Editorial policy

How Skim HQ turns public signals into opportunity briefs.

This policy explains what we look for, what we avoid, and how readers should interpret source-backed business idea research.

Selection

Signals must point to buyer pain

We prioritize public evidence of workflow friction, budget pressure, procurement intent, regulation, hiring, or repeated operator complaints.
We avoid publishing ideas that are only trend labels, generic market summaries, or unsupported “AI for X” claims.
We separate early signals from validated demand and make that distinction visible in the brief.

Scoring

Opportunity scores summarize fit, urgency, and execution clarity using available signals.
Every score can be wrong when market conditions, buyer priorities, or source quality changes.
Nothing in Skim HQ is financial, investment, legal, procurement, or professional advice.

Corrections

If a source is stale, unavailable, or materially misread, we update or remove the affected claim when we verify the issue.
Subscriber-only labs may expose more source context than public previews, but public pages should not imply certainty that the underlying signal does not support.
Correction requests can be sent to [email protected] with the page URL and the specific claim in question.

Proof format

The sample digest shows how Skim HQ labels buyer pain, source context, scoring, and first wedges in practice.