Bring a business decision. Teldera plans the analysis a seasoned strategist would run, and works it through with you.
For decisions like
Raise prices Pick a first market Answer rivals Launch products Win back customers Test a plan
Grouped by the three questions behind every strategy. You make the call.
Example questions you could ask
Options generated for you to review
A new market or a new product? See how a full project works →
Not an AI report. A case you build, check and change.
Simplified views. Every tool has more behind it.
1 · The need
Every need rated for how much it matters and how well it's already met. The ones worth building on stand apart from the table stakes.
✦AI drafts the candidate needs and finds the references. You rate them, and the tool ranks.
2 · The market
One pool of spend, cut as many ways as you'd like. The tool guides you to measurable or arguable cuts. You select the targets and the sequencing.
✦AI works out how the market can be sized and proposes the figures. The engine does the arithmetic.
3 · The edge
What they need on the left, what you'll claim on the right. A line is a fit. A need with no line, and a claim with no line, are both findings.
✦AI reviews the fit against your rating and says what it would need to see. The rating stays yours.
All three on the platform’s own worked example — an electric van into UK courier fleets. Figures illustrative.
See each tool work: the tools, on film →
Built to be usable and defendable — around the ways AI goes wrong. Every press fills a prompt written for one situation with your own market and figures.
Hallucination
Generic AI chat
It invents figures, fluently.
With Teldera
It never touches the arithmetic.
Poor sources
Generic AI chat
It cites a report mill like a statistics office.
With Teldera
Every source graded. Report mills named, not dropped.
Unclear rationale
Generic AI chat
Easy to use. Hard to use well.
With Teldera
How to ask is worked out. Every answer keeps its why.
Inconsistency
Generic AI chat
Three people, three answers.
With Teldera
Three people, one prompt.
The needs you ranked are what the value proposition is matched against. The segments you targeted are what the growth plan is built from. Every tool reads what the others recorded.
Notes, or a PDF, Word or PowerPoint file. ✦ The AI reads it against your project. You add or skip each line.
“Range isn’t the problem. We lose a van for half a shift every time it sits on a depot charger.1”
“Anything over £48k a van doesn’t get past procurement2, whatever it saves on fuel.”
“We trialled a rival’s van3 last spring. Drivers liked it, finance didn’t.”
“And we had to drop two cages a run4. The battery eats the payload.”
1 · Needs Map · evidence
Charging doesn’t cost a shift
2 · Price Case · account reading
Budget ceiling: £48k a van
3 · Competitive Landscape · new rival
The rival’s van
4 · ⚠ Contradicts your Value Proposition
You claim: “Payload matches diesel”
The pasted text isn’t kept. Only what you add, with its quote.
Illustrative — invented figures; several tools are still being built.
31 fleet managers interviewed. Not range — predictable charging downtime.
£180M a year of courier vans replaced — sized top-down and bottom-up, agreeing within 4%.
⚠ Looks done. Isn’t. Reads Worth it, and the work behind one of the answers under it has not started.
£4,100/yr cheaper to run, £9,000 more to buy than the diesel van — a 2.2-year payback.
Above what the evidence supports · Conditional Go allows up to Enter small. Our call:
Three routes costed. Leasing turns the £9,000 sticker into a monthly line — the objection that decides it. Year-two volume of 1,400 units fits the line's 2,000 of spare capacity. No capex.
Illustrative — invented figures; several tools are still being built.
31 interviews across 14 teams. The top unmet need belongs to the engineer, not the designer.
$738M counted by designer seats, $1.16BN counted by teams — 44% apart, and the gap is the finding.
Two entrenched rivals, and a day per feature of spec-writing that appears on nobody's budget.
Above what the evidence supports · Conditional Go allows up to Enter small. Our call:
Free for anyone who only looks or comments. Paid per editor — the pricing structure IS the route in. Rendering pro-grade vectors in a browser is the bet. Funded and signed off — a cost, not a blocker.
Illustrative — invented figures; several tools are still being built.
Seven needs, four OEMs. The top one was on no specification — it was in the warranty returns.
$1.1BN a year, sized two ways 7% apart — and eleven programmes reach most of it.
No qualified equivalent at this thickness — and the warranty saving lands in a budget the buyer does not hold.
①②③ said go. The build said not at this volume. The plan goes back — the market does not. The chemistry is qualified. The line that makes it at volume is not funded.
The worked examples are open to anyone. The tools are on trial while in development.