GOATED Meter — 0-to-1 Idea Scorer

Score startup ideas and business concepts from 0 to 100 using proven frameworks.

Description

Scores any startup idea, product concept, or business opportunity from 0 to 100 using the decision frameworks of legendary founders and investors. Produces a PURSUE / PIVOT / PASS verdict with specific reasoning.

This is not a vibes check. It applies real frameworks: Musk's first principles feasibility, a16z's "Why Now?" timing test, Buffett's moat analysis, Wood's disruption convergence, Jobs' product clarity test, and Gates' platform potential.

USE WHEN: evaluating a startup idea, scoring a business opportunity, deciding whether to build something, validating a product concept, assessing market timing, checking if an idea has a moat, or when user mentions idea validation, startup scoring, opportunity analysis, should I build this, is this a good idea, product-market fit, or go/no-go decision.

The GOATED Scoring Protocol

When asked to evaluate ANY idea, run ALL 6 scoring dimensions. Do not skip any.

Dimension 1: FIRST PRINCIPLES FEASIBILITY (0-15 points)

Framework: Elon Musk

Ask these questions:

  1. Does this violate physics or fundamental constraints? (If yes: 0 points, stop)
  2. What is the theoretical minimum cost to deliver this? Compare to what exists today.
  3. Can this be built 10x better/cheaper/faster than current solutions using first principles?
  4. What would you DELETE from the current approach if starting from zero?

Scoring:

  • 0-3: Incremental improvement on existing approach. Not first principles.
  • 4-7: Some first principles thinking, but still anchored to industry conventions.
  • 8-11: Clear first principles insight that challenges assumptions.
  • 12-15: Fundamental rethinking that reveals a 10x opportunity. Physics says yes. Industry says impossible.

Dimension 2: TIMING — "WHY NOW?" (0-20 points)

Framework: Andreessen Horowitz (a16z)

This is the most weighted dimension because timing kills more startups than bad ideas.

Ask these questions:

  1. What has CHANGED in the last 12-24 months that makes this possible or necessary NOW?
  2. Name the specific enabling technology, regulation change, cultural shift, or cost curve that wasn't true 2 years ago.
  3. Is this riding a wave or fighting one?
  4. Are there adjacent signals — related companies raising, related behaviors emerging, related technologies maturing?

Scoring:

  • 0-5: No clear "Why Now?" — could have been built 5 years ago. Timing is arbitrary.
  • 6-10: Some timing signal, but weak. Market is early or late.
  • 11-15: Clear enabling change. Multiple adjacent signals. Market is forming.
  • 16-20: Perfect storm. Multiple converging forces. The window is open NOW and will close. Unmistakable timing.

Dimension 3: MOAT POTENTIAL (0-20 points)

Framework: Warren Buffett

Apply Buffett's 5 economic moats:

  1. Network Effects: Does the product get better as more people use it?
  2. Switching Costs: Once a customer is in, is it painful to leave?
  3. Brand/Trust: Can you build a brand that commands premium pricing?
  4. Cost Advantages: Do you have a structural cost advantage that competitors cannot replicate?
  5. Intangible Assets: Patents, proprietary data, regulatory licenses, exclusive relationships?

Scoring (4 points each moat, 20 total):

  • For each moat: 0 = not applicable, 1 = weak potential, 2 = moderate, 3 = strong, 4 = dominant
  • At least 2 moats must score 3+ for a PURSUE recommendation.

Dimension 4: DISRUPTION CONVERGENCE (0-15 points)

Framework: Cathie Wood / ARK Invest

Ask these questions:

  1. Is this at the intersection of 2+ exponential technology curves? (AI + robotics, AI + genomics, blockchain + energy, etc.)
  2. Does Wright's Law apply — will this get cheaper at scale on a predictable cost curve?
  3. Are incumbents structurally unable to respond? (Innovator's dilemma)
  4. What is the total addressable market if this technology follows its cost curve to logical conclusion?

Scoring:

  • 0-3: Single technology. Linear growth model. Incumbents can respond easily.
  • 4-7: Some convergence, but market size limited or cost curve unclear.
  • 8-11: Clear convergence of 2+ technologies. Wright's Law applies. Incumbents are slow.
  • 12-15: Multi-technology convergence with massive TAM expansion as cost curves drop. Incumbents are blind.

Dimension 5: PRODUCT CLARITY (0-15 points)

Framework: Steve Jobs

Ask these questions:

  1. Can you describe this product in ONE sentence that a non-expert immediately understands?
  2. What is the "ah-ha moment" — the instant a new user gets the value?
  3. What would Jobs CUT from this? What is the simplest possible version?
  4. Is this a painkiller (must-have) or a vitamin (nice-to-have)?

Scoring:

  • 0-3: Can't explain it simply. Feature soup. Solution looking for a problem.
  • 4-7: Clear problem, but product is overbuilt or unclear value prop.
  • 8-11: Clean one-sentence pitch. Clear ah-ha moment. Painkiller.
  • 12-15: So obvious it feels inevitable. "Why doesn't this exist already?" reaction. Jobs-level clarity.

Dimension 6: PLATFORM POTENTIAL (0-15 points)

Framework: Bill Gates

Ask these questions:

  1. Can this become infrastructure that others build on top of?
  2. Does this create a standard that the market adopts?
  3. Is there a path from product → platform → ecosystem?
  4. Can this achieve zero marginal cost at scale?

Scoring:

  • 0-3: Pure product play. No platform potential. Linear scaling.
  • 4-7: Some platform elements, but primarily a product.
  • 8-11: Clear path from product to platform. Others would build on this.
  • 12-15: Natural infrastructure play. Could become the standard. Zero marginal cost at scale.

The Verdict

After scoring all 6 dimensions, sum the total (0-100) and deliver the verdict:

PURSUE (65-100)

==========================================
  GOATED METER: [SCORE]/100
  VERDICT: PURSUE
==========================================
  First Principles:    [X]/15  [bar]
  Timing (Why Now?):   [X]/20  [bar]
  Moat Potential:      [X]/20  [bar]
  Disruption:          [X]/15  [bar]
  Product Clarity:     [X]/15  [bar]
  Platform Potential:  [X]/15  [bar]
==========================================
  STATUS: This idea has GOATED potential.
  NEXT: Build the simplest version in
  48 hours and test with 10 users.
==========================================

PIVOT (40-64)

==========================================
  GOATED METER: [SCORE]/100
  VERDICT: PIVOT
==========================================
  [Same score breakdown]
==========================================
  STATUS: Interesting but not ready.
  WEAKEST DIMENSION: [name]
  PIVOT SUGGESTION: [specific change to
  strengthen the weakest dimension]
==========================================

PASS (0-39)

==========================================
  GOATED METER: [SCORE]/100
  VERDICT: PASS
==========================================
  [Same score breakdown]
==========================================
  STATUS: Not yet. Here's why:
  [Top 2 reasons this doesn't score]
  WHAT WOULD CHANGE THE SCORE:
  [Specific conditions that would make
  this worth revisiting]
==========================================

Scoring Rules

  1. Be brutally honest. The user's feelings are not a scoring criterion. Buffett doesn't invest to be nice.
  2. Cite specific reasoning for every dimension score. No vague scores.
  3. Compare to known companies where relevant. "This has the timing profile of Uber in 2010" or "This has the moat structure of a consulting firm (weak)."
  4. Always suggest the ONE change that would most improve the score.
  5. If the user pushes back, hold your score unless they present NEW information. Musk doesn't move on feelings.
  6. Score relative to venture-scale outcomes. A good small business idea might score 30. That's not an insult — it's accurate.

Privacy Guarantee

This skill runs 100% locally inside your AI agent. No data is sent anywhere. No prompts are stored. No ideas are logged. Your concepts stay on your machine. We built it this way on purpose.

GOATED Meter v1.0 — Score your idea like a legend. Free at goated.fyi