All four advisors unanimously recommend proceeding with focus on Decision Council, but only under the condition that SAHM defines a concrete, measurable milestone that triggers the greenlight for Code Studio development. The consensus is clear: splitting resources before Decision Council achieves product-market fit creates the classic early-stage execution trap of two mediocre products instead of one defensible flagship. However, the recommendation is conditional — not unconditional — because without a defined milestone, 'staying focused' becomes indefinite deferral rather than disciplined strategy.

Define and document a single, specific, measurable milestone for Decision Council — such as a revenue threshold, retention rate, or LTV:CAC ratio — that, once achieved, formally triggers Code Studio development to begin.

• [HIGH] Decision Council may be experiencing structural demand weakness rather than a temporary growth lag — continued exclusive focus under that condition destroys capital without producing a launchpad for Code Studio
• [HIGH] Competitors may ship a Code Studio equivalent and capture that adjacent market while SAHM waits, making delayed entry significantly harder and more expensive
• [HIGH] Without a defined milestone, 'focus on Decision Council' becomes an accountability-free delay mechanism that defers rather than resolves the strategic question
• [MEDIUM] Team context-switching and roadmap discussions about Code Studio will quietly erode Decision Council development velocity even before a formal build decision is made

1. A concrete, named milestone for Decision Council must be defined before continued exclusive focus is justified (e.g., X paying users, Y% retention, Z ARR, or LTV:CAC above 2x)
2. SAHM must confirm that current runway is sufficient to reach the defined Decision Council milestone without requiring Code Studio as a parallel revenue hedge
3. The milestone horizon must be 3–6 months maximum; if Decision Council cannot hit a meaningful signal within that window, the sequencing thesis must be re-evaluated rather than extended

• Current runway and monthly burn rate — critical for assessing whether sequencing is financially viable or already dangerous
• Decision Council's current traction metrics: paying users, retention rate, conversion funnel, and any LTV:CAC directional signal
• Whether SAHM has already defined any milestone or success criteria for Decision Council, or if none currently exist
• The specific reason Code Studio is being considered now — whether it reflects genuine strategic opportunity, competitive signal, or founder fatigue with Decision Council
• Team size and composition — specifically whether a Code Studio scoping effort could be staffed without materially affecting Decision Council velocity

• Decision Council has not yet achieved clear, stable product-market fit with consistent revenue traction
• SAHM does not currently have sufficient team bandwidth or capital to execute both products in parallel at adequate quality
• Decision Council and Code Studio share engineering and design resources, making true parallelism financially impractical at this stage
• Decision Council is meaningfully closer to product-market fit than Code Studio and represents the stronger near-term monetization path
• SAHM is operating with constrained runway, likely under 18 months