Build Competitor Battle Cards

Full method. Works on any model.

You are a senior competitive intelligence and product marketing operator. You build battle cards that sellers actually open on live calls to displace a competitor. You favor field evidence (customer reviews, win loss data, call transcripts) over internal opinion, and you package intel at the depth each audience needs.

CONTEXT
→ My company and product: {{YOUR_PRODUCT}}
→ Competitor this card is about: {{COMPETITOR}}
→ Our positioning and top strengths: {{YOUR_STRENGTHS}}
→ Competitor weaknesses and complaints we have evidence for: {{COMPETITOR_WEAKNESSES}}
→ Where we win and lose against them today: {{WIN_LOSS_SIGNAL}}
→ Target buyer segments and roles: {{TARGET_SEGMENTS}}
→ Raw source material (review quotes, community threads, call notes, pricing pages): {{SOURCE_MATERIAL}}

If any of these are missing or thin, especially COMPETITOR_WEAKNESSES, WIN_LOSS_SIGNAL, or SOURCE_MATERIAL, ask me up to five clarifying questions before writing. Do not invent competitor weaknesses, pricing, or feature claims you cannot ground in the source material.

METHOD
1. Define the audience question first. This card serves sales and marketing, who care about how the competitor is perceived: how they position, who buys them, what customers actually think. Keep everything scannable, not exhaustive.
2. Mine weaknesses from evidence. From SOURCE_MATERIAL, prioritize the equivalent of one to three star reviews and unfiltered community opinion, because those surface where the competitor falls short. Cluster complaints into themes (for example pricing, a missing feature, poor support, hard onboarding). Discount low effort or incentivized reviews and weight patterns that repeat across sources. Tag each theme with its strongest verbatim quote and where it came from, so every claim downstream stays traceable.
3. Rank each weakness theme on three criteria, scored 1 to 5:
   → Frequency: how often it shows up across independent sources
   → Deal impact: how directly it maps to why a buyer would leave the competitor
   → Our advantage: how strongly {{YOUR_STRENGTHS}} answers it
   Keep only themes scoring 3 or higher on all three. Drop the rest. If fewer than two themes survive the cutoff, keep the top two by combined score, mark them lower confidence, and say so on the card rather than inflating scores to fill space. Show me the scores; do not rank silently.
4. Write quick dismisses. Produce three to five, ordered most useful first. A quick dismiss is two to three sentences that brush the competitor off by naming their biggest weakness, our unique strength, or both. Assume the reader is mid call and needs to move on in one breath.
5. Write objection handling reply templates. For each top weakness theme, write a short template a rep can send after the call explaining, with evidence, why we win. Keep each under 150 words and tie it to a specific buyer pain.
6. Build the comparison logic. A tight strengths and weaknesses table (us versus them) on the dimensions buyers actually decide on. Only include claims grounded in the source material; flag anything that needs verification.
7. Add displacement plays. Suggest one proactive play per channel where evidence supports it: an outbound email angle for accounts likely running the competitor, a search theme for buyers Googling "alternatives to {{COMPETITOR}}", and a comparison landing page angle built from the queries a buyer would actually type. Note that these run with demand generation and the SEO or SEM team.
8. Set a refresh trigger. State what would make this card stale (a competitor pricing change, new release, funding, or a win rate shift) and recommend revisiting it every 45 to 60 days.

OUTPUT FORMAT
1. One line summary: how we beat {{COMPETITOR}} in a sentence
2. Weakness theme scorecard: every theme you considered, its frequency, deal impact, and advantage scores, and whether it was kept or dropped, so I can audit the ranking
3. Quick dismisses (ordered, most used first), each tagged with the evidence it rests on
4. Objection handling reply templates (one per top weakness theme)
5. Us versus them comparison table, each row tied to a source or explicitly flagged as unverified
6. Displacement plays (email, search, comparison page)
7. Fact check list: a numbered list of every factual claim in this card (weaknesses, feature gaps, pricing) with the source that grounds it, or a flag that it needs verification before the card ships
8. Refresh trigger and next review date logic

SELF CHECK before finishing
→ Facts to verify: every weakness, feature gap, and pricing claim traces to the source material, not to assumption. Anything you could not ground must appear in the fact check list as needing verification, never asserted as fact in the card body.
→ Failure mode to avoid: burying quick dismisses under long analysis. Sellers reach for depth roughly one time in twenty; lead with the fast dismisses.
→ Failure mode to avoid: generic differentiators that any vendor could claim. Every dismiss must name a specific, evidenced weakness or a strength a buyer cares about.
→ Failure mode to avoid: writing a card sellers cannot find or scan. Keep it tight and recommend where to publish it so the team already looks there.

For the most capable models. Goal and quality bar up front.

You are a senior competitive intelligence and product marketing operator.

GOAL: Turn raw competitive signal into a battle card a seller can open mid call to displace {{COMPETITOR}} fast. Your first line of output must be the one line summary of how we beat {{COMPETITOR}}; put the scorecard, dismisses, templates, table, plays, fact check list, and refresh trigger after it.

CONTEXT
→ Our product: {{YOUR_PRODUCT}}
→ Competitor: {{COMPETITOR}}
→ Our strengths: {{YOUR_STRENGTHS}}
→ Known competitor weaknesses: {{COMPETITOR_WEAKNESSES}}
→ Where we win and lose: {{WIN_LOSS_SIGNAL}}
→ Target buyers: {{TARGET_SEGMENTS}}
→ Raw evidence (reviews, threads, call notes, pricing pages): {{SOURCE_MATERIAL}}

PRINCIPLES
→ Field evidence beats internal opinion. Mine weaknesses from unfiltered one to three star reviews and community threads, cluster them into themes, discount incentivized reviews, and weight patterns that repeat across independent sources.
→ Rank each theme on frequency, deal impact, and how well {{YOUR_STRENGTHS}} answers it. Keep only themes strong on all three; if fewer than two survive, keep the top two and mark them lower confidence rather than inflating scores. Show your scoring; never rank silently.
→ Package intel for a seller mid call: three to five quick dismisses first (each two to three sentences naming a specific evidenced weakness or real strength), then objection handling reply templates per top theme, then a comparison table on the dimensions buyers actually decide on, then one displacement play per channel (outbound angle, search theme, comparison page) tied to how a buyer would search.
→ Every factual claim traces to {{SOURCE_MATERIAL}}. End with a numbered fact check list separating grounded claims from ones to verify. State a refresh trigger and a 45 to 60 day review rhythm.

QUALITY BAR: A rep can dismiss {{COMPETITOR}} in one breath from the top of the card, audit the ranking from the scorecard, and trace every weakness to a source. A demand generation or SEO team could run the displacement plays as written.

DO NOT invent competitor weaknesses, pricing, or feature claims you cannot ground in the evidence. Do not bury the dismisses under analysis. Do not offer generic differentiators any vendor could claim. If COMPETITOR_WEAKNESSES, WIN_LOSS_SIGNAL, or SOURCE_MATERIAL is missing or thin, ask one focused question before writing rather than guessing.

Five lines. Speed over rigor.

Build a battle card to displace {{COMPETITOR}} for {{YOUR_PRODUCT}}, using {{YOUR_STRENGTHS}} and evidence from {{SOURCE_MATERIAL}} (reviews, call notes, pricing).
Mine the competitor's biggest evidenced weaknesses, then write three to five quick dismisses a rep can say in one breath, ordered most useful first.
Add a short us versus them comparison table on the dimensions buyers actually decide on.
Quality bar: every weakness claim traces to a source; flag anything you cannot ground rather than asserting it.
Lead your output with a one line summary of how we beat {{COMPETITOR}}.