3-week publishing plan, recurring themes, article structure, workflow, and style guide. 2 articles per week — 1 each from 2 of us, with the third rotating as reviewer / checker.
Define what monopolistic attributes are (pricing power, barriers to entry, network effects, vertical integration). Explain why these companies tend to outperform over long time horizons. Use real examples from MPLY holdings — Apple's ecosystem lock-in, Nvidia's GPU dominance, Microsoft's enterprise moat. This is the foundational article the entire platform builds on. Should be linkable from every future article.
Educational piece on risk misconceptions: most retail investors think risk = price going down, but actual investment risk is permanent loss of capital. Cover diversification, concentration risk, volatility vs. risk, and why monopolistic companies tend to have lower fundamental risk despite sometimes higher valuations. Naturally leads readers toward why a basket of dominant companies (like an ETF) manages risk better than stock-picking.
Analyse Nvidia through the monopolistic attributes framework: 90%+ market share in AI training chips, CUDA software lock-in as a barrier to entry, network effects from the developer ecosystem. Cover the business model, revenue growth, margins, and key risks (AMD competition, custom chips from hyperscalers). Connect back to why MPLY holds it as its third-largest position.
Compare MPLY and XXXX directly — different methodologies, different results. XXXX uses a value screen which causes it to miss expensive-but-dominant companies like Nvidia. MPLY invests in monopolistic characteristics regardless of valuation. Include performance data, holdings overlap, and expense ratio comparison. Conclude with why methodology matters more than the label.
Explain who the Magnificent 7 are and why they now account for over a third of the S&P 500's market cap. Analyse each through the monopolistic lens: Apple (ecosystem), Microsoft (enterprise), Nvidia (AI hardware), Amazon (e-commerce + cloud), Alphabet (search + advertising), Meta (social networking), Tesla (brand + manufacturing scale). Discuss whether this concentration is sustainable or a risk. Note that MPLY holds all seven, unlike MOAT.
Practical guide walking readers through an ETF fact sheet — expense ratio, NAV, holdings, sector allocation, performance benchmarks. Use MPLY's actual fact sheet as the worked example. Demystify every metric. This is a high-SEO-value piece that should rank for people searching 'how to read ETF fact sheet' and naturally introduces them to MPLY.
These are the recurring article series that rotate through the content calendar. Every article should fit into one of these categories. This gives the platform a predictable rhythm that subscribers can rely on.
Analyse a specific MPLY holding through the monopolistic attributes framework (pricing power, barriers, network effects). The bread and butter of the platform.
Compare MPLY to another ETF or index (MOAT, QQQ, VOO, SCHG). Data-driven, fair, and analytical — never promotional.
Explain a core investing concept (risk, diversification, compound returns, market cycles). Builds the audience who will eventually discover MPLY through the platform.
Timely analysis connecting current events to monopolistic companies. Earnings season, rate decisions, regulatory changes, sector shifts.
Recurring format: take a company and score it against each monopolistic attribute. Visual, structured, shareable. Could become a signature format.
Every article follows this five-section structure. It keeps the writing consistent across all three writers and ensures we always include a risks section (which is what builds credibility and separates us from promotional content).
2–3 sentences. A surprising data point, a counterintuitive claim, or a timely question. This determines whether anyone reads past the fold.
Set the scene. Why does this matter right now? What's the relevant market backdrop, news event, or trend?
The core argument. Data, reasoning, evidence. Use the monopolistic attributes framework where relevant. Be specific — name companies, cite numbers, show your working.
Acknowledge what could go wrong. This is what separates credible analysis from promotion. Every article should have this.
What does this mean for investors? This is where the ETF connection can appear — naturally, at the end, as a logical consequence of the analysis.
MPLY or any ETF should only appear in section 5 (Implications) — never earlier. The analysis must stand on its own. The reader should arrive at the investment case through the logic, not be told what to think. If every article ends with "buy MPLY", readers will notice and trust collapses. Some articles should have neutral or cautious conclusions. That's what makes the positive calls credible.
The weekly pipeline from topic selection to publication. Two articles per week — one each from 2 of the 3 team members. The third rotates as quality checker. Every article gets a second pair of eyes before publishing.
Alex K writes, Aaron writes, Ed checks
Aaron writes, Ed writes, Alex K checks
Alex K writes, Ed writes, Aaron checks
Analytical, not academic. Confident, not arrogant. We explain complex ideas clearly without dumbing them down. Write like a smart friend who happens to know finance — not a textbook, not a Reddit post. Avoid: jargon without explanation, hype language ('explosive growth', 'to the moon'), and hedging so much that you say nothing.
The ETF is never the subject of an article — it's a natural implication of the analysis. MPLY should appear no more than 2–3 times in any article, and only in the final section or as a factual reference ('MPLY holds 99 securities exhibiting monopolistic attributes'). Never use phrases like 'you should invest in' or 'we recommend'. The positioning is educational, not advisory.
Every claim needs a source. Use: company earnings reports, SEC filings, YCharts, FactSet, FRED (Federal Reserve data), reputable financial media (FT, Bloomberg, WSJ, Reuters). Never use: Reddit, unverified Twitter/X posts, or AI-generated data. Always include the date of any data point.
Headlines: Clear, specific, benefit-oriented. Not clickbait. 'Why Nvidia's GPU Monopoly May Be Unstoppable' > 'This Stock Is About to Explode'. Subheadings every 200–300 words. Short paragraphs (3–4 sentences max). Bold key terms on first use. Include at least one data visualisation or comparison table per article.
Every article must end with: 'This content is for educational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Always conduct your own research or consult a qualified financial advisor before making investment decisions.' This is non-negotiable.