Lead magnet post

Purpose

A post that offers a free resource for a comment works when the resource is worth having and the post shows exactly what the reader gets. Most underperforming posts fail on packaging: the offer is explained in prose instead of listed, the resource has a vague name, or the proof is weak. This skill fixes those in order.

When to use

• The author wants a post that gives away a resource and collects comments in return.
• An existing resource post underperformed and needs a diagnosis and rewrite.

Route elsewhere when:

• The post has no resource attached. Use founder-post-triggers.
• The output is a company newsletter. Use newsletter-issue-formats.

Inputs

• The resource, under a working name.
• What is inside it, as a list of concrete items.
• The reader it is for, in their own words.
• The pain it solves now.
• Proof the author can stand behind: real numbers or credentials only. If there is no proof, use an experience-based or contrarian hook.
• A comment word, either chosen by the author or proposed to fit the resource.

Procedure

1. Qualify the resource. Apply three tests. Would a reader pay for it, even as a fair value? Can the reader consume it in under an hour? Is it written for one specific reader? If one test fails, say so and propose a fix before writing. The usual fix is to split one immediately useful piece out of a larger asset. Rename a vague resource to something specific.
2. Offer three hook options. Use three different archetypes, matched to the proof the author has. A hook that needs a metric the author does not have is ruled out. Let the author choose. If the author asks for the best one, pick it, say why in a line, and continue.
3. Build the post in this order:
   • the hook, opening on a concrete result, number or named tool, never a topic or a question;
   • a free-claim line within the first three lines, stating that the resource is free and what it is for;
   • a pain block that names the reader's problem in their words and moves from "I" or "we" to "you";
   • a deliverable list of four to six items, each concrete enough that the reader would comment to get that specific thing;
   • one call to action, which is one comment word, and a short postscript that adds proof, a trust line or a connection note.
4. Self-score the draft against the checks above before showing it. Fix any failure before delivery.
5. Give one media direction that makes the visual prove the hook's claim, not decorate it.
6. Check the promise. Each deliverable is a promise the resource must contain. If the resource cannot send what the list promises, change the list.
7. For a rewrite, score the existing post first and name the two or three biggest failures in plain terms. Keep the parts that already work, and make surgical edits where the structure is sound. Re-score after each edit. The free-claim line, the call to action and the postscript are the usual casualties. If the post runs past about 1,600 characters, cut enough to pay for any addition.

Output

• The post, ready to paste.
• The chosen hook, with its reason.
• One line of media direction.
• A note that each deliverable is a promise the resource must keep.
• For a rewrite, the diagnosis and the list of changes.

Quality bar

Every number and credential is real. There is one resource and one call to action. The deliverable list is concrete. Packaging is checked before the offer is blamed. Watch for an invented metric, a vague resource name, an offer explained in prose instead of listed, and more than one offer in the same post.

Rules

• Never fabricate metrics, client results or testimonials. Use real numbers or none.
• One post, one resource, one call to action.
• If a proof point sounds invented, check it with the author before using it.
• Match the author's spelling convention.