Project Molt · product candidates
Draft four. Then choose one.
Complete all four concepts by 7 September. Interview against the same four, choose one from the evidence, then build it for the end-of-October competition and launch. Granola leads today, but it has not won. The project brief defines the full sequence.
How to read this
The same evidence is required for every candidate.
- Leading hypothesis
- The most likely route going in. It still competes on the same evidence.
- Sketch
- A direction and a tension, no detail underneath it yet.
- Heading only
- A category with nothing in it. The gap is the point.
01 Surf nutrition
A healthy granola
Granola is the current front-runner. A small-batch product made locally still has to beat the other three concepts in interviews and maker checks.
Leading hypothesis- The idea
- A breakfast and recovery granola sold in bags and made locally in small batches. The concept must define what makes it healthy instead of using the word as an unsupported claim.
- Who for
- Families around the club who already buy breakfast every few weeks, and kids eating before or after a session.
- What it takes
- A kitchen or co-packer, ingredient sourcing, hygiene approval, nutrition information, allowed claims, shelf-life testing and packaging that survives a school bag. Cheaper and quicker to trial than a garment or a board.
- Value model to test
- Ingredients, packaging, kitchen time and paid local work come out of the price first. What happens after that is open: a Tamarin contribution, revenue share, a shared fund or a mix.
- The link to test
- The product has a credible local maker story and repeat purchase, but the assessment still has to prove whether it can carry the wider Sunset Duckies community model beyond Tamarin.
Unknown
- Which local maker wants to develop it, and how their role, time, payment, approval and credit work.
- What healthy means in the recipe and nutrition information, and what the packaging may claim.
- What a bag costs to make, what it sells for, and the surplus left per bag.
- Which value model is clear to buyers, fair to the people doing the work and viable at small volume.
- Who carries production, stock and compliance risk.
- Whether another microcommunity could adapt the product without copying the Tamarin story.
02 Surf gear
A first surfboard
The technical end of the range, and the piece of gear that most often decides whether a kid can join at all.
Sketch- The idea
- A durable first board for kids learning in Tamarin, built to be handed down rather than outgrown and replaced.
- Who for
- Families buying a first board, and the club itself, which needs boards to lend to kids who do not have one.
- What it takes
- The hardest of the four to produce, test, transport and store. Highest price, slowest cycle, most capital tied up per unit.
- Value model to test
- Not worked out. Options include paid local shaping, a contribution linked to each board, a community purchase programme or a mix.
- The tension
- It solves the gear barrier most directly and is the least realistic thing for a small club to make first. Worth drilling into precisely because those two pull against each other.
Unknown
- Whether we make boards, commission them, or buy them well.
- What a first board should cost a family here, and what that leaves.
- Whether a shaper locally would work with the club.
- How a hand-me-down scheme would actually run.
03 Everyday wear
Not yet ideated
Clothes for ordinary days, off the water. No concrete idea attached yet, which is a gap to close rather than a verdict.
Heading only- The idea
- Open. The research should name the item families keep buying, then this becomes a specific product rather than a category.
- Who for
- Kids and parents, worn on days with no surfing in them. The widest audience of the four and the least specific problem.
- What it takes
- Sizing across growing kids, minimum orders, stock sitting in boxes. Easy to design, easy to get wrong, easy to end up with unsold sizes.
- Value model to test
- Not worked out. Local production income, a per-sale contribution and a shared brand margin need to be compared rather than assumed.
- The risk
- This is the category a club drifts into by default: a logo on a t-shirt. It only earns its place if it solves something the research actually surfaced.
Unknown
- Which item families name most often.
- Whether anyone outside the club would buy it.
- How to avoid sizing waste at small volumes.
04 Surf wear
Not yet ideated
Worn in the water: lycras, wetsuits, anything that has to survive salt, sun and a growing body.
Heading only- The idea
- Open. A long-life lycra is the obvious candidate, but nothing has been worked up.
- Who for
- Every kid in the club already wears one, and the club buys club lycras out of dues today.
- What it takes
- Technical fabric, fit across sizes, minimum orders. Harder than food, easier than a board.
- Value model to test
- Not worked out. The product could create local paid work, reduce what the Tamarin group already spends, return value per sale or combine those routes.
- The angle
- The only category where the club is already a customer of itself. Worth checking whether that changes the maths.
Unknown
- What the club currently spends on lycras, and with whom.
- Whether growth-friendly fit is real or a marketing line.
- Minimum order against the size of the club.
Evaluation
The same nine tests for all four.
Filled in during the research, not now. A candidate that wins on paper and loses at training has lost.
| Criterion | Surf nutrition | Surf gear | Everyday wear | Surf wear |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The problem it solves Named by families in the research, not by us. | — | — | — | — |
| Evidence people will buy Orders, pre-orders and refusals at a tested price. | — | — | — | — |
| The quality standard A claim with a test, not an adjective. | — | — | — | — |
| Local production Maker, work done here, imported inputs, capacity and quality control. | — | — | — | — |
| Fair maker involvement Payment, credit, approval and ownership agreed before launch. | — | — | — | — |
| Production risk Rules, minimums, lead time, storage, delivery and cash tied up. | — | — | — | — |
| Economics and community value Quoted unit cost, retail price, margin, local paid work and the value option being tested. | — | — | — | — |
| Would the kids use it The one criterion no adult can answer. | — | — | — | — |
| Can the model travel Another microcommunity can adapt it without borrowing Tamarin's identity or relationships. | — | — | — | — |
Interviews run from 8 to 18 September and the product decision closes on 25 September. Families, kids, outside buyers and makers supply the evidence. The winner moves into proof-of-concept work and an end-of-October launch; the other three stay here with the reasons they did not pass.
Back to the project brief How these get tested, compared and decided Open the project brief