Home
Resources
Agent Skills
Writing voices
Silas — the strategy analysis essay

Silas — the strategy analysis essay

A blog-writing style skill that makes an AI agent write in the strategy analysis voice of Ben Thompson: it starts from a real, dated event or something the writer did, steps back into the history of the market, lays out who supplies, who distributes and who owns the customer, reads company statements critically, gives the strongest objection a fair hearing, and ends on the implication for who wins. Headed sections, first person, long analytical paragraphs broken by short ones. 1,800 to 4,000 words. It works on any business topic. The skill gives a fingerprint table, a seven-step build, sentence rules, strict truth rules for events, quotes and intentions, a worked opening and a revision pass.

In the voice of Ben Thompson

Updated 5 October 2026 · By Sadeq

When to use it

Write a blog post in Silas's voice: the strategy analysis essay. Start from a recent event, a company announcement or something the writer just did, step back into history and the value chain, introduce or reuse a named framework, weigh the strongest counter-argument fairly, then draw the implication for who wins and why. Headed sections, long analytical paragraphs broken by short punchy ones, first person, links back to the writer's own earlier posts. Use when someone asks for a post "in Silas's style", a strategy breakdown, an analysis of a market move, a "what this means for our industry" piece, or thought leadership for B2B readers. Works for any business topic. Do not use it for how-to guides, short updates or anything without a real event or argument to analyse.

Complete file

SKILL.md

---
name: silas
description: >
  Write a blog post in Silas's voice: the strategy analysis essay. Start
  from a recent event, a company announcement or something the writer
  just did, step back into history and the value chain, introduce or reuse
  a named framework, weigh the strongest counter-argument fairly, then
  draw the implication for who wins and why. Headed sections, long
  analytical paragraphs broken by short punchy ones, first person, links
  back to the writer's own earlier posts. Use when someone asks for a post
  "in Silas's style", a strategy breakdown, an analysis of a market move,
  a "what this means for our industry" piece, or thought leadership for
  B2B readers. Works for any business topic. Do not use it for how-to
  guides, short updates or anything without a real event or argument to
  analyse.
license: MIT
metadata:
  author: daena-digital
  version: "1.0"
  collection: blog-style-voices
---

# Silas — the strategy analysis essay

Silas reads the news and asks the question underneath it: why did this
company do this, and what does it tell us about how this market works?
The answer is built from history, a model of the market, and the
incentives of each player. The essay is long because the argument is,
and it earns the length with structure.

Studied from Ben Thompson's essays at Stratechery. This skill reproduces
his *moves*, never his sentences, coined frameworks or section names.

## When to pick Silas over another voice

- Something happened — a launch, a price change, a merger, a new
  regulation, a shift in customer behaviour — and readers want to know
  what it means.
- The writer has a model of how their market works and can apply it.
- The audience is decision-makers who will read 2,000 words if every
  section moves the argument.

Pick Ezra for one idea argued from first principles with no news hook.
Pick Theo when the reader needs steps rather than understanding.

## The fingerprint

| Trait | Silas does | Silas never does |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 1,800–4,000 words | Under 1,200 (too thin to carry the model) |
| Opening | A specific recent event or something the writer did, told in one or two paragraphs, sometimes a short historical scene | A thesis statement up front, a definition |
| Sections | 3–6 headed sections, each a step in the argument: *"The supply side"*, *"Why distribution matters more now"* | Clickbait headers, numbered tips |
| Framework | One named model of the market — value chain, who supplies, who distributes, who owns the customer — introduced plainly or reused from the writer's earlier posts | A new jargon term every section |
| History | A paragraph or two on how this market worked before, so the change is visible | History for its own sake |
| Evidence | Quoted company statements, earnings remarks or public filings, in block quotes, then interpreted | Unsourced claims about what a company "plans" |
| Self-reference | Links to the writer's own earlier posts that set up the framework | Pretending every idea is new |
| Paragraphs | Long analytical paragraphs (4–7 sentences) broken by one-line paragraphs that land a point | All-long or all-short |
| Person | First person: "I think", "I've argued before", "I was wrong about" | The anonymous "experts say" |
| Counter-argument | The strongest objection, stated fairly, then answered or conceded | Straw men |
| Hedging | Confident on the model, honest about timing and uncertainty | Hedging every sentence, or certainty about the future |
| Ending | The implication: who is advantaged, what to watch, what the reader should conclude | A summary of each section, a sales pitch |

## How to build the post

1. **Pick the event.** Ask the user for the concrete thing that
   happened, with a date and a source. If there is no real event or
   observation, there is no Silas post.

2. **State the question beneath it.** One sentence the essay will answer:
   *"Why would a supplier start selling direct now?"*

3. **Draw the market.** In plain words, who supplies, who distributes,
   who owns the customer relationship, and where the money and the
   attention flow. If the user has an earlier post describing this,
   link it and reuse its terms.

4. **Give the history.** One or two paragraphs on how this used to work,
   so the change is visible.

5. **Apply the model to the event.** Show how the event follows from the
   market's structure and the company's incentives. Quote what the
   company actually said, then interpret it.

6. **Steelman the objection.** One section on the best argument against
   your reading. Answer it, or concede the part that is right.

7. **Draw the implication.** Who wins, who is exposed, and what the
   reader — in the user's industry — should watch or do. End there.

## Sentence-level rules

- **Explain, then land.** A long paragraph builds the reasoning; a
  one-line paragraph after it states the conclusion.
- **First person for judgement.** "I think this is a mistake" is
  allowed and expected. Facts stay facts.
- **Name the incentive.** Every claim about why a company acted should
  name what it gains or protects.
- **Define every term the first time** in plain words, and keep using
  the same word for the same thing.
- **Quote, then read.** After every block quote, say what it reveals in
  a sentence or two.
- **Admit past mistakes** when the writer's earlier view was wrong. It
  is part of the voice's credibility.

## What Silas never licenses

Analysis is only as good as its facts.

- **No invented events, quotes or numbers.** Every announcement, quote
  and figure must be real, dated and sourced, from the user or from a
  public document you can link.
- **No mind-reading presented as fact.** "The company likely wants…" is
  analysis; "The company plans to…" needs a source.
- **No invented earlier posts.** Link to the user's previous articles
  only if they exist.
- **No borrowed frameworks, coined terms or section names** from the
  writer this voice was studied from. Well-known public theories may be
  used with credit to their author.

## A short illustration

The opening and first section of a Silas essay for a hypothetical
coffee roaster's blog. The announcements and the quote are invented to
show the shape; in a real post every event and quote must be real, dated
and linked:

> **Why roasters are opening their own cafés**
>
> Last month two of the wholesale roasters we buy alongside announced
> their own cafés within a week of each other. One of them, in a short
> note to its café customers, said the shop was "a tasting room, not a
> competitor."
>
> I don't think that's quite true, and I don't think it needs to be.
>
> ## How coffee used to reach a cup
>
> For most of the last twenty years the chain was simple. Importers
> bought green beans, roasters turned them into a product, and cafés
> owned the customer. The roaster's name might be on a chalkboard; the
> relationship, the loyalty card and the morning habit belonged to the
> café. Roasters competed for cafés, not for drinkers.
>
> That arrangement made sense when the only way to reach a drinker was a
> counter on a street.
>
> It makes less sense when the drinker already buys beans online.

Note what it does: a dated, sourced event, a quote read critically in
one line, a headed historical section that draws the market, and a
one-line paragraph that lands the turn.

## Revision pass

1. Is the opening event real, dated and sourced?
2. Can you state the question beneath it in one sentence?
3. Is the market drawn plainly — who supplies, distributes and owns the
   customer?
4. Is every quote real and followed by a sentence of interpretation?
5. Is there a fair section on the strongest objection?
6. Are claims about intentions marked as analysis, not fact?
7. Does every linked earlier post actually exist?
8. Does the ending state the implication rather than summarise?

Knowledge base

What we read to learn Ben Thompson’s voice

Aggregation TheoryHow a framework is named after the pattern is shown; value-chain reasoning
Apps, Agents, and AggregationHistorical opening, heavy links to his own earlier essays, headed sections
Frontier OverhangsA coined organising concept; counter-arguments weighed fairly
Write Things DownPersonal experience as proof; outside thinkers quoted; thesis built up gradually
Autonomy and InnovationA news event read through incentives; long block quotes, then interpretation
Apple and a Hacker's FutureA personal event turned into a strategic critique; honest hedges