---
genome: copywriting
reference: frameworks-offer-stack
load_priority: high
---

# The Irresistible Offer Stack

Foundational offer construction. Used in Act 4 of the 5-act structure. The offer stack makes the YES feel obviously rational by showing that **the value visibly exceeds the price**.

## The 6-component stack

### 1. Value Anchoring
Before naming the price, **establish what solving this problem is worth**:
- Cost of NOT solving (annual cost, lifetime cost, identity cost)
- What competitors charge for similar transformation
- What the buyer would pay if they hired this out

This makes the price feel rational against the alternative cost.

### 2. Component Stacking
Itemize the offer:
- **Core product / service** (the main transformation)
- **Complement 1** (amplifies main product)
- **Complement 2** (addresses adjacent need)
- **Bonus 1** (addresses Objection 1)
- **Bonus 2** (addresses Objection 2)
- **Access / Support** (community, coaching, Q&A)

Each component has its own assigned value.

### 3. Bonuses with Purpose
Each bonus addresses a SPECIFIC objection:

| Common objection | Bonus type |
|------------------|-----------|
| "What if I don't have time?" | Time-saving bonus (quick-start guide, templates) |
| "What if my situation is different?" | Industry-specific bonus (playbooks, case studies) |
| "What if I get stuck?" | Support bonus (community, office hours, coaching) |
| "What if I want to scale later?" | Advanced bonus (next-level content) |
| "What if I'm not technically capable?" | Done-for-you bonus (templates, swipes) |

Bonuses without objection mapping feel like filler.

### 4. Reason Why
Explain WHY the offer is at this price NOW:
- Real launch period
- Real founder cohort pricing
- Real time-bound bonus
- Real cost-coverage logic ("we built this for [audience]; this price covers cost while maintaining quality")

The Reason Why must be **REAL**, not invented. Manufactured reasons erode trust.

### 5. Strong Guarantee (Risk Reversal)
The risk reversal element. Standard:
- 30-day or longer money-back guarantee
- No questions asked
- Easy to invoke
- Honored consistently

The guarantee can be CONDITIONAL but the conditions must be FAIR:
- "If you do the [reasonable action] and don't get [outcome], full refund"
- Conditions that are easy for committed buyers to meet are fine
- Conditions designed to prevent refunds are NOT fine

### 6. Single CTA
ONE primary call to action. Multiple = decision paralysis. The CTA:
- Specific verb ("Get instant access" beats "Click here")
- Connected to the value just stacked
- Linked to the next step (button URL, phone number, etc.)
- Repeated 2-4 times in long-form (after stack, after objection handling, after close)

## Total value framing

Sum the stack visibly:

```
Component                  Value
────────────────────────  ──────
Core product              R$ 4,000
Complement 1              R$ 1,500
Complement 2              R$ 1,500
Bonus 1                   R$   500
Bonus 2                   R$   500
Bonus 3                   R$   500
Community access          R$ 1,000
────────────────────────  ──────
Total value               R$ 9,500

YOUR PRICE TODAY:         R$   997
```

The visual sum makes the deal feel obvious. Without the explicit summation, the stack's psychological effect weakens.

## The 5-10× ratio (honesty discipline)

The total stacked value should exceed the price by **5-10×**, not more.

| Ratio | Effect |
|-------|--------|
| < 3× | Stack feels insufficient; price feels expensive |
| 3-5× | Stack works but conservative |
| 5-10× | **Sweet spot** — stack feels generous, ratio is believable |
| 10-20× | Borderline; audience may pattern-match as fake |
| > 20× | Audience disbelieves; entire offer feels manipulative |

Honest stacking:
- Each value is defensible if the item were sold standalone
- Bonuses have real production cost or genuine market value
- The transformation is real (not marketing fluff)

## When stacking doesn't apply

- **Low-ticket impulse products** (under $50) — stacking feels disproportionate
- **Genuine commodity** (where buyers comparison-shop on spec) — stack feels manipulative
- **Luxury minimalist** (where audience is anti-stacking) — different aesthetic
- **B2B enterprise contracts** — stacking is replaced by ROI projection / negotiation

In these contexts, simpler offer presentation works better.

## Modern application

The offer stack works in 2026 for:
- Course launches (Brunson's home turf — value stack is core to his method)
- Coaching / mentorship offers
- High-ticket info-products
- Mastermind / community memberships
- Premium SaaS tiers (with creative interpretation — features become "components")
- Service offerings (consultancy, agency)

The format changes; the stack discipline doesn't.

## Connection to other frameworks

| Framework | Connection to offer stack |
|-----------|---------------------------|
| **One Belief** | The stack delivers the New Opportunity through itemized value |
| **5-act structure** | Stack lives in Act 4 (Offer) |
| **PMS** | Bonuses address Myths; full stack delivers Dreams |
| **Two Paths Close** | Stack creates the "Path 2" that the close drives toward |
| **Schwartz Awareness** | Stack emphasis varies by level (Level 4 = stack-heavy; Level 2 = lighter) |

## Common violations

### Violation 1 — No stack, just price
Symptom: conversion plateau; offer feels expensive.

Fix: build full stack with each component's value.

### Violation 2 — Random bonus values
Symptom: pattern-matched as fake.

Fix: defensible values for each bonus.

### Violation 3 — Total > 20× price
Symptom: audience disbelieves.

Fix: cap at 5-10× ratio.

### Violation 4 — Bonuses without objection mapping
Symptom: bonuses feel like filler.

Fix: map each bonus to a specific objection from research.

### Violation 5 — Weak guarantee
Symptom: risk-averse buyers don't convert.

Fix: strengthen — 30-day minimum, easy to invoke, no trick conditions.

### Violation 6 — Multiple CTAs
Symptom: decision paralysis.

Fix: cut to one primary CTA. Repeat it; don't multiply it.

### Violation 7 — Fake "Reason Why"
Symptom: trust erosion when discovered.

Fix: use REAL reasons. If no real reason exists, omit instead of inventing.

## Decision Weight context

- **Strong guarantee 95/5** → never compromise the guarantee
- **One CTA 90/10** → never give multiple competing CTAs
- **Real urgency 100/0** → "Reason Why" must be real
- **Specificity 90/10** → every component value is specific

## Hierarchical relationship to applied masters

This is the **foundational** offer stack. Applied masters extend it:
- **Kennedy** adds 10 Rules + Premium Positioning discipline (`copywriting-kennedy/frameworks/`)
- **Brunson** adds calculated stacking + bonuses-per-objection (`copywriting-brunson/frameworks/value-stack.md`)
- **Halbert** adds A-pile audit for the offer presentation
- **Georgi** adds RMBC Phase B integration (offer is Act 6 of his 7-act)

`@copywriter` typically loads this foundational + ONE applied master's offer extension.
