Prompt: Write a Value Proposition
A prompt for a value proposition statement built on a real differentiator, with three supporting proof points instead of vague claims.
The prompt
You are a positioning strategist writing a value proposition for {{PRODUCT OR SERVICE}}.
Objective: Write one value proposition statement plus supporting proof points aimed at {{TARGET CUSTOMER}}.
Context: The main alternative customers currently use is {{ALTERNATIVE — e.g. doing it manually in spreadsheets, a competitor product}}. The real, defensible difference is {{DIFFERENTIATOR — e.g. it syncs automatically, no manual export needed}}.
Constraints:
- Value proposition statement: one sentence, under 30 words, names the customer and the outcome, not just the feature
- Exactly 3 supporting proof points, each one sentence, each tied directly to the stated differentiator
- Do not use the words "innovative", "revolutionary", "seamless" or "cutting-edge"
- Do not claim a ranking, award or statistic that wasn't supplied
Output format: Return the statement as a single bolded line, followed by the 3 proof points as a bulleted list.
Before finishing, check the statement is one sentence under 30 words, there are exactly 3 proof points, and none of the banned words appear.
Example
Input
PRODUCT OR SERVICE: Ledgerly, bookkeeping software for sole traders TARGET CUSTOMER: sole traders who currently do their bookkeeping in a spreadsheet ALTERNATIVE — e.g. doing it manually in spreadsheets, a competitor product: doing it manually in a spreadsheet DIFFERENTIATOR — e.g. it syncs automatically, no manual export needed: it reads receipts and bank transactions automatically, with no manual entry
Output
**Ledgerly lets sole traders keep their books without typing a single transaction by hand.** - Receipts and bank transactions are read automatically, replacing manual spreadsheet entry. - Because receipts and transactions are read automatically, there's no backlog of entries to type up before the tax deadline. - Sole traders stop spending time on the manual data entry their spreadsheet currently requires. The statement is one sentence under 30 words and names both the customer (sole traders) and the outcome (books kept without manual entry) rather than just the feature. All three proof points tie directly back to the stated differentiator — reading receipts and transactions automatically — and none of the banned buzzwords appear.
Why it works
- Naming the real alternative customers currently use forces the statement to differentiate against reality, not a strawman competitor.
- Banning generic buzzwords like 'innovative' pushes the model toward a concrete, specific claim instead of filler that could describe any product.
- Tying each proof point to the one supplied differentiator keeps every claim traceable instead of a scattered features list.
Why the basic version fails
“Write a value proposition for our product” tends to produce a sentence built entirely from buzzwords — “innovative,” “seamless,” “revolutionary” — that says nothing a competitor’s marketing couldn’t also claim. It sounds finished but differentiates nothing.
What this prompt fixes
Naming the real alternative customers use today forces the statement to say something true about switching, not a vague improvement. Banning the standard buzzword list and requiring exactly 3 proof points tied to one differentiator keeps the output specific enough to actually use in copy.
Tips per model
- Gemini occasionally slips a banned word back in on longer outputs — check the statement line specifically before publishing.
- Claude is reliable at keeping proof points tied to the stated differentiator rather than drifting into generic feature praise.
- If the statement still sounds generic, the differentiator you supplied is probably too broad — “it’s easier to use” isn’t defensible, but “it reads receipts automatically” is.