Six pillars determine commercial success. There are three foundations. Two are execution. One guides everything.

Here's what I learned starting this newsletter:

I can’t really start monetising with sponsors till I hit 5,000 subscribers. YouTube won't let creators monetise until they have 1,000 subscribers and 4,000 watch hours. Forced foundation-building.

Sports properties have no gate. Julia could sell destination sponsorships today with zero infrastructure built. Nothing stops properties from monetising before proving the experiences work.

That freedom is the problem.

The three experiences

Working with Julia, I kept coming back to the same framework. Ged Tarpey at Baller League, Manuel at IRONMAN—same three experiences determine viability:

Julia's destinations: In-person experience exists—venues host races. Talent/teams’ experience has gaps—teams drive hours for hotels. Remote experience undefined—no content showing what makes locations special.

Why this matters

Julia is identifying where demand exists and what barriers prevent conversion.

Baller League did this. £15 tickets removed the price barrier. Free streaming removed the access barrier. They removed the friction from those games.

Natural demand already exists for Julia's destinations. Teams need accommodation within 30 minutes of the venue. Fans need premium experiences beyond grandstands. High-value guests need hospitality during race weekends.

The gap is in infrastructure serving demand that already flows through.

Strategy Playbook: Identify natural demand first. Remove barriers preventing conversion. Prove behaviour changes before building more infrastructure.

While I am growing this newsletter from 0 - 2000+ subscribers. I am tracking one metric obsessively: open rates.

Total subscribers are important, but I actually want to know who opens every issue.

50% open rate with 1,000 subscribers beats 20% open rate with 5,000. Sponsors understand this immediately.

Why this matters

Formula E 2014-2015: The audience wasn't massive initially. But retention across multiple city-centre races proved the format worked. Sponsors bought engagement, not reach.

IRONMAN tracks athlete retention across events globally. Manuel explained they know which athletes race multiple times annually, which bring spectators, and which markets show the strongest loyalty. That data determines their entire partnership strategy.

Julia's destinations face the same question: How many teams return repeatedly? Which brings high-value guests?

What determines quality

Repeat behaviour. Teams return annually. Fans are following the series to these locations. Guests are booking premium experiences for multiple race weekends.

Organic discourse. Are teams recommending these locations? Are fans creating content about race weekends?

Natural demand signals. Are people asking when the next race is? Complaining about limited accommodation?

Here's my challenge: I'm researching specific audience thresholds indicating commercial readiness. Newsletter operators need 5K-10K subscribers before sponsors work. What's the equivalent for motorsport destinations? Racing series? Individual teams?

Strategy Playbook: Prove retention before claiming reach. 5,000 engaged participants beat 50,000 casual viewers.

With my newsletter, distribution is simple. Write in Google Docs. Send via Beehiiv. One channel, full control.

Julia's destinations have a different complexity entirely. Racing happens at physical venues. Content creation isn't the primary product; hosting races and events is.

Why this matters

Formula E 2014-2015: Free YouTube streaming while negotiating broadcast deals. Built an audience on the owned channel. Provided demand before depending entirely on broadcasters.

F1 teams: Dependent on Formula One Management for broadcast. Limited leverage because they don't control audience access.

Julia doesn't control the race broadcast. But she can create owned content showing what makes these destinations valuable—venue access tours, team facility walkthroughs, premium hospitality experiences, and local area benefits for race weekends.

Own the destination narrative even when she doesn't own the race broadcast.

The content mix

I learned this from the newsletter: educational content first, then entertainment. Readers need to understand what The Commercial Table analyses before caring about my commentary.

Julia's destinations: Show what exists, what gaps get filled, what experiences become possible. Educational before promotional.

Strategy Playbook: Own distribution channels even when you don't control the primary product. Create content around what you do control.

Before launching this newsletter, I built systems. Notion database tracking story ideas. Google Doc templates. Airtable for interviews.

Seems basic, but I can't write consistently without them.

Why this matters

Julia's destinations need a similar foundation before monetising. Not enterprise systems, minimum capability proving she can deliver what gets promised.

Minimum: Single point of contact responding within 24 hours. Basic service catalogue. Method tracking what gets promised. Proof of delivery capability.

IRONMAN has been built to enterprise scale over the years. Started simpler.

Where systems break

Regional racing series 2023: Sold five destination partnerships. Couldn't track which hotels honoured team discounts, which hospitality delivered, or which activation rights got used. Three partners didn't renew.

IRONMAN: Built tracking systems before scaling partnerships globally. Partners renew because they prove deliverables through reporting.

Strategy Playbook: Build minimum systems proving delivery capability before selling. First partners judge operational competence as much as audience access.

IRONMAN's partnership filter: Does this sponsor improve athlete experience, spectator experience, or broadcast experience?

Manuel explained that they double-check to make sure they pass that test.

Same three-experience framework that Ged Tarpey described at Baller League.

Why this matters

Julia's destinations apply the same filter. Does this partner improve team travel experience, fan race-weekend experience, or content showcasing destinations? If not, a partnership doesn't fit.

When to monetise

Julia's sequence: Identify natural demand. Map service gaps. Prove that removing barriers changes behaviour. Then monetise around demonstrated value.

Not "will teams use this?" but "teams already need this, here's proof."

Formula E 2014-2016: Lower sponsorship rates initially. Proved engagement. Rates increased as retention data accumulated.

IRONMAN: Partnerships priced on proven athlete retention and engagement metrics. Sponsors buy demonstrated outcomes, not projections.

Strategy Playbook: Partnership filter prevents bad deals. Three experiences must improve, or the partnership doesn't fit. Prove value exists before optimising price.

Strategy is creative decision-making.

Opinion-driven, not data-driven. Decisive, not vague. Fast, not slow. Simple, not complex.

Why this matters

Formula E chose city-centre street circuits over permanent tracks. Data suggested permanent tracks control costs. They chose spectacle instead.

My decision to focus The Commercial Table on tactical breakdowns instead of news aggregation. Data showed that news gets more clicks. I chose depth over breadth.

Julia's decision to identify demand before building infrastructure. Conventional approach: build first, hope demand follows. She's proving that demand exists first.

The backwards map

Julia's work taught me this. Start with priority. Map backwards to what must be true first.

Her priority: monetise destinations to prove viability to investors.

Backwards sequence:

When STRATEGY matters

Positioning decisions. Julia's destinations aren't "motorsport resorts" competing with luxury properties. They're "racing operation hubs" serving travelling teams and fans. Different lane.

Market entry sequence. IRONMAN proved a model in established markets before global expansion. Systematic validation before scaling.

Strategy Playbook: Start with priority, map backwards to required foundations. Do stakeholders understand it, remember it, love it? If not, the strategy isn't clear.

Julia's testimonial said something that stuck with me: "The commercial jigsaw puzzle I'm solving."

That's what the six pillars are. A commercial jigsaw puzzle.

Most properties have pieces scattered everywhere. They're building without proving demand. Growing without tracking retention. Monetising without systems to deliver. Distributing without owning channels.

They don't know which piece to place first.

Julia needed sequencing clarity. Which investments come before others? What proves viability to investors? How do you structure commercial pathways when vision is clear but execution order isn't?

That's what the backwards map solved. Start with her priority (monetise to prove viability). Work backwards to what must be true first (proof audiences use locations, understanding existing market, clarity on service gaps).

The six pillars gave us the framework. The backwards map gave us the sequence.

Here's what I've learned working across properties:

You can't skip pillars. You can't monetise before building experiences that work. You can't grow without providing retention. You can't operate without a minimum system.

But most properties try.

They chase sponsors before the format is clear. They scale before proving the concept. They commit capital before identifying natural demand.

The six pillars show you what to build. The backwards map shows you in what order.