only one position.
## Where we are
We are pre-launch, with no paying customers yet.
We have already conducted problem interviews with our target readers to understand what they are struggling with when evaluating an investment. What we learned from those interviews drove the 17 articles I’ve written.
The ideas and analysis are there. They just weren’t written by a professional.
Your first job is to help with the next step: solution interviews.
We will put the articles in front of our target readers to test whether the features we designed actually solve their problem, whether readers perceive that value, and where the product still falls short before our soft launch.
You will help me write the questions we use to interview those readers. What we learn from those interviews will then drive the editing.
## The actual job:
You edit toward one bar: does each piece solve the reader’s problem?
You don’t decide that by feel. You determine it from the customer and your analysis of what the customer tells us.
That means you will help me:
* Write the solution-interview questions we put to target readers to test whether the features we designed solve their problem and where they fall short.
* Grasp the customer’s problem in depth. Know who they are and what they are actually trying to solve.
* Understand the assumptions I’m making to solve that problem, and spot where those assumptions hold or break.
* Validate that what is in each piece actually solves the customer’s problem and that the customer perceives it that way.
* Validate that we are delivering the information in the way the customer wants to learn it—the right way to help them take their medicine.
* Use what we learn to edit, restructure, and rewrite each article.
When something doesn’t work, you tell me why. You back it with evidence from the customer and your own analysis, not your personal taste.
## The hard part:
-The framework doesn’t exist anywhere else. You can’t Google it.
-You are editing a brand-new system of ideas, judged against one test: does it solve the reader’s problem?
-If you edit from instinct or preference, this won’t work.
## You’re the right person if:
*You prefer working with neurodiverse people
* You’re an expert in newsletter architecture.
* You’ve helped build paid newsletters from scratch that produced real sales.
* You understand why different formats work well enough to identify the format this audience will genuinely want to use to consume this information.
* You understand that a format is a repeatable structure that already gets attention, holds attention, and delivers the idea in a proven way.
* You discover what makes a publication desirable by researching the people reading it and studying how the product fits into their lives.
* You have high intellectual horsepower. You can take a new problem and its assumptions, hold them accurately, and work through the logic independently.
* You’ve made at least one investment in your life—stocks, bonds, real estate, a business, or something else. That experience allows you to put yourself in the reader’s shoes.
* You have a real interest in investing.
* You love to learn.
* You can take blunt feedback and move quickly.
* You have enough availability to contribute consistently.
## How we work
I process ideas out loud. We will talk through the argument, the customer’s problem, and what the article needs to accomplish before you put things on paper.
I react to edits and give direct feedback. You should be comfortable asking questions, challenging the logic, and iterating quickly.
I can't manage every part of your work. Once we understand the problem together, I expect you to work through it independently.
******You’re the wrong person if:
* You think editing primarily means grammar, polish, or reducing word count.
* You edit by feel instead of analyzing what the reader actually needs.
* You can only do this on the margins of a full-time job and cannot contribute consistently.
* You don’t love to learn.
* You want to edit completely asynchronously.
* You don’t have a real interest in investing.
*You have no results to speak of(subscriptions, views, units sold)
## To apply
Send me:
1. One paid newsletter you helped build and the number of units or subscriptions it sold.
2. One piece you edited, before and after, where your edit made it land better with the reader. Tell me what you changed and how you knew it worked.
3. Two questions you would put to a target reader in a solution interview to determine whether a piece is solving their problem.
******Please answer these questions directly. Generic applications will not be considered.
## The trial
Strong fits will be paid to complete a short trial.
You will help develop the questions we will use to interview target readers and edit one of the 17 articles. That is the real test for both of us.
## Logistics
* 17 existing articles to start, with ongoing work after launch
* Hiring multiple writers and editors
* Paid trial
* Per-article rate after the trial
* Remote freelance position
* Live collaboration required
