Teardown: A Welcome Series That's Losing Money
Objective: Given a synthetic-but-realistic 3-email welcome series with real, lesson-mapped defects mixed in with deliberately correct choices, find the actual problems, and don't flag the decoys.
A junior teammate at Bonobos built a welcome series for new newsletter signups last sprint. Open rates are fine, but revenue from the flow is flat, and the unsubscribe rate is creeping up. You're asked to review the three emails before more subscribers go through it.
Some of what's below looks wrong but is actually a correct, deliberate call per the lesson. Flag the real problems, cite the lesson rule each one breaks, and leave the correct choices alone.
Before you start
What you'll need
Free path (everything below is enough to finish)
Free, and the entire deliverable is a written answer key, no specialized tool needed to complete the teardown itself.
Free tier lets you see how send-delay and conditional-split settings are actually configured in a live flow, useful context for spotting the timing defect.
Paid upgrades (optional, faster/deeper)
The free path (Google Docs plus a free Klaviyo account to see real settings) is complete for finding and writing up every defect. ActiveCampaign only matters if you go on to rebuild the flow with more branches.
Only relevant if you want to go further than this teardown and rebuild the flow with richer branching than the free tier supports.
The process
Specimens to review
Review this 3-email welcome series. List every real defect you find, cite the specific lesson rule it breaks, and rate its severity. Do not flag anything that's actually a correct choice per the lesson.
EMAIL 1 — sent: immediately upon signup (0 days) Subject: FLASH SALE: 20% OFF ENDS IN 24 HOURS!!! Body: Welcome to Bonobos! As a new subscriber, use code WELCOME20 for 20% off ANYTHING on the site. This deal disappears in 24 hours, so shop now before it's gone. [Shop the Sale ->] EMAIL 2 — sent: same day, 4 hours after Email 1 Subject: Learn All About Why Bonobos Started And What Makes Us Different From Other Menswear Brands Body: Bonobos was founded in 2007 to fix a simple problem: menswear that actually fits. Over 500,000 guys have visited a Guideshop to get properly fitted, and we've been featured in GQ, Esquire, and the New York Times. Curious what proper fit feels like? [See how Guideshops work] EMAIL 3 — sent: same day, 8 hours after Email 1 Subject: Your 20% off code WELCOME20 expires in 24 hours Body: Don't forget, code WELCOME20 is still live for 20% off anything on Bonobos.com. It expires in 24 hours, so don't wait. [Shop Now ->] Context: a subscriber who places an order 2 hours after Email 1 still receives Email 3 with the same discount code.
Specimen: synthetic, realistic
Final deliverable
A written answer key: every real defect found, its severity, the specific lesson line or Mistake number it breaks, and a one-line fix, with confirmation of which flagged-looking elements you correctly left alone.
See a reference example
Running the same checklist against a Warby Parker specimen surfaces a different critical defect: a shared code isn't the issue there, all three subject lines are personalized and under 7 words. Instead, Email 3 never states an actual deadline, 'act now' with no date attached is urgency in name only. The fix pattern is the same either way: name the specific line, quote the lesson rule it breaks, and don't touch the parts that were already correct, like Warby's Email 2, which correctly skips any offer and sticks to brand story.
Success criteria
You're done when you can:
- Flags the reused WELCOME20 code across Email 1 and Email 3 as a critical defect, citing Mistake 4
- Flags the same-day send timing (no 2-3 day, no 5-7 day gaps) as a critical defect, citing the lesson's stated Email 2/Email 3 timing
- Does NOT flag Email 2's lack of a discount code as a defect, correctly recognizing the offer belongs in Email 3
- Does NOT flag Email 3's stated 24-hour deadline language as fake urgency, correctly recognizing the lesson tells Email 3 to add urgency
- Identifies at least 4 of the 5 real defects with the correct lesson citation for each