Big job offer, new city

Where the panel agrees

• Most seats see a version of this worth pursuing if it is tested small first.
• Nobody on the panel recommends betting everything at once.
• The panel accepts your success measure as the scoreboard: Family settled and me performing well in the role within a year.

Where it disagrees

• Housel vs Grant. Housel (Not yet) pushes back on Grant (Yes). What would settle it: A plan that still works at half the expected results would make me comfortable.
• Grant vs Housel. Grant (Yes) pushes back on Housel (Not yet). What would settle it: Seeing you change one part of the plan based on new evidence would raise my confidence.
• Grant vs Duke. Grant (Yes) pushes back on Duke (Yes, if). What would settle it: Seeing you change one part of the plan based on new evidence would raise my confidence.

Options and tradeoffs

• Accept and move this summer. Upside: Fastest learning for the least money at risk. Tradeoff: Slower to full scale and can feel like hedging.
• Ask to start remote for a year. Upside: Speed and full focus if the demand is real. Tradeoff: Largest downside if the key assumption is wrong.
• Stay and push for promotion here. Upside: Protects time and money for other priorities. Tradeoff: You may miss a real opening and learn nothing.

Assumptions

• The brief covered the material questions. Assumptions inside each answer remain unverified.

Evidence gaps

• Housel: A plan that still works at half the expected results would make me comfortable.
• Grant: Seeing you change one part of the plan based on new evidence would raise my confidence.
• Duke: A clear quit date and quit number agreed today would raise my confidence.
• Manning: A plan with a prepared adjustment for each likely failure would convince me.

Risks

• Housel: Expecting a straight line of progress when real outcomes are lumpy and slow.
• Grant: Confirmation bias, only hearing the evidence that supports what you already believe.
• Duke: Sunk cost pulling you to keep going long after the evidence says stop.
• Manning: Running the scripted play after the field has clearly changed.
• Hormozi: Competing on price with a commodity offer, then having no margin left to fund acquisition.

Decision criteria

• Hit family settled and me performing well in the role within a year
• Define the quit point before you start
• Stay within Relocation is paid. About $20k in savings as a cushion. without new debt

Suggested next experiment

Housel's test 30 days

1. Run the plan with double the timeline and double the cost. If it still works, go. If not, shrink it.
2. Write down what result would make you continue, change course or stop.
3. Review the result with the panel again and record your decision.

Kill criteria: Stop or rethink if you are well short of family settled and me performing well in the role within a year by the review date.