← Systems
Systems · Business Architecture · · Active

Credes Dual-Track Revenue Model

01
Problem
B2B and B2C growth funnels require contradictory resource allocation — sales-led vs product-led. Running both from a single team was creating thrash and slow decisions.
02
Model
Treat B2B and B2C as separate profit centres sharing infrastructure but with independent growth budgets, timelines, and success metrics.
03
System
Weekly budget allocation meeting. Separate Notion dashboards. Monthly cross-pollination session to surface learnings from each track.
04
Metrics
B2B: qualified pipeline value, time-to-close. B2C: D7 retention, referral rate. Both: contribution margin per acquisition channel.
05
Lessons
Infrastructure sharing creates unexpected leverage — tooling built for B2B sales often improves B2C onboarding flows. Budget the cross-pollination time explicitly or it won't happen.

The core insight behind this system is that B2B and B2C aren’t just different markets — they’re different operating systems. A B2B sale is fundamentally a relationship compressed into a contract. A B2C conversion is a product experience compressed into a moment of desire and trust.

Running both from the same operating rhythm creates cognitive overhead that kills execution in both tracks. The solution isn’t to pick one — it’s to give each track its own tempo while sharing infrastructure and learnings.

Why Most Dual-Track Attempts Fail

The most common failure mode is treating B2B and B2C as equivalent lines of business with proportional resource splits. This fails because the operating logic of each track is fundamentally different:

DimensionB2BB2C
Sales cycleWeeks to monthsDays
Decision makerCommittee or championIndividual
Primary growth leverOutbound + relationshipsProduct + referral
Success signalPipeline + revenueRetention + referral rate
Content strategyThought leadership, case studiesOnboarding, habit loops

When you run these from the same weekly cadence, B2B slows to match B2C urgency, or B2C is starved of the iteration speed it needs.

The Cross-Pollination Insight

The unexpected discovery in operating this system was that infrastructure built for one track consistently improved the other:

  • The case study process built for B2B sales became the template for B2C testimonial collection
  • The onboarding analytics built for B2C retention revealed where B2B implementations were failing
  • The support knowledge base built for B2C users became the FAQ resource for B2B prospects

This only surfaces if you explicitly budget time for cross-track review. Without a monthly session, each track optimises locally and misses the leverage.

Current Metrics (Q1 2025)

Tracking contribution margin per acquisition channel across both tracks. Early signal: B2C referral channel has significantly lower CAC than any B2B channel, but B2B has 3× higher LTV. The system is designed to run both without requiring a decision on which to prioritise.

```