rebrand Scirium docs (Wall-O -> Scirium) + add v1/v2 documentation package
This commit is contained in:
root
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
|
||||
# Wall-O Business Proposal
|
||||
# Scirium Business Proposal
|
||||
|
||||
Status: OPEN (v1 draft, pre-critical-review)
|
||||
Date: 2026-08-16
|
||||
Author: Sho'Nuff (Conductor) + Wall-O marketing team
|
||||
Author: Sho'Nuff (Conductor) + Scirium marketing team
|
||||
First client: Wall Orthodontics (pilot beachhead)
|
||||
Product scope: business-agnostic internal staff knowledge-base chat
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -26,13 +26,13 @@ Product scope: business-agnostic internal staff knowledge-base chat
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Executive Summary
|
||||
|
||||
Wall-O is a multi-tenant internal staff knowledge-base chat platform. Every knowledge domain inside a business (employee handbook, billing, IT help, policies, procedures) becomes its own scoped AI chat channel, backed by that business's real documents. Staff ask questions in a chat interface and get grounded, cited answers drawn from the company's own files - never hallucinated, never leaking across domains.
|
||||
Scirium is a multi-tenant internal staff knowledge-base chat platform. Every knowledge domain inside a business (employee handbook, billing, IT help, policies, procedures) becomes its own scoped AI chat channel, backed by that business's real documents. Staff ask questions in a chat interface and get grounded, cited answers drawn from the company's own files - never hallucinated, never leaking across domains.
|
||||
|
||||
The core problem is universal and business-agnostic: employees waste a documented, measurable fraction of their week hunting for information that already exists somewhere in the organization. McKinsey and Gartner studies put that fraction in the double digits of weekly hours. Enterprise solutions (Glean, Moveworks, Coveo) solve this for large companies at enterprise prices and enterprise procurement complexity. The SMB and vertical-niche middle - dental practices, law firms, restaurants, retail groups, logistics firms - is priced out and under-served.
|
||||
|
||||
Wall-O's answer is a hard invariant: one channel equals one knowledge domain, one attached AI agent, and one scoped knowledge source. This makes answers provably grounded (every reply carries citations to the source document) and provably isolated (a billing question can never surface a patient file or a neighboring tenant's data). The product is self-hosted, white-label, and business-agnostic by construction - the same core serves a 12-person dental practice and a 200-person law firm.
|
||||
Scirium's answer is a hard invariant: one channel equals one knowledge domain, one attached AI agent, and one scoped knowledge source. This makes answers provably grounded (every reply carries citations to the source document) and provably isolated (a billing question can never surface a patient file or a neighboring tenant's data). The product is self-hosted, white-label, and business-agnostic by construction - the same core serves a 12-person dental practice and a 200-person law firm.
|
||||
|
||||
Financially, Wall-O is a high-margin software product running on infrastructure IT Pro Partner already owns: ~$68K build cost, ~$0.50 per 1,000 queries marginal cost, ~95-98% gross margin, ~$1,000 CAC against ~$14K LTV, and full build-cost payback in ~10-13 months (realistic). The v1 is a grounded Q&A assistant. The v2 roadmap adds risk-tiered "do" capabilities (reporting, content generation, integrations) that deepen the moat without ever touching patient/PHI scope.
|
||||
Financially, Scirium is a high-margin software product running on infrastructure IT Pro Partner already owns: ~$68K build cost, ~$0.50 per 1,000 queries marginal cost, ~95-98% gross margin, ~$1,000 CAC against ~$14K LTV, and full build-cost payback in ~10-13 months (realistic). The v1 is a grounded Q&A assistant. The v2 roadmap adds risk-tiered "do" capabilities (reporting, content generation, integrations) that deepen the moat without ever touching patient/PHI scope.
|
||||
|
||||
This proposal defines v1 and v2 concretely, prices it against the market, and makes the fact-based case for building it. It is submitted for critical review.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ This proposal defines v1 and v2 concretely, prices it against the market, and ma
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Elevator Pitch
|
||||
|
||||
Wall-O is the AI coworker that reads your business's actual documents and answers your team's questions with citations - for the price of a streaming subscription, on infrastructure you control, scoped so nothing leaks. It is "a private, cited ChatGPT for your employee handbook, billing rules, and policies" - one tightly-scoped assistant per knowledge domain, white-labeled to your brand.
|
||||
Scirium is the AI coworker that reads your business's actual documents and answers your team's questions with citations - for the price of a streaming subscription, on infrastructure you control, scoped so nothing leaks. It is "a private, cited ChatGPT for your employee handbook, billing rules, and policies" - one tightly-scoped assistant per knowledge domain, white-labeled to your brand.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ This is not an industry-specific problem. A dental practice has the same shape o
|
||||
| Generic LLM (public ChatGPT) | Low | High (risk) | Hallucinates, no access to internal docs, leaks data |
|
||||
| Enterprise knowledge AI (Glean, Moveworks, Coveo) | Low | Low (but expensive) | $30+/seat/mo, enterprise procurement, overkill for SMB |
|
||||
|
||||
The gap: there is no affordable, self-hosted, white-label answer for the SMB and vertical-niche middle. Enterprise tools solve the problem but are priced and packaged for enterprises. Public LLMs are cheap but ungrounded and unsafe for internal documents. Wall-O sits in that gap.
|
||||
The gap: there is no affordable, self-hosted, white-label answer for the SMB and vertical-niche middle. Enterprise tools solve the problem but are priced and packaged for enterprises. Public LLMs are cheap but ungrounded and unsafe for internal documents. Scirium sits in that gap.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3.3 The precise target user
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -80,9 +80,9 @@ The buyer is the owner or office manager of an SMB (10 to 200 employees) who:
|
||||
|
||||
The beachhead vertical is orthodontics/dental (Wall Orthodontics), but the product model is explicitly business-agnostic - the same channel primitive serves any document-driven business.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3.4 The gap Wall-O fills
|
||||
### 3.4 The gap Scirium fills
|
||||
|
||||
| Need | Public LLM | Enterprise AI | Wall-O |
|
||||
| Need | Public LLM | Enterprise AI | Scirium |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Grounded, cited answers from my docs | No | Yes | Yes |
|
||||
| Affordable for SMB | Yes (but unsafe) | No | Yes |
|
||||
@@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ Sources: ~1B global knowledge workers (Schroders); ~100M US knowledge workers (U
|
||||
- AI in Knowledge Management: $6.7B (2023) to $62.4B (2033), **25% CAGR** (Market.us).
|
||||
- Knowledge Management Software: $14.56B (2025) to $70.01B (2035), **16.9% CAGR**, fastest segment "intelligent chatbots and virtual agents" (MRFR).
|
||||
- Enterprises deploying internal AI chatbots report **45-55% reduction in query resolution time** (MRFR).
|
||||
- SMB AI adoption rose from 5.2% (Jan 2023) to 17.7% (end 2025), with entry cost falling to $20-30/mo (JPMorgan Chase Institute). The demand is rising and the price point is coming to Wall-O's band.
|
||||
- SMB AI adoption rose from 5.2% (Jan 2023) to 17.7% (end 2025), with entry cost falling to $20-30/mo (JPMorgan Chase Institute). The demand is rising and the price point is coming to Scirium's band.
|
||||
|
||||
### 4.3 Real-world examples (the fact-based case to build)
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -135,19 +135,19 @@ On the "every business has this problem" claim, the independent studies converge
|
||||
- IDC: ~2.5 hours/day, ~30% of the workday, spent searching; 60% of executives say staff could not find what they needed.
|
||||
- Deloitte: **>25% of time** spent searching for information.
|
||||
|
||||
These cluster around 20-30% of the workday lost to search - a universal, business-agnostic cost, not an enterprise-only one. That is the budget Wall-O attacks.
|
||||
These cluster around 20-30% of the workday lost to search - a universal, business-agnostic cost, not an enterprise-only one. That is the budget Scirium attacks.
|
||||
|
||||
### 4.4 Why the SMB/vertical segment is underserved
|
||||
|
||||
1. Enterprise tools price SMBs out on purpose. Glean is ~$50-75/seat with a 100-seat minimum (~$60K/yr floor); M365 Copilot is $30/seat on top of a required M365 license; Moveworks is $100K+/yr; Coveo is opaque enterprise QPM. None serve a 10-30 person practice.
|
||||
2. SMB AI budgets are tiny - median ~$28-50/month total (JPMorgan Chase Institute). A $60K/yr enterprise contract is 100x an SMB's entire AI budget.
|
||||
3. Only 17.7% of SMBs had adopted AI by end-2025, versus near-universal experimentation in large enterprises - while 91% of AI-using SMBs report revenue impact (Salesforce). The wedge is a cheap, self-hosted, vertical-aware tool - exactly Wall-O.
|
||||
3. Only 17.7% of SMBs had adopted AI by end-2025, versus near-universal experimentation in large enterprises - while 91% of AI-using SMBs report revenue impact (Salesforce). The wedge is a cheap, self-hosted, vertical-aware tool - exactly Scirium.
|
||||
|
||||
### 4.5 Competitive landscape (condensed)
|
||||
|
||||
Full 10-competitor analysis is in the research appendix. The key fact: **the $300-800/month self-hosted band for 10-30 seat SMBs is structurally empty.**
|
||||
|
||||
| Competitor | Pricing | Target | Wall-O's gap |
|
||||
| Competitor | Pricing | Target | Scirium's gap |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Glean | $50-75/seat, 100-seat min (~$60K/yr) | Enterprise | Self-host + white-label + vertical templates + SMB price |
|
||||
| Moveworks/ServiceNow | $100K+/yr | Enterprise IT/HR | Not ticket-automation; general internal knowledge |
|
||||
@@ -160,16 +160,16 @@ Full 10-competitor analysis is in the research appendix. The key fact: **the $30
|
||||
|
||||
Two strategic notes from the research:
|
||||
|
||||
1. The two tools an SMB owner already has are **M365 Copilot and Notion AI** - so Wall-O must lead with self-hosted data control + vertical specificity, not generic "AI chat over docs", which those already do.
|
||||
2. **No competitor is white-label.** That is the cleanest MSP/reseller angle - ITPP can sell Wall-O under a partner's brand where Glean/Guru/Notion/Copilot cannot.
|
||||
1. The two tools an SMB owner already has are **M365 Copilot and Notion AI** - so Scirium must lead with self-hosted data control + vertical specificity, not generic "AI chat over docs", which those already do.
|
||||
2. **No competitor is white-label.** That is the cleanest MSP/reseller angle - ITPP can sell Scirium under a partner's brand where Glean/Guru/Notion/Copilot cannot.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. Product Overview
|
||||
|
||||
### 5.1 The core primitive (what makes Wall-O different)
|
||||
### 5.1 The core primitive (what makes Scirium different)
|
||||
|
||||
Every Wall-O channel is exactly three things bound together, and this is a hard invariant:
|
||||
Every Scirium channel is exactly three things bound together, and this is a hard invariant:
|
||||
|
||||
1. One knowledge domain (e.g. "Employee Resources", "Billing", "IT Help").
|
||||
2. One attached AI agent (a domain-tuned persona).
|
||||
@@ -232,7 +232,7 @@ v2 adds risk-tiered "do" capabilities on top of the v1 answer engine. These are
|
||||
| Reporting (structured extraction + SQL aggregation + chart render) | Reporting | Zero new write risk | Yes | Highest value, zero risk - recommended first v2 ship |
|
||||
| Content generation (drafts, summaries, boilerplate) | Content generation | Drafts only | Yes | Saves drafting time |
|
||||
| Housekeeping (move/rename/delete-to-recycle) | Housekeeping | Destructive | No - propose/approve/audit | Keeps knowledge fresh |
|
||||
| Integrations (Graph delegated sendMail/calendar/webhooks) | Integrations | External side effects | No - approval | Connects Wall-O to workflows |
|
||||
| Integrations (Graph delegated sendMail/calendar/webhooks) | Integrations | External side effects | No - approval | Connects Scirium to workflows |
|
||||
| Design/brand (template render + image gen) | Design/brand | Drafts only | Yes (template-driven only) | Flyers, branded assets |
|
||||
|
||||
**Write rails (SETTLED):** destructive actions require propose -> approve -> narrow audited write with before/after and undo path. Harmless writes auto-approve by risk tier. Per-agent tool scoping preserves one-agent-one-domain. Template-driven rendering is required for text-accurate flyers; raw image generation is unreliable for text and is not shipped for that use.
|
||||
@@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ The v1 and v2 product model references no industry. "Tenant" is any business; "c
|
||||
|
||||
### 6.1 Pricing philosophy
|
||||
|
||||
Premium positioning, not race-to-bottom. Wall-O is "the most accurate, best-scoped internal knowledge assistant", not the cheapest. Price for value delivered (time saved, errors avoided), not competitor undercutting. The product is self-hosted software with high gross margin, so price is set by willingness-to-pay in the segment, not by our marginal cost.
|
||||
Premium positioning, not race-to-bottom. Scirium is "the most accurate, best-scoped internal knowledge assistant", not the cheapest. Price for value delivered (time saved, errors avoided), not competitor undercutting. The product is self-hosted software with high gross margin, so price is set by willingness-to-pay in the segment, not by our marginal cost.
|
||||
|
||||
### 6.2 Tiers (from the financial model)
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -274,11 +274,11 @@ Blended ARPU at a 60/30/10 tier mix = $469/mo (modeled at $450 for safety). Ever
|
||||
|
||||
### 7.1 The hard invariant is the moat
|
||||
|
||||
The one-channel-one-agent-one-scope invariant is not a feature a competitor can bolt on after the fact; it is the schema. It makes every answer provably grounded and provably isolated, and it is what lets Wall-O serve regulated-adjacent verticals (dental, legal) where data leakage is a dealbreaker. Enterprise tools do broad search over everything; Wall-O does scoped answers over exactly one domain.
|
||||
The one-channel-one-agent-one-scope invariant is not a feature a competitor can bolt on after the fact; it is the schema. It makes every answer provably grounded and provably isolated, and it is what lets Scirium serve regulated-adjacent verticals (dental, legal) where data leakage is a dealbreaker. Enterprise tools do broad search over everything; Scirium does scoped answers over exactly one domain.
|
||||
|
||||
### 7.2 SMB price point with enterprise-grade isolation
|
||||
|
||||
Wall-O pairs SMB affordability with the isolation discipline usually found only in enterprise platforms. That combination is the open gap in the market.
|
||||
Scirium pairs SMB affordability with the isolation discipline usually found only in enterprise platforms. That combination is the open gap in the market.
|
||||
|
||||
### 7.3 Self-hosted and white-label
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -286,7 +286,7 @@ Data never leaves the customer's estate (or ITPP's controlled netcup estate). Ch
|
||||
|
||||
### 7.4 Distribution via existing ITPP MSP
|
||||
|
||||
IT Pro Partner already runs the infrastructure and has the MSP relationship model. Wall-O is not a cold-start consumer product; it slots into an existing managed-services motion where the first customer (Wall Orthodontics) is already warm.
|
||||
IT Pro Partner already runs the infrastructure and has the MSP relationship model. Scirium is not a cold-start consumer product; it slots into an existing managed-services motion where the first customer (Wall Orthodontics) is already warm.
|
||||
|
||||
### 7.5 The moat compounds in v2
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -332,7 +332,7 @@ Sell through IT Pro Partner's managed-services relationships and peer referral (
|
||||
|
||||
### 9.1 The one risk that kills the product
|
||||
|
||||
Hallucination. If Wall-O ever gives staff a wrong, confidently-stated answer about policy or billing, trust collapses and the product is done. The never-fabricate rail, mandatory citations, and below-threshold "I could not find an answer" behavior are not features - they are the product. This is why the answer engine ships before any "do" capability, and why the v2 write features are risk-tiered with approval gates.
|
||||
Hallucination. If Scirium ever gives staff a wrong, confidently-stated answer about policy or billing, trust collapses and the product is done. The never-fabricate rail, mandatory citations, and below-threshold "I could not find an answer" behavior are not features - they are the product. This is why the answer engine ships before any "do" capability, and why the v2 write features are risk-tiered with approval gates.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -400,7 +400,7 @@ Sensitivity: even at V4 Pro rates ($0.435/$0.87) it is $1.31/1K queries; a 5x pr
|
||||
**Yes - build it.** The math is unambiguous because three things compound:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Near-zero marginal cost (~$0.50 per 1,000 queries) on self-hosted infra and open components - no license fees, no per-seat third-party cost.
|
||||
2. ~95-98% gross margin with premium pricing in a market that already has real floors (Glean ~$60K/yr minimum, Moveworks $100K+). Wall-O at $199-$2,000/mo is dramatically cheaper to the customer yet ~98% margin to us.
|
||||
2. ~95-98% gross margin with premium pricing in a market that already has real floors (Glean ~$60K/yr minimum, Moveworks $100K+). Scirium at $199-$2,000/mo is dramatically cheaper to the customer yet ~98% margin to us.
|
||||
3. Owned distribution: ITPP already has the MSP client base and trust, so CAC is ~$1,000/tenant instead of a paid-acquisition crawl.
|
||||
|
||||
Full payback in ~10-13 months realistic, profitable even in the conservative case within ~2 years. The honest caveats: the M365 connector is the riskiest engineering line (fund and pilot it first), DeepSeek may raise prices (LiteLLM abstraction absorbs it), and churn/adoption are unproven in a new category (activation, queries-per-active-user, is the KPI to watch).
|
||||
@@ -415,7 +415,7 @@ The build requires, and the design docs already specify:
|
||||
|
||||
| Infrastructure | Status | Detail |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| netcup host for Wall-O | To provision | Docker host, Caddy TLS edge, one Rocket.Chat workspace + MongoDB per tenant |
|
||||
| netcup host for Scirium | To provision | Docker host, Caddy TLS edge, one Rocket.Chat workspace + MongoDB per tenant |
|
||||
| Orchestrator (FastAPI) | To build | Multi-tenant, owns tenancy/agents/scopes/retrieval/LLM |
|
||||
| Postgres + pgvector | To build | Tenancy tables, chunks + HNSW vector index |
|
||||
| admin-ai (LiteLLM) | Existing | DeepSeek V4 Pro primary + fallback chain |
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user