Create a 2x2 competitive positioning matrix for {{market}}.
Inputs:
- List of competitors to include (6–8): {{paste}}
- Two axes I want to use: {{paste — X-axis and Y-axis dimensions, e.g. price vs. capability, breadth vs. depth, ease-of-use vs. power-user}}
- Where I think we fit: {{paste — and why}}
Output:
## The matrix (as text)
```
HIGH [Y-axis label]
|
Quadrant 2 Quadrant 1
[name] [name]
- Competitor A - Competitor B
- Competitor C
LOW [X-axis] ─────────────┼───────────── HIGH [X-axis]
Quadrant 3 Quadrant 4
[name] [name]
- Competitor D - Competitor E
- Competitor F - [Us]
|
LOW [Y-axis label]
```
## Quadrant naming
Each quadrant gets a descriptive name (not "high-high"). E.g. "Premium specialists," "Mass-market scale," "Bootstrapped DIY," "Legacy incumbents."
## Placement justification
For each competitor: 1–2 sentences on why they're in that quadrant, citing public evidence (pricing page, feature set, target customer, recent positioning).
## Where we fit — honest version
- Where the user thinks we fit
- Where the actual evidence places us
- The delta and what it means
## Risks of this matrix
Honest.
- Axis choices that flatter us — name them
- Competitors that are mis-placed because of insufficient data
- Whether the 2x2 collapses if the market shifts (e.g. our X-axis stops mattering)
## Better axes if this 2x2 is weak
If the chosen axes aren't actually discriminating (everyone clusters in one quadrant), suggest 2–3 alternative axis pairs that would create cleaner separation.
Hard rule: if "Us" ends up in the visually best quadrant (top-right), pressure-test. Either the axes are honest or they were chosen to land us there. Be willing to redo.positioningcompetitivestrategy