Deep research: competitors and market, with citations

I'm weighing [decision I'm facing] and want to research it.
Context: [company / industry / size / market I operate in].
What I already know: [2-4 sentences on what I've already got].

Don't search anything yet. Help me scope the brief:
1. Rephrase my decision so it's clear which options I'm choosing
   between and what distinguishes them.
2. List what information would have to be missing for me to
   decide wrong — ranked from most important.
3. Suggest 3 different scopes for the research (broad, medium,
   narrow), and for each, state what it will and won't answer.
4. Write down what I probably won't be able to find out from
   public sources at all, and where I'll have to find it instead.

Be specific, no generic advice about the importance of data.

My decision: [decision].
My context: [company, industry, size, market].

Suggest 5 variants of a research question for deep research.
For each, state:
- the exact wording of the question (one sentence, not a
  run-on)
- what type of source would answer it (statistics, annual
  reports, price lists, industry analyses, user discussions,
  legislation)
- how my decision would change depending on how the answer
  comes out
- how hard it will be to find out from public sources (easy /
  hard / probably unknowable)

Make the variants differ in angle, not just wording. At least
one should target risks, and at least one should target what
would have to be true for the decision to turn out wrong.

Do deep research on this question:
[exact wording of the research question].

Context: I'm a [role] at a [type of company, size, industry].
I need this research as material for deciding whether
[decision], and I'm deciding within [weeks / months].

Boundaries:
- geography: [country / region], flag data from other markets
  explicitly
- time period: primarily sources from the last [2] years; older
  only where nothing newer exists, and flag those
- segment: [exact scope], don't stray outside it
- not interested in: [what to leave out]

Output:
1. A half-page summary for someone who won't read the whole
   report — what I found and what it means for the decision
2. [Main body per the use case: a table of players / a price
   overview / a list of risks / ...]
3. What's certain, what's likely, and what's an estimate — three
   separate lists
4. What I wasn't able to find out, and why

Rules:
- cite a source and year for every factual claim
- where you don't have a source, write "no source" instead of
  stating it as fact; a shorter report beats a padded one
- distinguish primary sources (statistics, annual reports,
  official documents) from retellings; for retellings, look for
  the original source
- where sources disagree, show both numbers side by side and
  explain what accounts for the methodology difference — don't
  average them
- no recommendations like "the company should consider"; I want
  facts and interpretation, I'll make the decision myself

Pull a verification checklist from the previous report.

Table with columns:
claim or number | where it is in the report | the link you cited
for it | exactly what I should find on that page to confirm it |
how much my decision rests on it (key / supporting / context)

Include every number, every claim about competitors, and every
claim about rules and obligations. Sort from key to supporting.

Separately, below the table, list claims whose source is
secondary (someone retold another source) — for those, note what
the primary source would be and where to look for it.

Don't judge whether it's true. Just give me a list to check.

This is the report from the previous research run. Don't
research again, critique this output.

1. Where are the biggest uncertainties in the analysis — claims
   the conclusion leans on most heavily and that rest least on
   sources?
2. What would have to be true for the main conclusion to be
   wrong? List 3 specific conditions.
3. What sources are obviously missing — types of data that
   should exist for this question and aren't in the report?
4. What counterarguments would someone who believes the opposite
   raise?
5. Which claim in the report is most influenced by the source
   having an interest in a particular slant (a vendor, an
   industry association, a consulting firm selling the service)?

Be harsh. I don't want confirmation, I want to find where this
could break.

From the previous research, these specific things are missing:
1. [gap 1 — e.g. price tiers for players X and Y]
2. [gap 2 — e.g. return and warranty rules in this country]
3. [gap 3]

Do targeted research on only these three points. Don't rewrite
the context or the general market description.

For each point I want:
- a concrete finding with a link and the source's date
- how reliable that source is, and why
- if it can't be found from public sources, say so directly and
  suggest where else to find it (who to contact, what type of
  document to look for, what database)

I'd rather have three honest answers than ten guesses.

Deep research: market entry.

Question: what stands in the way of a company like mine entering
[country / region] with [product / service] through the
[online / retail / B2B] channel?

Context: [company size, industry, existing markets, what sets us
apart]. Decision: whether to enter within [12] months, or not.

Output:
1. Half-page summary: the three main barriers, and whether
   they're surmountable
2. Entry barriers broken down into: regulatory (what I need to
   comply with), operational (logistics, support, language),
   market-related (who's already there), and cost-related (what
   investment it requires) — with a source for each
3. Table: major players in the segment, their positioning, price
   tier (low/medium/high), channels, what sets them apart
4. Channels: how products of this type are actually sold in this
   country, and the concentration (one dominant platform vs.
   fragmented)
5. Three scenarios: fast entry, cautious entry via a partner,
   don't enter — for each, what argues for and against it, with
   a reference to the findings above
6. What I wasn't able to find out, and what I'd need to find
   another way

Rules: treat the regulatory section as informational, not as
legal advice, and for every requirement, state which regulation
or official source it's from.

Deep research: competitive map.

Question: who competes with [our product / service] in the
[scope] segment in the [geography] market, how are they
positioned, and where are the gaps in their offering?

Context: [our company, what sets us apart, who we sell to].

Output:
1. Table of players: name, who they sell to, price tier, main
   channel, what they present as their differentiator, where you
   got it from
2. Group the players into 3-4 clusters by strategy (not by size)
   and describe what distinguishes the clusters
3. Uncovered spots in the market offering: a customer segment,
   product type, or sales method nobody serves well — and what
   supports that (missing offerings, user complaints, a pricing
   gap)
4. Which players have made significant moves in the last 2
   years: new products, price changes, market entry or exit
5. Sources this overview can be kept updated from going forward

Don't include players who operate in the industry but don't
serve my segment — instead list them separately as "out of
scope" with a reason.

Deep research: price tiers.

Question: what price tiers does [product / service] sell at in
the [scope] segment in the [geography] market, and what
influences price the most in this industry?

Context: I'm considering [price / pricing model] and need to
know where that would place me.

Output:
1. Table: player, publicly listed price or range, what's
   included in the price, where the figure is from and as of
   what date
2. Price bands: how many exist in the market, what's typical for
   each, and what value the customer gets for that price
3. Pricing models used in the industry (one-time, subscription,
   volume-based, freemium) and how widespread each is
4. What pushes price up and down in this industry — specific,
   documented factors, not generic economic truisms
5. Explicitly separate: prices that are publicly listed versus
   prices that are estimates or secondhand

Don't recommend what price I should set. I want a map of the
market, not a pricing strategy.

Deep research as material for a strategy meeting.

Question: [question]. The decision that will be made at the
meeting: [decision]. Audience: [company leadership / owner /
board], they already know [what they know], they don't know
[what needs explaining].

Output in exactly this order:
1. A one-page summary: the situation, the three most important
   findings, what they mean for the decision, what the main
   uncertainty is
2. Five numbers that will come up in the meeting — each with a
   source, a year, and one sentence on exactly what it measures
   (so it holds up if someone asks)
3. Risks: what could go wrong, how likely it is, and what it
   would mean — ranked by impact
4. Three questions the research didn't answer, that need to come
   up at the meeting
5. A detailed appendix with sources and specifics for anyone who
   asks

Write plainly, no marketing language. No "strategic opportunity"
or "synergy." Short sentences, concrete numbers.

Deep research: supplier vetting.

Subject: [company name], [country], industry [industry].
Context: we're considering [type of partnership] with them at a
scale of [roughly].

Output:
1. Basic profile: when it was founded, who owns and runs it,
   where it operates, how big it is — a source and date for
   every data point
2. History and stability: how long in the industry, ownership
   changes, restructurings, renaming
3. Publicly traceable signals: lawsuits, insolvency, enforcement
   actions, sanctions, regulatory actions, repeated customer
   complaints — a source for each, and whether the matter is
   closed or ongoing
4. References and reputation: who talks about them publicly, how,
   and whether it's independent sources or their own materials
5. Red flags: specifically what should concern me
6. What can't be found from public sources and what I need to
   request directly from them or from official registries

Rules: strictly separate documented facts from impressions
gathered from discussions. Be especially careful with negative
claims — if you don't have a solid source, present it as an
unverified mention, not as fact.

I'm attaching two things: the market research report and an
overview of our own numbers (anonymized export).

[report]

---

[our data: e.g. revenue structure by segment, our products'
price tiers, where customers come from, margins by category]

Compare them and return:
1. Where we stand against the market: on price, by segment, by
   channel — specifically, with numbers from both sides
2. The three biggest mismatches: where our assumption about the
   market diverges from what the research says
3. Where we have a strong position that the report isn't showing
   we're using
4. Where our segment is most vulnerable given what competitors
   are doing
5. What data we're missing to do this comparison properly

Don't compute or estimate any new numbers — work only with what's
in the materials. Where you don't have data for a comparison,
say so.