Commercial licensing
You sell the dream. Borrow the proof.
You run AI courses, founder camps, or growth programs. Every ad, livestream, and parent briefing answers the same question: after this, what can they actually make?
You do not lack students. You do not lack instructors. You lack an answer the other side can verify themselves.
I am 14. In 17 days I finished a real research project and left behind 343 rows of data you can check line by line. That evidence can be licensed to you.
Three assets. None of them answer the question.
Testimonials can be bought. Famous teachers prove youare impressive — not that your students will be. Admission outcomes blur whether the course did the work or the family's resources did.
What you are missing is a real sample: process visible, data inspectable, the person willing to appear on camera.
A 14-year-old. Twelve campuses. No institution behind him.
A high-school student, bilingual in Spanish and English. On twelve U.S. Top 30 campuses he stopped strangers, asked the same three questions, filmed everything, transcribed it, and logged every row. No institutional endorsement. No parents doing the work.
Trip / schools
17 days, 12 Top 30 schools
Structured records
343 rows, 100% transcribed
Approaches
298 cold opens
Accepted / rejected
142 / 156 (47.7% success)
All 156 rejections were kept. A project built for packaging would not keep a 52% failure record.
Video
142 completed on-camera interviews— each its own file, attached to the matching database row. Open the row, open the video. Not a separate dump folder.
Where it was shot
Main quads, student centers, and library entrances across 12 campuses — real grounds, natural light, real students walking through frame.
Who is on camera
Strangers stopped on the spot: undergrads, graduate students, faculty and staff. 116 recorded majors across 105 different fields.
Length
About 5 minutes per formal interview (recruitment + consent kept inside a 7-minute window).
What was asked
The exact same three questions every time — so all 142 interviews can be compared side by side or cut into compilations.
Language & sound
English, live ambient audio. Wind, hesitation, people reversing themselves mid-sentence — none of that was cleaned out.
How it was shot
Single camera, handheld, on-location audio. Not a studio. Not staged.
Rights
Verbal consent captured on site for each person, with consent status logged. Available for commercial use.
Ready cutdowns
Each interview includes a marked 20–40 second high-density beat — ready to become an ad clip.
You cannot stage this.
Twelve different campuses as sets. Real student accents and awkward pauses. A 14-year-old holding the frame. Any clip you cut can be traced back on the spot to its full original video and verbatim transcript.
The data behind every video
These are not loose files. Every clip is tagged. Processing completion: 100%.
ID / school / name / major
Every row uniquely locatable.
Three-question transcripts
Each question stored in its own raw transcript column — not a summary, not a rewrite.
Is university worth it?
Yes / No / Depends already coded.
Habits & advice libraries
Habits and advice mentioned in each interview linked to two separate theme tables — reverse-searchable (e.g. who mentioned waking early).
Approach outcome
Accepted / Rejected auto-coded. All 156 rejections stay in the same table, with IDs.
Instagram / email
Interviewee contacts for follow-up and second-pass verification.
Already finished deliverables
- A full postmortem — per-school success rates, deep-interview density, daily output, all calculated.
- Yes / Depends / No distribution — of 129 clear answers: Yes 65.9%, Depends 33.3%, No 0.8%. School gaps are extreme (MIT 88.9% Yes, UC Berkeley 33.3%).
- Spanish & English quote bank — lines pulled from transcripts, ready for posters and slides.
- Method SOP — topic → question design → approach scripts → shooting rhythm → transcription → database → analysis, including attribution for all 156 rejections.
- Database template — the whole structure, ready to copy.
You are not buying footage. You are buying conviction.
1 · It invites you to disprove it
Most marketing says “trust me.” This one says “check it yourself.” Any row leads to original video and transcript. Only something that survives a random audit deserves to be called evidence. Parents are not talked into belief — they click, watch, and convince themselves.
2 · The failures stayed in
One hundred fifty-six rejection records sit in the same table as the 142 successes. Nothing deleted. That is the hardest part to fake: nobody invents a 52% failure rate for themselves. Once parents see that column, their doubt about every other number drops.
3 · There is no second copy on the market
| Who | What they have | What they lack |
|---|---|---|
| Surveys / reports | Scale and statistics | No video, no face speaking |
| Street-interview creators | Video and emotion | Inconsistent questions, no database, no side-by-side analysis |
| Institution student cases | A story | Unauditable — and family resources are unclear |
| This package | Video + identical questions + structured database | — |
Same questions. Same method. Twelve top schools. One hundred five majors. This is a sample you can analyze — not a handful of cute street clips.
4 · The person speaking is 14
The last parental defense is always: “My kid is too young / they can’t.” Adult case studies never get past that sentence. A 14-year-old with no institutional backing, rejected 156 times on foreign campuses, makes that sentence harder to say.
Time-sensitive. This leverage only holds this year. Next year I am 15 — and the same dataset is just “a high-school project.”
Five ways this becomes your enrollment engine.
1 · Paid social clips
Pull the marked 20–40 second cuts from 142 interviews and ship them as ads. Twelve campuses as rotating backdrops — one account can post for a month without repeating locations. Opening three seconds, ready-made: “A 14-year-old got rejected 156 times on campus. His database is public.” No actors. No locations to rent. No staging. When comments doubt it, send the database link.
2 · Landing pages & enrollment packets
Put a read-only database link on the page. Competitors can write case studies. They cannot write “click in and check it yourself.”
Our method backed a real research project completed independently by a 14-year-old: 17 days, 12 U.S. Top 30 campuses, 298 cold approaches, 156 rejections, 343 structured rows you can audit line by line. The database is open for inspection.
3 · Parent briefings & live enrollment
Parents only really ask one thing: can my kid do this? Let them ask me. I can join by video or in person, bilingual in Spanish and English, and walk through how the project was built — including what 156 rejections felt like. Screen-share the database live. Let a parent pick a random row and play the original clip. Peer voice converts faster than yours.
4 · Ready-made lesson content
The three-question transcripts plus the habits and advice libraries are already a class outline. “105 majors tell teenagers which three habits to build” — one session. “Why MIT says university is worth it 88.9% of the time, and Berkeley only 33.3%” — one session. Every claim has source video. None of it is invented.
5 · Have your students copy the system
The full database structure and SOP can be handed to your cohort. Your course stops at “we listened” and starts ending with “we submitted an auditable output.” Next enrollment cycle, you use your own students’ cases — you no longer need to borrow mine.
Contact: will@hao.com.co