wiki/knowledge/agency-operations/new-dawn-shine-contract-conflict.md · 668 words · 2026-04-05
New Dawn Scope Conflict — $5k Contract Reallocation
Overview
A scope conflict surfaced during a February 2026 marketing and website call between Asymmetric (Sebastian Gant, Melissa Cusumano) and A New Dawn Therapy (Katie Geiser). The two parties hold materially different understandings of what the original $5,000 contract covers. The conflict was not resolved on the call; Sebastian committed to consulting AAG leadership and delivering a written proposal.
See also: [1] · [2]
The Conflict
Client's Position (Katie Geiser)
- The $5k contract covers the full scope: website build + SEO optimization + Google Ads strategy.
- KG has already delivered all copy, images, page structure, and template layouts — she views the remaining work (build, SEO, ads) as AAG's responsibility under the original agreement.
- She has not been informed of any scope change and pushed back directly: "I thought the keywords and the SEO optimization was already a part of the original scope."
Agency's Position (Sebastian Gant)
- The $5k budget was reallocated to cover the unexpected Elementor rebuild, which consumed the project's remaining capacity.
- SEO and Google Ads are now considered post-project retainer services, not deliverables within the original contract.
- SG acknowledged he cannot make final commitments without consulting AAG leadership, as scope and contract decisions are above his authority.
Key Exchange
KG: "Along with that pricing too, because it sounds like through the original scope, it's with like the Google Ads, the SEO kind of like optimization."
SG: "I think that initial five grand for the initial project, I think that's just shifted into like the website build… any other stuff, kind of the strategy, the SEO, the whatever that comes after will kind of fold into… a retainer."
KG: "No, what do you mean by that?"
Contributing Factors
- Elementor rebuild was presented as complimentary. KG understood the switch to Elementor as a no-cost convenience upgrade, not a reallocation of budget. SG confirmed the build portion is complimentary, but the design of new pages is not.
- Design vs. build distinction was not clearly communicated. The rebuild covers building pages from existing designs. Pages without a template require either paid AAG design work or client-provided layouts — a distinction KG was not aware of.
- Client has done substantial work. KG wrote all copy, formatted all pages, and created templates. She reasonably expected the remaining deliverables (SEO, ads) to be fulfilled by AAG.
- SG lacks authority to resolve unilaterally. Contract and scope decisions sit with AAG leadership, creating a communication gap on the call.
Resolution Path
SG committed to the following before the next meeting (February 27th):
- [ ] Consult AAG leadership to clarify what the original $5k contract covers
- [ ] Deliver a written proposal that defines:
- Agreed-upon project scope going forward
- Whether SEO and Google Ads remain in scope or move to a retainer
- Pricing for AAG to design new pages (pages without existing templates)
- Recommended tools/process for KG to provide design layouts herself (as a lower-cost alternative)
Operational Lessons
Scope Changes Require Written Acknowledgment
When a project pivots (e.g., unexpected rebuild consuming budget), the client must be notified in writing and asked to acknowledge the change. Verbal discussions in recurring calls are insufficient — especially when the client is managing significant personal and business demands and may not register the implication.
"Complimentary" Needs a Clear Boundary
Describing the Elementor rebuild as complimentary without specifying what it excludes (new page design) created a false expectation. Any complimentary service offer should include explicit scope limits in writing.
Retainer Transitions Should Be Scoped Proactively
If the plan was always to move SEO/Ads to a retainer post-build, that transition should have been documented in the original contract or communicated as a formal amendment — not surfaced mid-project when the client asks about deliverables.