Funnel teardown: Ghost (Newsletter and publishing platforms)
Founder(s): John O'Nolan

Ghost sells ownership as the product. The funnel is the non-profit foundation, the open-source code, and the explicit anti-Substack framing.

TL;DR: Ghost's funnel positions the product as the principled alternative to managed creator networks: open-source, non-profit-foundation-owned, zero platform-cut on subscriptions. The marketing site, governance structure, and pricing model all reinforce the same wedge — you own the publication, the platform does not own you. The lesson for indie founders: principle-led positioning is durable when the principle maps to a real structural decision (legal entity, code license, revenue model), and it falls apart when it is just rhetoric.

What they sell: An open-source publishing platform for newsletters, blogs, and membership publications, available self-hosted free or as Ghost(Pro) managed hosting.
Who it's for: Writers, publishers, and small media companies who want a fully owned site, custom design, and no platform cut on subscription revenue.
Pricing: Self-hosted open-source free; Ghost(Pro) managed hosting starts around $11/month with tiered plans by member count; zero cut on subscription revenue beyond Stripe fees (verified 2026-05-18).

Hook pattern: Principle-led wedge against named category
The hero positions Ghost against managed creator networks (Substack the implicit reference) on principle: own your audience, own your design, own your economics. The hook works because the principle maps to a concrete structural difference (open source, non-profit foundation, no revenue cut) the buyer can verify.

Story pattern: Foundation governance as proof
The story is told through the Ghost Foundation governance, public financials, and the open-source contributor community. The brand reinforces 'we are not optimising for an exit because we are structurally not built to' — which is the inverse of every VC-funded creator network.

Offer pattern: Two-track offer (self-host free, managed paid)
The free open-source self-host removes the 'I will just build it myself' objection. Ghost(Pro) managed hosting is the easy path for buyers who do not want to run infrastructure. The two tracks each serve a different segment without compromising the principle.

What's working:
Principle maps to verifiable structure — open source, foundation governance, no revenue cut — so the marketing claim is the same as the legal reality.|Anti-incumbent framing (against managed creator networks) gives readers a side to be on.|Two-track offer captures both technical buyers (self-host) and convenience buyers (Pro).|Theme marketplace and customisation depth signal that 'own your design' is a real promise, not a slogan.|Member portal and newsletter features have closed most of the feature gap with managed alternatives.

What to adapt:
If you position on a principle, back it with a verifiable structural decision the buyer can audit.|Two-track offers (DIY free, managed paid) can capture both ends of a buyer spectrum without diluting the principle.|Anti-incumbent framing works when the incumbent's commercial structure is materially different from yours.

What to avoid:
Do not position on principle if you cannot back it with structure — readers smell rhetoric without proof.|Do not assume self-hosted will dominate revenue — Ghost(Pro) is the commercial engine, not the free tier.|Do not copy the foundation governance angle if your entity is a normal VC-backed startup — the structural truth has to match the marketing.

Brunson lens:
Hook: Principle-led wedge (ownership) against managed-network incumbents.
Story: Foundation governance and open-source community as verifiable proof.
Offer: Two-track offer — free self-host as bait, managed Pro as ascension.
Value ladder tier: Front-end lead funnel (open source self-host) into managed hosting ascension.