acquisition-channel-advisor by deanpeters/product-manager-skills
npx skills add https://github.com/deanpeters/product-manager-skills --skill acquisition-channel-advisor指导产品经理根据单位经济效益(CAC、LTV、回收期)、客户质量(留存率、NRR)和可扩展性(魔力数字、潜在规模)来评估是否应该扩大、测试或终止一个获客渠道。使用此框架做出数据驱动的市场进入决策,并优化渠道组合以实现可持续增长。
这不是一个渠道策略框架——它是一个用于渠道评估的财务视角,帮助你避免扩大无利可图的渠道或终止那些可以修复问题的渠道。在决定如何在各渠道间分配营销预算时使用。
一个系统化的方法来评估获客渠道:
| LTV:CAC | 回收期 | 客户质量 | 可扩展性 |
|---|
广告位招租
在这里展示您的产品或服务
触达数万 AI 开发者,精准高效
| 决策 |
|---|
3:1 | <12个月 | 留存良好 | 规模大 | 积极扩大
2-3:1 | 12-18个月 | 留存一般 | 规模中等 | 测试与优化
<2:1 | >18个月 | 留存差 | 规模小 | 终止或修复
在以下情况使用:
不要在以下情况使用:
使用 workshop-facilitation 作为此技能的默认交互协议。
它定义了:
其他(请说明))此文件定义了特定领域的评估内容。如果存在冲突,请遵循此文件的领域逻辑。
此交互式技能会提出最多 4 个自适应问题,并在决策点提供3-5 个枚举选项。
代理询问:
"让我们评估这个获客渠道。请提供:
渠道详情:
客户获取:
业务背景:
如果你没有确切数字,可以提供估算值。"
代理计算(如果未提供):
CAC = 月度支出 / 每月获取的客户数
代理询问:
"现在让我们将此渠道的单位经济效益与你的混合指标进行比较。
渠道单位经济效益:
问题:
根据回答,代理计算:
代理标记:
代理询问:
"来自此渠道的客户与其他渠道相比表现如何?
留存与扩展:
根据回答,代理评估:
代理标记:
代理询问:
"这个渠道能否扩展以满足你的增长目标?
效率与规模:
根据回答,代理评估:
代理综合:
代理提供 3-4 条建议:
适用条件:
建议:
"积极扩大此渠道 —— 卓越的经济效益 + 可扩展性
单位经济效益:
客户质量:
可扩展性:
为何这是一个赢家:
如何扩大:
预期影响:
风险: 低。强劲的单位经济效益支持积极扩大。"
适用条件:
建议:
"在扩大之前进行测试与优化 —— 边际经济效益,可修复
当前状态:
客户质量:
诊断: [以下之一:]
如何优化:
如果 CAC 是问题:
如果 LTV 是问题:
如果定位是问题:
时间线:
暂时不要扩大: 当前的经济效益最多是盈亏平衡。先修复,再扩大。"
适用条件:
建议:
"终止此渠道(或暂停) —— 经济效益不支持投资
原因:
问题:
客户质量:
问题所在: [具体诊断:]
应该修复还是终止?
修复如果:
终止如果:
建议:终止并重新分配预算
重新分配到:
如何处理预算:
例外: 如果此渠道占总销售与营销支出的 <10%,只需暂停它。不值得修复。"
适用条件:
建议:
"继续,但限制投资 —— 战略价值 > 短期 ROI
财务现实:
尽管经济效益差仍继续的原因:
如何管理:
时间线:
风险: 你正在补贴增长。确保这是值得的。"
如果用户有多个渠道,代理可以生成:
| 渠道 | CAC | LTV | LTV:CAC | 回收期 | 魔力数字 | 质量 | 建议 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Google Ads | $500 | $2,000 | 4:1 | 8个月 | 0.9 | 高 | 扩大 |
| 内容 | $200 | $1,500 | 7.5:1 | 4个月 | 1.2 | 高 | 扩大 |
| 外展 | $10K | $50K | 5:1 | 18个月 | 0.6 | 中 | 优化 |
| 活动 | $15K | $30K | 2:1 | 24个月 | 0.3 | 低 | 终止 |
预算分配建议:
查看 examples/ 文件夹中的示例对话流。以下为迷你示例:
渠道: 有机内容(博客、SEO)
建议: 积极扩大。卓越的单位经济效益,快速回收期,高质量客户。将内容支出增加 2-3 倍。
渠道: Google Ads
建议: 在扩大之前进行测试与优化。CAC 高,此细分市场的新用户引导薄弱。改进落地页,定位更高意向的关键词,为付费客户提供更好的新用户引导。
渠道: 行业活动
建议: 终止。CAC 太高,回收期太长,客户质量差。将预算重新分配到内容和付费搜索。
症状: "让我们把 Google Ads 支出增加 10 倍!"(LTV:CAC 是 1.5:1)
后果: 你在没有改善单位经济效益的情况下加速现金消耗。亏损更快。
解决方法: 只扩大 LTV:CAC >3:1 且回收期 <12 个月的渠道。在扩大之前修复有问题的渠道。
症状: "CAC 只有 $100!"(但客户在 30 天内流失)
后果: 如果 LTV 也很低,低 CAC 就毫无意义。你获取的是流失者,而不是客户。
解决方法: 按渠道跟踪同期群留存率和 NRR。低 CAC + 高流失率 = 差渠道。
症状: "我们从这个活动获得了 10,000 个注册!"(5% 转化为付费客户)
后果: 注册不支付账单。CAC 是根据付费客户计算的,而不是注册数。
解决方法: 仅跟踪付费客户的 CAC。忽略虚荣指标,如注册数、展示次数、点击次数。
症状: "混合 CAC 是 $500"(但隐藏了一个渠道的 CAC 是 $10K)
后果: 差的渠道隐藏在混合指标中。你不知道该终止哪个渠道。
解决方法: 按渠道跟踪 CAC、LTV、回收期。单独比较各个渠道。
症状: "我们将 CAC 降低了 50%!"(通过定位低意向、低 LTV 的客户)
后果: CAC 下降了,但 LTV 也下降了。单位经济效益变差,而不是变好。
解决方法: 为 LTV:CAC 比率优化,而不是仅优化 CAC。更高的 CAC 伴随更高的 LTV 更好。
症状: "LTV:CAC 是 6:1,这个渠道太棒了!"(回收期是 48 个月)
后果: 你在收回 CAC 之前就用完了现金。比率很好,现金流很糟。
解决方法: 将 LTV:CAC 与回收期配对。3:1 且 8 个月回收期优于 6:1 且 36 个月回收期。
症状: "这个渠道在 2 周后没有效果"
后果: 渠道需要时间来优化。过早终止浪费了学习机会。
解决方法: 在评估前给渠道 3-6 个月和 100+ 个客户。跟踪趋势,而不是快照。
症状: "90% 的客户来自 Google Ads"
后果: 算法变更、竞争对手出价更高、渠道饱和 = 业务停滞。
解决方法: 渠道多样化。没有一个单一渠道应占新客户获取的 >50%。
症状: "这个再营销活动的 ROI 很高!"(但客户无论如何都会转化)
后果: 你为那些原本会自然发生的转化付费。夸大了 ROI。
解决方法: 使用对照组测试增量性。只计算真正增量的转化。
症状: "企业活动是战略性的,我们不能停止!"(每年亏损 $500K)
后果: "战略性" 成为无限期烧钱的借口。
解决方法: 限制战略性渠道的支出。设定改进时间线(6-12 个月)。如果没有进展,终止。
saas-economics-efficiency-metrics — CAC、LTV、回收期、魔力数字计算saas-revenue-growth-metrics — NRR、流失率、按渠道的同期群分析finance-metrics-quickref — 渠道评估指标的快速查找feature-investment-advisor — 功能决策的类似 ROI 框架business-health-diagnostic — 更广泛的业务健康评估research/finance/Finance_For_PMs.Putting_It_Together_Synthesis.md(决策框架 #2)research/finance/Finance for Product Managers.md每周安装数
215
仓库
GitHub 星标数
1.5K
首次出现
Feb 12, 2026
安全审计
安装于
codex192
opencode189
gemini-cli186
github-copilot185
cursor183
kimi-cli182
Guide product managers through evaluating whether to scale, test, or kill an acquisition channel based on unit economics (CAC, LTV, payback), customer quality (retention, NRR), and scalability (magic number, volume potential). Use this to make data-driven go-to-market decisions and optimize channel mix for sustainable growth.
This is not a channel strategy framework—it's a financial lens for channel evaluation that helps you avoid scaling unprofitable channels or killing channels with fixable problems. Use when deciding how to allocate marketing budget across channels.
A systematic approach to evaluate acquisition channels:
Unit Economics — What does it cost to acquire, and what's the return?
Customer Quality — Do customers from this channel stick around and expand?
Scalability — Can this channel sustain growth at the volume you need?
Strategic Fit — Does this channel align with your go-to-market strategy?
| LTV:CAC | Payback | Customer Quality | Scalability | Decision |
|---|
3:1 | <12mo | Good retention | High volume | Scale aggressively
2-3:1 | 12-18mo | Average retention | Medium volume | Test & optimize
<2:1 | >18mo | Poor retention | Low volume | Kill or fix
Use this when:
Don't use this when:
Use workshop-facilitation as the default interaction protocol for this skill.
It defines:
Other (specify) when useful)This file defines the domain-specific assessment content. If there is a conflict, follow this file's domain logic.
This interactive skill asks up to 4 adaptive questions , offering 3-5 enumerated options at decision points.
Agent asks:
"Let's evaluate this acquisition channel. Please provide:
Channel details:
Customer acquisition:
Business context:
You can provide estimates if you don't have exact numbers."
Agent calculates (if not provided):
CAC = Monthly Spend / Customers Acquired per Month
Agent asks:
"Now let's compare this channel's unit economics to your blended metrics.
Channel Unit Economics:
Questions:
Do customers from this channel have similar LTV to other channels?
What's the payback period for this channel?
Based on answers, agent calculates:
Agent flags:
Agent asks:
"How do customers from this channel perform compared to other channels?
Retention & Expansion:
What's the churn rate for customers from this channel?
What's the NRR for customers from this channel?
What's the customer profile from this channel?
Based on answers, agent evaluates:
Agent flags:
Agent asks:
"Can this channel scale to meet your growth targets?
Efficiency & Volume:
What's the S &M efficiency for this channel (Magic Number)?
What's the addressable volume for this channel?
What's the CAC trend for this channel?
How much growth do you need from acquisition?
Based on answers, agent evaluates:
Agent synthesizes:
Agent offers 3-4 recommendations:
When:
Recommendation:
"Scale this channel aggressively — Excellent economics + scalability
Unit Economics:
Customer Quality:
Scalability:
Why this is a winner:
How to scale:
Expected impact:
Risk: Low. Strong unit economics support aggressive scaling."
When:
Recommendation:
"Test & optimize before scaling — Marginal economics, fixable
Current State:
Customer Quality:
Diagnosis: [One of these:]
How to optimize:
If CAC is the problem:
If LTV is the problem:
If targeting is the problem:
Timeline:
Don't scale yet: Current economics are break-even at best. Fix first, then scale."
When:
Recommendation:
"Kill this channel (or pause) — Economics don't support investment
Why:
Problem:
Customer Quality:
What's broken: [Specific diagnosis:]
Should you fix or kill?
Fix if:
Kill if:
Recommendation: Kill and reallocate budget
Reallocate to:
What to do with budget:
Exception: If this channel is <10% of total S&M spend, just pause it. Not worth fixing."
When:
Recommendation:
"Continue, but cap investment — Strategic value > short-term ROI
Financial Reality:
Why continue despite poor economics:
How to manage:
Timeline:
Risk: You're subsidizing growth. Make sure it's worth it."
If user has multiple channels, agent can generate:
| Channel | CAC | LTV | LTV:CAC | Payback | Magic Number | Quality | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Google Ads | $500 | $2,000 | 4:1 | 8mo | 0.9 | High | Scale |
| Content | $200 | $1,500 | 7.5:1 | 4mo | 1.2 | High | Scale |
| Outbound | $10K | $50K | 5:1 | 18mo | 0.6 | Medium | Optimize |
| Events | $15K |
Budget allocation recommendation:
See examples/ folder for sample conversation flows. Mini examples below:
Channel: Organic content (blog, SEO)
Recommendation: Scale aggressively. Exceptional unit economics, fast payback, high-quality customers. Increase content spend 2-3x.
Channel: Google Ads
Recommendation: Test & optimize before scaling. CAC is high, onboarding is weak for this segment. Improve landing page, target higher-intent keywords, better onboarding for paid customers.
Channel: Industry events
Recommendation: Kill. CAC too high, payback too long, poor customer quality. Reallocate budget to content and paid search.
Symptom: "Let's 10x our Google Ads spend!" (LTV:CAC is 1.5:1)
Consequence: You accelerate cash burn without improving unit economics. Lose money faster.
Fix: Only scale channels with LTV:CAC >3:1 and payback <12 months. Fix broken channels before scaling.
Symptom: "CAC is only $100!" (but customers churn in 30 days)
Consequence: Low CAC means nothing if LTV is also low. You're acquiring churners, not customers.
Fix: Track cohort retention and NRR by channel. Low CAC + high churn = bad channel.
Symptom: "We got 10,000 signups from this campaign!" (5% convert to paid)
Consequence: Signups don't pay bills. CAC is calculated on paid customers, not signups.
Fix: Track CAC on paid customers only. Ignore vanity metrics like signups, impressions, clicks.
Symptom: "Blended CAC is $500" (but hiding that one channel is $10K CAC)
Consequence: Bad channels hide in blended metrics. You don't know which channels to kill.
Fix: Track CAC, LTV, payback by channel. Compare channels individually.
Symptom: "We reduced CAC 50%!" (by targeting low-intent, low-LTV customers)
Consequence: CAC dropped but so did LTV. Unit economics got worse, not better.
Fix: Optimize for LTV:CAC ratio, not CAC alone. Higher CAC with higher LTV is better.
Symptom: "LTV:CAC is 6:1, this channel is amazing!" (payback is 48 months)
Consequence: You run out of cash before recovering CAC. Great ratio, terrible cash flow.
Fix: Pair LTV:CAC with payback period. 3:1 with 8-month payback beats 6:1 with 36-month payback.
Symptom: "This channel didn't work after 2 weeks"
Consequence: Channels need time to optimize. Killing too early wastes learning.
Fix: Give channels 3-6 months and 100+ customers before evaluating. Track trends, not snapshots.
Symptom: "90% of our customers come from Google Ads"
Consequence: Algorithm change, competitor outbids you, channel saturates = business grinds to halt.
Fix: Diversify channels. No single channel should be >50% of new customer acquisition.
Symptom: "This retargeting campaign has great ROI!" (but customers would've converted anyway)
Consequence: You're paying for conversions that would happen organically. Inflated ROI.
Fix: Test incrementality with holdout groups. Only count truly incremental conversions.
Symptom: "Enterprise events are strategic, we can't stop!" (losing $500K/year)
Consequence: "Strategic" becomes an excuse for burning cash indefinitely.
Fix: Cap spend on strategic channels. Set timeline for improvement (6-12 months). If no progress, kill.
saas-economics-efficiency-metrics — CAC, LTV, payback, magic number calculationssaas-revenue-growth-metrics — NRR, churn, cohort analysis by channelfinance-metrics-quickref — Fast lookup for channel evaluation metricsfeature-investment-advisor — Similar ROI framework for feature decisionsbusiness-health-diagnostic — Broader business health assessmentresearch/finance/Finance_For_PMs.Putting_It_Together_Synthesis.md (Decision Framework #2)research/finance/Finance for Product Managers.mdWeekly Installs
215
Repository
GitHub Stars
1.5K
First Seen
Feb 12, 2026
Security Audits
Gen Agent Trust HubPassSocketPassSnykPass
Installed on
codex192
opencode189
gemini-cli186
github-copilot185
cursor183
kimi-cli182
DOCX文件创建、编辑与分析完整指南 - 使用docx-js、Pandoc和Python脚本
43,600 周安装
| $30K |
| 2:1 |
| 24mo |
| 0.3 |
| Low |
| Kill |