Brand: Lisy | Website: trylisy.com | Social: @trylisy
Hero Product: Growth + Shine Hair Oil | $48-55 / 2oz
Distribution: DTC only (ruthless focus before expanding)
Exit Window: Year 3.5 - Year 5, targeting $600M-1B+ valuation
Every $100M+ beauty brand of the last 5 years followed this sequence:
| Divi (Dani Austin) | Scalp health influencer → $40M Year 1 |
| Rhode (Hailey Bieber) | Massive social presence → $212M in 3 years → $1B exit |
| Monday Haircare | TikTok-native → $100M+ in 2 years |
| Drunk Elephant | DTC-first → $845M exit (8x revenue) |
| Tatcha | DTC premium → $500M exit (8-10x revenue) |
Five things every breakout beauty brand did that most brands don't:
Olaplex had patented chemistry that genuinely repaired hair bonds, stylists became evangelists because they could see it working in the chair. Rhode's Lip Treatment became a cult product because it was genuinely good, not because Hailey is famous. Drunk Elephant was praised by dermatologists. Divi's scalp serum showed real before-and-after results that customers posted unprompted.
The brands that survived all had products that delivered real results. Celebrity/influencer brands that launched mediocre formulas with a famous name (Haus Labs V1, Humanrace, About Face) struggled or had to relaunch.
The product must genuinely work. No shortcuts on formulation.
The highest-exit brands said NO to easy revenue.
The brand that went everywhere, Olaplex (salons, Sephora, Ulta, Amazon, DTC simultaneously), watched unauthorized Amazon resellers destroy their pricing power. Stock went from $30 to under $2.
What this means for Lisy: DTC only until expansion rules are met (Section 3). Channel discipline = pricing power = premium exit multiple.
The founder brands where the celebrity did a launch post and disappeared; they stalled or died.
What this means for Lisy: Lisette's content is not a "launch campaign." It is the engine. She creates consistently for years, not weeks. Lisette stays on camera. She is the face of the brand. This is why "founder burnout" is in the risk section.
Selling out fast creates:
What this means for Lisy: We launch with 500 units. That's it. We WANT to sell out in 1-3 days. The stockout is a feature, not a bug. Waitlist capture during stockout = 10-20K emails. "Sold out in 4 days" becomes Lisette's next viral post.
When the hero product becomes iconic, it becomes the entry point that pulls customers into the rest of the line. Launching with 15 products dilutes marketing dollars, content focus, and inventory capital across too many SKUs.
What this means for Lisy: One SKU at launch: Growth + Shine Hair Oil. All content, all ads, all inventory capital → one product. No new products until expansion rules are met (Section 3). Iterate V1. The oil must become synonymous with the Lisy brand. If someone says "Lisy" they should think "hair oil" immediately.
What they did:
What happened:
What Lisy does differently: DTC only. Sequential expansion per Section 3 rules. No PE money. Bootstrap = clean cap table. We control pricing because we control distribution. Premium positioning = premium exit multiple.
What they did:
What actually happened:
What Lisy does differently: Premium pricing: $48-55, not $7. 75%+ product margins. Founder IS the brand: Lisette's face, voice, and story. You can't copy that. DTC captures full margin + customer data. Our "$10M Year 1" is NET brand revenue, not retail sell-through. We'd rather have 200K customers at $50 than 1.4M at $7. Fewer customers, higher value, deeper loyalty.
What they did right (almost everything):
What they lacked:
What Lisy does differently: Paid media from Day 1, not Month 6, not Year 2. The flywheel is simultaneous: organic + paid from launch. Organic sales fund ads. Ads fund inventory. Both engines at once. Subscription architecture from Day 1 (Divi added subscriptions later). Simultaneous engines compress the timeline.
Three co-founders. Equal ownership. 33.33% each.
Anything outside a founder's domain requires ALL THREE founders to agree.
The rule: If one founder disagrees, it does not move forward.
| Product | Growth + Shine Hair Oil |
| Size | 2oz |
| Price Range | $48-55 |
| Target AOV | $75-85 through bundles, subscriptions, multi-packs |
| Status | Formulation in development (testing with lab in Dominican Republic) |
Product development is Lisette's domain. Domain authority from Section 3 applies here. David and Juan contribute perspective and validate with data, but Lisette leads the product.
The size and price are deliberate, not arbitrary.
| Offer | Price | Discount | Purpose |
|---|---|---|---|
| Single bottle | $48-55 | - | Entry point / trial |
| 2-pack | $82-94 | 15% | AOV boost |
| 3-pack | $114-130 | 21% | AOV boost + gifting |
| Subscription | $41-47/bottle | 15% recurring | LTV driver |
Lisy at $48-55 for 2oz undercuts every major competitor per ounce while holding 75%+ margins.
| AOV | Total Orders Needed | Orders/Day (Avg) |
|---|---|---|
| $35 | 285,714 | 783 |
| $45 | 222,222 | 609 |
| $55 | 181,818 | 498 |
| $65 | 153,846 | 422 |
| $75 | 133,333 | 365 |
| Month | Revenue | Cumulative | Orders/Day | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M1 | $70,000 | $70,000 | 29 | Inventory-capped, organic launch |
| M2 | $100,000 | $170,000 | 42 | Restocks arriving, ads ramping |
| M3 | $250,000 | $420,000 | 104 | Inventory caught up, ads scaling |
| M4 | $450,000 | $870,000 | 188 | Flywheel running |
| M5 | $700,000 | $1,570,000 | 292 | Consistent scaling |
| M6 | $900,000 | $2,470,000 | 375 | Approaching $1M |
| M7 | $1,050,000 | $3,520,000 | 438 | First $1M month |
| M8 | $1,130,000 | $4,650,000 | 471 | Sustained $1M+ |
| M9 | $1,200,000 | $5,850,000 | 500 | Momentum building |
| M10 | $1,300,000 | $7,150,000 | 542 | Holiday prep |
| M11 | $1,500,000 | $8,650,000 | 625 | Black Friday/Holiday |
| M12 | $1,350,000 | $10,000,000 | 563 | Holiday tail + Q1 prep |
Bootstrap Note: M1-M2 revenue is INVENTORY-CONSTRAINED, not demand-constrained. Lisette's audience should create more demand than we can fulfill with $30K of starting inventory. This is by design; selling out fast creates viral scarcity ("Sold out in 3 days!") and builds a massive waitlist that converts when restocks arrive. The real revenue acceleration begins M3 when inventory catches up to demand.
| Phase | Months | Daily Orders | Daily Revenue | Constraint |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bootstrap Launch | M1 | 25-45 | $2,000-3,600 | Inventory-capped |
| Restock + Ramp | M2 | 30-65 | $2,400-5,200 | Inventory catching up |
| Flywheel Engaged | M3 | 80-150 | $6,400-12,000 | Ads scaling |
| Full Scale | M4-6 | 190-375 | $15,200-30,000 | Cash-funded growth |
| Accelerate | M7-9 | 435-500 | $34,800-40,000 | Compounding |
| Peak | M10-12 | 540-625 | $43,200-50,000 | Holiday + momentum |
Note: Product gross margin is 80-85% (product COGS only). Fully-loaded margin (including shipping, fulfillment, processing) is 66-70% at current scale, targeting 80% as COGS drops with volume. These are broken out separately for visibility into true product-level economics.
Total launch inventory: 1,400 units. Remaining buffer: $0.
Core mechanic: Every dollar from organic sales funds ads. Every dollar from ads funds inventory. Repeat.
| Cash on Hand | $18,800-$34,800 |
| Inventory | 0 (awaiting 2,500 unit restock, Week 6-7) |
| Reorder In Transit | 2,500 units (arriving Week 6-7) |
Month 1 is NOT about hitting a big revenue number. It is about:
From M4 onward, growth is limited by execution, not capital. Cash flow is strongly positive and compounding.
Why: This is the ignition. Without organic revenue, there is no cash to fund ads. Lisette's audience IS the startup capital.
Why: There is no testing budget. Every dollar spent on ads must return 2x+ immediately. We cannot afford a 2-3 week "learning phase" that loses money.
Why: If the 900-unit Batch 2 arrives 1 week late, we have zero inventory for 7+ days. That is 7 days of $0 revenue and lost momentum.
Why: Cash from sales must be accessible within 1-2 business days to reinvest into ads and inventory. Every day of delay is a day we cannot scale.
| Revenue | Inventory | Ad Spend | Ship/Proc | Net Cash | Cumulative | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Start | - | - | - | - | - | $30,000 |
| M0 | $0 | $18,700 | $0 | $0 | -$20,700 | $9,300 |
| M1 | $63K | $27,500 | $10K | $6K | +$19,500 | $28,800 |
| M2 | $90K | $30K | $20K | $9K | +$31K | $59,800 |
| M3 | $225K | $54K | $60K | $20K | +$91K | $150,800 |
| M4 | $405K | $80K | $110K | $36K | +$179K | $329,800 |
| M5 | $630K | $105K | $160K | $57K | +$308K | $637,800 |
| M6 | $810K | $120K | $200K | $73K | +$417K | $1,054,800 |
| When | Units | Cost/Unit | Total | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8 wks pre-launch | 500 | $14 | $7,000 | Source: $30K starting capital. Ready and warehoused before launch day. |
| 4 wks pre-launch | 900 | $13 | $11,700 | Source: $30K starting capital. Expected arrival: Week 2-3 of M1. CRITICAL: Confirm manufacturer lead time. |
| M1 (Week 2) | 2,500 | $11 | $27,500 | Cash source: Organic launch revenue ($17-24K) + ad fund remainder. Arrival: Week 6-7 (early M2). NOTE: This is the tightest cash moment. May need to order 2,000 units ($22K) if cash is short. |
| M2 (Week 6-7) | 3,000 | $10 | $30,000 | Cash source: M1 cumulative revenue. Arrival: M3. Begin negotiating Net 15-30 terms. Buffer stock building begins. |
| M3 | 6,000 | $9-10 | $54-60K | MOQ leverage improving pricing. Net 30 terms targeted. Arrival: M4-M5. |
| M4-M6 | 8-12K/cycle | $8-9 | $72-108K | COGS dropping to $8-9/unit at volume. Net 30 terms established. Negotiate aggressively for $5-6/unit at scale. 60-90 day payment terms negotiated. |
| M7+ | 20-30K/mo | $5-6 target | $100-180K | Multiple warehouse locations. 3PL partnership for fulfillment. Full supply chain maturity. Target COGS $5-6/unit (path to 80% fully-loaded margin). 4-6 week safety stock maintained. |
Year 1 is DTC ONLY through trylisy.com.
Channel expansion follows the rules in Section 3. Year 1 is DTC only through trylisy.com.
| Channel | M1-3 | M4-6 | M7-9 | M10-12 | Total | % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DTC Website | $160K | $750K | $1,120K | $1,250K | $3,280K | 33% |
| Paid Social | $175K | $1,050K | $1,555K | $1,700K | $4,480K | 45% |
| Affiliate/UGC | $10K | $100K | $230K | $350K | $690K | 7% |
| Subscriptions | $75K | $150K | $475K | $850K | $1,550K | 15% |
| Month | Ad Spend | ROAS | Expected Rev | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M1 | $10K | 2.5x | $25K | Bootstrap testing |
| M2 | $20K | 2.5x | $50K | Scaling winners |
| M3 | $60K | 2.5x | $150K | Revenue-funded |
| M4 | $110K | 2.5x | $275K | Flywheel running |
| M5 | $160K | 2.4x | $384K | Multi-platform |
| M6 | $200K | 2.3x | $460K | Efficiency focus |
| M7 | $240K | 2.3x | $552K | Approaching $1M months |
| M8 | $270K | 2.2x | $594K | Scale mode |
| M9 | $300K | 2.2x | $660K | Peak efficiency |
| M10 | $350K | 2.1x | $735K | Holiday ramp |
| M11 | $420K | 2.0x | $840K | BFCM |
| M12 | $380K | 2.0x | $760K | Sustain |
| Total | $2.52M | 2.3x avg | $5.49M |
Bootstrap Note: Ad spend in M1-M2 is capped by available cash, not by opportunity. Starting at $300-500/day and scaling weekly as revenue flows in. By M3, ad spend is limited only by ROAS performance, not capital. The remaining ~$4.5M in Year 1 revenue comes from organic, email/SMS, subscriptions, and repeat customers.
| Daily Spend | Stage | ROAS Target |
|---|---|---|
| $300-500 | M1 - Proving ground | 3-5x |
| $1K-5K | M2-4 - Scale winners | 2.5-3x |
| $5K-15K | M5-9 - LTV data available | 2-2.5x |
| $15K-50K | M10+ - First purchase | 1.5-2x (3-5x w/ LTV) |
| $50K-100K+ | Y2-3 - Market capture | 0.8-1.2x (2.5-4x w/ LTV) |
If we cannot hit 2x at $500/day, we will never hit 1x at $10,000/day. The math only gets harder. If paid does not work at small scale, we are cooked. This is the proving ground. Every creative is tested here. Kill losers fast. Scale winners immediately.
Winners from M1 get scaled aggressively. New creatives tested alongside proven winners. ROAS starts to compress slightly; this is normal. If ROAS stays above 2x, keep pushing. Do not pull back.
Multi-platform (Meta + TikTok Ads + Google + YouTube). Diminishing returns are real; each incremental $1K/day produces slightly less return. BUT: LTV data is now available. We know payback windows. A customer acquired at 2x ROAS who buys 3x over 12 months is actually a 6x return. This is where most brands panic and pull back. We do not.
At this scale, we are acquiring customers at near-breakeven or slight loss on first purchase, banking on LTV. This is normal. This is how every major DTC brand operates at scale. The model works IF the product is good enough to retain. Bad product = LTV does not exist = we bleed cash at scale.
We are now in "market capture" mode. Acquiring at a loss, knowing LTV covers it. Cash reserves + subscription revenue fund the float. Brands that get here with proven LTV models do not lose. They compound.
Build the business so it works at 0.8x ROAS. If the LTV model is strong, the product retains customers, and subscriptions compound, then even a 0.8x first-purchase ROAS is wildly profitable over 12 months. The goal is not to need a 3x ROAS forever. The goal is to prove 3x works at small scale, then scale to a point where 0.8-1.2x on first purchase generates billions in lifetime value. That is how we bootstrap $30K into $10M and $10M into $100M.
Paid media amplifies whatever you already are. If the product is amazing, genuinely changes people's hair, and we put paid media behind it, the result is extraordinary. Customers convert, they reorder, they tell their friends, and every dollar of ad spend compounds into lifetime value.
If the product is mediocre, paid media amplifies that too. Ads bring people in, they buy once, they are disappointed, they do not come back, and every dollar of ad spend is wasted. No amount of creative, targeting, or budget fixes a bad product. Paid media does not create demand for something people do not want. It accelerates demand for something they do.
When paid media scales aggressively (going from moderate spend to $100K+/day), things break if the back-end is not ready:
Zero founder salary Year 1. All three founders have existing income. Every dollar in the account compounds. Taking salary in Year 1 is like selling Amazon stock in 1998 to buy a car. Salary starts earliest Month 12-13.
| Line Item | Amount |
|---|---|
| Gross Revenue | $10,000,000 |
| Less: Returns/refunds (5%) | -$500,000 |
| Net Revenue | $9,500,000 |
| Product COGS (~17%) | -$1,700,000 |
| Product Gross Profit (82%) | $7,800,000 |
| Operating Expenses | |
| Shipping/fulfillment (6%) | -$560,000 |
| Payment processing (3%) | -$300,000 |
| Paid advertising | -$2,520,000 |
| Software/tools | -$40,000 |
| 3PL/fulfillment fees | -$150,000 |
| Other operating | -$120,000 |
| Total Operating Expenses | -$3,690,000 |
| Operating Profit (EBITDA) | $4,110,000 (~43%) |
This is not a sacrifice; it is a strategic decision.
Revenue targets for each year are in the Executive Summary. Detailed planning for Year 2+ happens at the end of the preceding year, with actual data. Below is the bigger picture.
What is NOT a constraint: Anything done through a computer. AI + a small team can accomplish what 100 people did 5 years ago. Marketing, analytics, creative production, customer communication, financial modeling - all of this scales without proportional headcount.
What IS a constraint - the physical world. These are the real bottlenecks as we scale:
An acquirer pays more for a brand that dominates ONE market than a brand that does the same revenue across 20 countries.
Scenario 1: A US-dominant brand at $100M = the acquirer's pitch is "We buy this, expand internationally, and triple revenue." That's a 3x growth story they can sell to their board.
Scenario 2: A global brand at $100M spread across 20 countries = the acquirer's pitch is: "We buy this and... optimize?" There's no obvious growth lever. Less exciting.
Being #1 in the US is harder than being #20 across 100 countries. But it's more valuable at exit.
TARGET: 60-90% of revenue from US even after international expansion. International is a multiplier, not the base.
We build it to exit. We sell when there is liquidity and the number makes sense. Just like trading, we do not try to sell at the top. We sell when a real buyer shows up with a real number. No ego. No greed. No emotional attachment.
No external investment. Ever. The only time outside money enters is at exit. Bootstrap to exit. Clean cap table = maximum founder equity = maximum payout.
L'Oreal, P&G, Unilever, e.l.f., Shiseido
PROS:
CONS:
Equity rollover + second bite
PROS:
CONS:
Based on industry research:
Lisy Exit Window: Year 3.5 - Year 5 (depending on market conditions and offers received)
| Scenario | Revenue Multiple | EBITDA Multiple | Implied Valuation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conservative | 3-4x | 12-15x | $360-480M |
| Target | 5-6x | 15-20x | $600-720M |
| Premium | 7-9x | 20-25x | $840M-1.08B |
Probability: Medium-High (especially M1-3) | Impact: Severe - lost sales, disappointed audience, momentum killer
Probability: Low | Impact: High - 45% of revenue dependent on paid
Probability: Medium | Impact: High - founder is the brand engine
Probability: Low-Medium | Impact: Severe - can halt growth entirely
Probability: Medium | Impact: Medium-High
Year 1 is DTC only through trylisy.com. Platform dependency risk is about ad platforms, not marketplace channels. Amazon and Sephora are added in Year 2+ to further diversify.
Probability: Low (assuming QC processes) | Impact: Severe - can destroy brand trust
Risk: Meta/Google costs continue rising 10-20% annually
Mitigation: Lisette organic content, influencer affiliate program, email/SMS list building
Offset: 20-30% of acquisition comes from organic at $0 CAC
Risk: $48-55 hair oil represents 100% of Year 1-2 revenue
Mitigation: Relentless iteration on hero product (V1.0 → V1.3) makes it the best oil on the market. 2nd product unlocks at $30M cumulative. Sequential expansion.
Target: Hero product stays dominant but new products diversify revenue after $30M milestone
Risk: Lisette's face and voice are the brand
Mitigation: Build brand beyond Lisette, develop additional brand ambassadors
Strategy: Document brand guidelines, create content playbook, train team
Risk: DTC-only limits addressable market long-term
Mitigation: Sequential expansion after $30M cumulative: 2nd product → 3rd product → Amazon → Sephora. DTC ceiling is much higher than most people think - Rhode did $200M+ primarily through DTC + Sephora.
Note: Dominating one channel before expanding is a feature, not a limitation. International after $100M/year US.
Risk: Larger brands copy positioning or launch competing products
Mitigation: Speed to market, authentic founder story, community building
Advantage: First-mover in Dominican-heritage hair oil positioning
Risk: Recession impacts discretionary beauty spending
Mitigation: $48-55 price point is accessible luxury, focus on retention over acquisition
Data: Premium beauty growing 8% annually vs. 5% for mass market
| Year 1 Scenario | Revenue | Key Assumptions |
|---|---|---|
| Bull Case | $12-15M | Everything works: Founder content goes mega-viral. Paid ads maintain 3.0x ROAS at scale. DTC conversion rate exceeds expectations. Subscription rate hits 35%. |
| Base Case | $7-10M | Plan as outlined executes. Paid ads average 2.3x ROAS. Bootstrap flywheel works (organic funds ads, ads fund inventory). M1-M2 inventory-constrained, M3+ fully scaled. DTC-only strategy performs well. |
| Bear Case | $6-8M | Paid ads struggle (1.8x average ROAS). Inventory issues in M2-3. Slower subscription adoption. Content performance below peak. |
| Floor Case | $3-5M | Paid ads break even (1.2-1.5x ROAS). Rely heavily on organic only. $30K capital limits inventory cycles. Slower flywheel but still cash-positive. Still excellent for a $30K investment. |
Assumptions:
| Year | Revenue | Growth | EBITDA | EBITDA % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | $7-10M | - | ~$2M | ~20-24% |
| 2 | $26M | 160% | $2.6M | 10% |
| 3 | $50M | 92% | $6.0M | 12% |
| 4 | $75M | 50% | $11.3M | 15% |
Exit implication: $225-375M (3-5x revenue)
Assumptions:
| Year | Revenue | Growth | EBITDA | EBITDA % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | $7-10M | - | ~$2.3M | ~24% |
| 2 | $36M | 260% | $6.5M | 18% |
| 3 | $80M | 122% | $16.0M | 20% |
| 4 | $120M | 50% | $27.6M | 23% |
Target exit implication: $600-840M (5-7x revenue)
Assumptions:
| Year | Revenue | Growth | EBITDA | EBITDA % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | $10-15M | - | ~$2.6M | ~26% |
| 2 | $46M | 360% | $9.2M | 20% |
| 3 | $100M | 117% | $23.0M | 23% |
| 4 | $150M | 50% | $37.5M | 25% |
Exit implication: $900M-1.35B (6-9x revenue)
Assumptions:
Why $3M is still a WIN:
$3M Revenue Math (Organic-Only):
We assume the launch failed. We travel forward 90 days. Revenue is under $30K. The flywheel never ignited. Here are the five most likely reasons why:
Cash is a commodity. Dollars have no inherent value. The value is the people, the product, and the brand we build. Every dollar sitting in the account should be deployed into growth, not extracted for personal use.
Funds ads → acquires customers → generates subscription revenue for 12+ months → worth $10-50 over time.
Gone. Taxed. Spent. Zero compounding.
| Cash Flow Item | % of Operating Cash |
|---|---|
| Reinvest in Marketing | 60-70% |
| Working Capital Build | 20-25% |
| Infrastructure | 10-15% |
| Founder Distributions | 0-5% |
Rationale: Maximum reinvestment to capture market share while CAC is favorable and Lisette's influence is growing.
| Cash Flow Item | % of Operating Cash |
|---|---|
| Reinvest in Marketing | 45-55% |
| Product Development | 15-20% |
| Working Capital Build | 15-20% |
| Founder Distributions | 10-15% |
Rationale: Begin taking modest distributions while continuing aggressive growth. Build war chest for opportunistic investments.
| Cash Flow Item | % of Operating Cash |
|---|---|
| Reinvest in Marketing | 35-45% |
| Strategic Investments | 15-20% |
| Cash Accumulation | 20-25% |
| Founder Distributions | 15-20% |
Rationale: Demonstrate profitability, build cash reserves for clean balance sheet at exit, allow founders to de-risk personally before exit.
| Year | Base Salary (Each) | Distribution Potential | Total Comp Range |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 2 | $150-200K | $50-100K | $200-300K |
| 3 | $200-275K | $200-500K | $400-775K |
| 4 | $275-350K | $500K-1M+ | $775K-1.35M+ |
Exit Windfall: At target valuation of $600-720M with founders holding majority equity (33.33% each), exit proceeds of $400-500M+ for the founding team combined.
Multi-member LLC (Florida). All three founders listed as members in Articles of Organization. Each founder properly identified (full legal name, address, tax ID). All brand assets, content, formulas, and IP assigned to the LLC (nothing belongs to any individual founder, everything belongs to the entity). This needs to be done correctly. Budget $2-5K for a business attorney to handle formation and Operating Agreement.
Operating Agreement (must be signed by all three founders pre-launch): This is the single most important legal document we will have. It defines how the business runs and what happens in every scenario.
33.33% each.
4-year vest with 1-year cliff (standard).
No founder can sell, transfer, or pledge their shares without unanimous consent from the other two. This prevents surprises.
This prevents bottlenecks on small transactions while ensuring oversight on large ones.