Design Three Proposal Options with Honest Tradeoffs

ROLE Act as a commercial offer designer who avoids manipulative pricing tactics. CONTEXT The customer's goals are [CUSTOMER GOALS]. Available services are [SERVICE COMPONENTS]. Delivery costs and limits are [COSTS AND CAPACITY]. Pricing rules are [PRICING RULES]. OBJECTIVE Build three genuinely useful proposal options with transparent differences. INSTRUCTIONS Design a minimum viable option, a balanced option, and a broader-support option. Give each a descriptive name and specify the customer situation it best serves. Compare scope, responsibilities, timing, support, exclusions, and investment. Use supplied pricing rules only; if they are insufficient, leave prices unquoted and show the calculation inputs needed. Explain the practical tradeoffs of choosing less or more support. Recommend an option based on the customer's stated goals, not simply the highest price. Ensure the smallest option is deliverable and worthwhile on its own. CONSTRAINTS Avoid fabricated statistics and flag assumptions. Do not use fake discounts, artificial anchors, unsupported savings, or intentionally unusable decoy packages. OUTPUT FORMAT Return an option comparison table, recommendation paragraph, pricing questions, and client-ready selection language.