ESSAY
March 8th, 2025
Researching Weird Ideas
Researching Weird Ideas
THE SEEDCORE TEAM
THE SEEDCORE TEAM
The strangest client pitches often contain the most valuable insights. Someone wants to build an AI that analyzes grocery receipts to predict relationship problems. Another envisions a subscription service where people practice difficult conversations with AI versions of their family members. A third proposes a platform that uses biometric data to automatically order comfort food when you're having a bad day. These aren't polished business school pitches—they're raw concepts that sound absurd until you dig into the logic. Traditional consulting firms hear these ideas and immediately list reasons they won't work. We approach them with curiosity about what problem they're actually trying to solve and whether there might be better ways to solve it. Our job isn't to judge whether weird ideas deserve to exist. Our job is to understand what makes someone believe their concept could work, then figure out the most effective path from insight to reality. This often means showing clients that their core intuition is valuable even when their execution approach needs adjustment.
The strangest client pitches often contain the most valuable insights. Someone wants to build an AI that analyzes grocery receipts to predict relationship problems. Another envisions a subscription service where people practice difficult conversations with AI versions of their family members. A third proposes a platform that uses biometric data to automatically order comfort food when you're having a bad day. These aren't polished business school pitches—they're raw concepts that sound absurd until you dig into the logic. Traditional consulting firms hear these ideas and immediately list reasons they won't work. We approach them with curiosity about what problem they're actually trying to solve and whether there might be better ways to solve it. Our job isn't to judge whether weird ideas deserve to exist. Our job is to understand what makes someone believe their concept could work, then figure out the most effective path from insight to reality. This often means showing clients that their core intuition is valuable even when their execution approach needs adjustment.
Take the meal-prep AI therapy concept that combines nutritional planning with mental health support. The research starts with understanding the psychological premise—that food choices and emotional states are connected, and people might engage more with mental health tools integrated into daily routines. We investigate nutritional psychiatry research, discovering evidence that diet affects mood regulation. We explore meal-planning apps and therapy platforms, identifying gaps where neither addresses the intersection of food and mental health. The technical research examines AI capabilities for nutritional analysis and therapeutic conversation, while market research reveals growing demand for mental health tools that don't feel clinical. But here's where our approach differs—we don't just research whether the original idea could work. We research whether adjacent opportunities might deliver the same value with less complexity. The investigation reveals that a simpler nutritional wellness platform with mood-tracking could capture much of the same demand without regulatory complications of positioning as therapy. Or a meal-planning service incorporating stress-reduction techniques could serve the wellness market more broadly while avoiding mental health licensing requirements. We present these alternatives not as replacements but as potentially easier paths to the same goal of helping people feel better through integrated food and mood management.
Take the meal-prep AI therapy concept that combines nutritional planning with mental health support. The research starts with understanding the psychological premise—that food choices and emotional states are connected, and people might engage more with mental health tools integrated into daily routines. We investigate nutritional psychiatry research, discovering evidence that diet affects mood regulation. We explore meal-planning apps and therapy platforms, identifying gaps where neither addresses the intersection of food and mental health. The technical research examines AI capabilities for nutritional analysis and therapeutic conversation, while market research reveals growing demand for mental health tools that don't feel clinical. But here's where our approach differs—we don't just research whether the original idea could work. We research whether adjacent opportunities might deliver the same value with less complexity. The investigation reveals that a simpler nutritional wellness platform with mood-tracking could capture much of the same demand without regulatory complications of positioning as therapy. Or a meal-planning service incorporating stress-reduction techniques could serve the wellness market more broadly while avoiding mental health licensing requirements. We present these alternatives not as replacements but as potentially easier paths to the same goal of helping people feel better through integrated food and mood management.
The AI family conversation practice service presents different challenges around psychology, technology ethics, and market positioning. We explore therapeutic role-playing research and conflict resolution methodologies, finding evidence that conversation rehearsal improves outcomes in difficult discussions. We investigate AI companionship capabilities and the digital mental health market, identifying technical approaches that could safely simulate family dynamics. But the research also reveals execution hurdles—AI safety concerns, privacy issues with family data, and complexity of modeling authentic relationship dynamics. This is where alternative pathway research becomes crucial. We identify adjacent opportunities that capture the same value with less complexity. A conversation coaching platform providing structured frameworks for difficult family discussions could serve the same need without requiring sophisticated AI personality modeling. Or a family communication app helping people prepare through guided reflection prompts could address the same problem through simpler technical approaches. We also research corporate team communication training as a potentially larger and less emotionally complex market. The goal isn't to discourage the original vision but to show multiple routes toward helping people navigate difficult conversations, some faster to market and easier to scale.
The AI family conversation practice service presents different challenges around psychology, technology ethics, and market positioning. We explore therapeutic role-playing research and conflict resolution methodologies, finding evidence that conversation rehearsal improves outcomes in difficult discussions. We investigate AI companionship capabilities and the digital mental health market, identifying technical approaches that could safely simulate family dynamics. But the research also reveals execution hurdles—AI safety concerns, privacy issues with family data, and complexity of modeling authentic relationship dynamics. This is where alternative pathway research becomes crucial. We identify adjacent opportunities that capture the same value with less complexity. A conversation coaching platform providing structured frameworks for difficult family discussions could serve the same need without requiring sophisticated AI personality modeling. Or a family communication app helping people prepare through guided reflection prompts could address the same problem through simpler technical approaches. We also research corporate team communication training as a potentially larger and less emotionally complex market. The goal isn't to discourage the original vision but to show multiple routes toward helping people navigate difficult conversations, some faster to market and easier to scale.
What distinguishes our research methodology is balancing validation of weird ideas with identification of pragmatic alternatives that preserve core insights. We don't dismiss strange concepts, but we don't accept initial execution approaches without exploring whether simpler solutions might achieve similar outcomes. This requires research that moves beyond feasibility analysis toward strategic opportunity mapping—understanding not just whether something could work but whether it represents the most effective approach to the underlying problem. We research market positioning alternatives, technical implementation options, and business model variations that could deliver similar value through different pathways. Often the most valuable outcome isn't validation of the original concept but discovery of adjacent opportunities the client hadn't considered. Someone fixated on building complex AI therapy might be surprised that simple mood-tracking integration could capture significant market value with fraction of the development effort. The research becomes collaborative exploration of possibility space rather than binary judgment about feasibility. We present multiple pathways toward the same goal, allowing clients to choose based on risk tolerance, available resources, and timeline preferences. If someone remains committed to their original weird vision despite alternatives, we support that choice completely. But we ensure they understand the full landscape before making that decision. The best weird ideas often point toward genuine market opportunities that can be pursued through various approaches, and our research reveals the full spectrum rather than just validating the first concept presented.
What distinguishes our research methodology is balancing validation of weird ideas with identification of pragmatic alternatives that preserve core insights. We don't dismiss strange concepts, but we don't accept initial execution approaches without exploring whether simpler solutions might achieve similar outcomes. This requires research that moves beyond feasibility analysis toward strategic opportunity mapping—understanding not just whether something could work but whether it represents the most effective approach to the underlying problem. We research market positioning alternatives, technical implementation options, and business model variations that could deliver similar value through different pathways. Often the most valuable outcome isn't validation of the original concept but discovery of adjacent opportunities the client hadn't considered. Someone fixated on building complex AI therapy might be surprised that simple mood-tracking integration could capture significant market value with fraction of the development effort. The research becomes collaborative exploration of possibility space rather than binary judgment about feasibility. We present multiple pathways toward the same goal, allowing clients to choose based on risk tolerance, available resources, and timeline preferences. If someone remains committed to their original weird vision despite alternatives, we support that choice completely. But we ensure they understand the full landscape before making that decision. The best weird ideas often point toward genuine market opportunities that can be pursued through various approaches, and our research reveals the full spectrum rather than just validating the first concept presented.
Researching Weird Ideas
ESSAY
March 8th, 2025
ESSAY
March 8th, 2025
Researching Weird Ideas
The strangest client pitches often contain the most valuable insights. Someone wants to build an AI that analyzes grocery receipts to predict relationship problems. Another envisions a subscription service where people practice difficult conversations with AI versions of their family members. A third proposes a platform that uses biometric data to automatically order comfort food when you're having a bad day. These aren't polished business school pitches—they're raw concepts that sound absurd until you dig into the logic. Traditional consulting firms hear these ideas and immediately list reasons they won't work. We approach them with curiosity about what problem they're actually trying to solve and whether there might be better ways to solve it. Our job isn't to judge whether weird ideas deserve to exist. Our job is to understand what makes someone believe their concept could work, then figure out the most effective path from insight to reality. This often means showing clients that their core intuition is valuable even when their execution approach needs adjustment.
Take the meal-prep AI therapy concept that combines nutritional planning with mental health support. The research starts with understanding the psychological premise—that food choices and emotional states are connected, and people might engage more with mental health tools integrated into daily routines. We investigate nutritional psychiatry research, discovering evidence that diet affects mood regulation. We explore meal-planning apps and therapy platforms, identifying gaps where neither addresses the intersection of food and mental health. The technical research examines AI capabilities for nutritional analysis and therapeutic conversation, while market research reveals growing demand for mental health tools that don't feel clinical. But here's where our approach differs—we don't just research whether the original idea could work. We research whether adjacent opportunities might deliver the same value with less complexity. The investigation reveals that a simpler nutritional wellness platform with mood-tracking could capture much of the same demand without regulatory complications of positioning as therapy. Or a meal-planning service incorporating stress-reduction techniques could serve the wellness market more broadly while avoiding mental health licensing requirements. We present these alternatives not as replacements but as potentially easier paths to the same goal of helping people feel better through integrated food and mood management.
The AI family conversation practice service presents different challenges around psychology, technology ethics, and market positioning. We explore therapeutic role-playing research and conflict resolution methodologies, finding evidence that conversation rehearsal improves outcomes in difficult discussions. We investigate AI companionship capabilities and the digital mental health market, identifying technical approaches that could safely simulate family dynamics. But the research also reveals execution hurdles—AI safety concerns, privacy issues with family data, and complexity of modeling authentic relationship dynamics. This is where alternative pathway research becomes crucial. We identify adjacent opportunities that capture the same value with less complexity. A conversation coaching platform providing structured frameworks for difficult family discussions could serve the same need without requiring sophisticated AI personality modeling. Or a family communication app helping people prepare through guided reflection prompts could address the same problem through simpler technical approaches. We also research corporate team communication training as a potentially larger and less emotionally complex market. The goal isn't to discourage the original vision but to show multiple routes toward helping people navigate difficult conversations, some faster to market and easier to scale.
What distinguishes our research methodology is balancing validation of weird ideas with identification of pragmatic alternatives that preserve core insights. We don't dismiss strange concepts, but we don't accept initial execution approaches without exploring whether simpler solutions might achieve similar outcomes. This requires research that moves beyond feasibility analysis toward strategic opportunity mapping—understanding not just whether something could work but whether it represents the most effective approach to the underlying problem. We research market positioning alternatives, technical implementation options, and business model variations that could deliver similar value through different pathways. Often the most valuable outcome isn't validation of the original concept but discovery of adjacent opportunities the client hadn't considered. Someone fixated on building complex AI therapy might be surprised that simple mood-tracking integration could capture significant market value with fraction of the development effort. The research becomes collaborative exploration of possibility space rather than binary judgment about feasibility. We present multiple pathways toward the same goal, allowing clients to choose based on risk tolerance, available resources, and timeline preferences. If someone remains committed to their original weird vision despite alternatives, we support that choice completely. But we ensure they understand the full landscape before making that decision. The best weird ideas often point toward genuine market opportunities that can be pursued through various approaches, and our research reveals the full spectrum rather than just validating the first concept presented.
THE SEEDCORE TEAM