wiki/clients/current/papertube/2026-04-05-marketing-services-agreement-finalization.md Layer 2 article Client: Paper Tube Co 838 words Updated: 2026-04-05
↓ MD ↓ PDF
client paper-tube contract abm performance-fee attribution kpis lead-definition epr food-traceability

Marketing Services Agreement Finalization — 2026-04-05

Overview

Call between Mark Hope (Asymmetric) and Parag Agrawal (Paper Tube Co) to finalize the marketing services agreement. The parties worked through Parag's redline of the draft contract, resolving all open items. Agreement is ready to be cleaned up and executed, with a kickoff target of December 15, 2025.

Attendees:
- Parag Agrawal — parag@papertube.co (Paper Tube Co, external)
- Mark Hope — mark.hope@asymmetric.pro (Asymmetric)

Key Decisions

Term Final Previous Draft Rationale
Contract term 9 months 12 months Gives Paper Tube flexibility to exit earlier if performance is unsatisfactory
Notice period 60 days 90 days Enough runway for Asymmetric to reallocate staff; 90 felt excessive to Parag
Post-contract attribution window 12 months 18 months Covers long B2B sales cycles without over-complicating tracking
Performance fee 8% flat 8% tiered Simplified to a single flat rate on revenue from qualified leads
Attribution scope ABM-only (email, LinkedIn, content) Included paid search & paid social Paid search/social already run by Paper Tube; excluded to avoid paying for existing revenue
Qualified lead definition Revenue ≥ $100k (ABA threshold, TBD by Parag) Not defined Prevents Asymmetric from being compensated for low-value startup leads Paper Tube already receives

Attribution Scope — Detail

Parag struck paid search and paid social from the primary attribution clause because Paper Tube already runs those channels independently. The agreed scope for performance fee attribution is:

Anything sourced through paid search or paid social that Paper Tube was already operating is excluded from the 8% performance fee calculation. This eliminates the gray-area benchmark debate (e.g., indexing existing paid search revenue) in favor of a clean channel-based boundary.

Lead Definition

A "qualified lead" must meet a minimum annual revenue threshold — discussed as $100k+ — to count toward Asymmetric's performance fee. This:

"One way to do that would just be to define the definition of a lead. And so that would be revenue above X." — Mark Hope

Parag agreed to confirm the exact threshold and share it with Mark.

KPIs & Performance Benchmarks

No specific numbers were set in this call. Mark committed to proposing initial ABM funnel benchmarks using a reverse-engineered approach:

  1. Define target revenue / number of qualified leads
  2. Work backward to required presentations / meetings
  3. Work backward to required outreach volume (emails, calls)

Parag's primary interim KPI of interest: number of meetings generated from ABM activity, as a leading indicator before revenue materializes.

Mark noted benchmarks will be informed by Asymmetric's internal database of B2B open rates, click-through rates, and conversion rates, but will be refined once early data comes in.

Regulatory Opportunities Discussed

Two regulatory tailwinds were flagged as potential ABM messaging angles:

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)

Food Traceability Act

Both were flagged for deeper research by Asymmetric before incorporating into campaign strategy. See [1] if that article exists.

Kickoff Plan

Action Items

Sources

  1. Regulatory Tailwinds As Abm Hooks
  2. Index
  3. Performance Fee Structures Abm
  4. Abm Funnel Benchmarking