Occasional, thesis-led research. Each report takes a single proposition, tests it against the public record, and says plainly what could not be established.
The three Market Insights publications monitor a beat. They are built for scanning: signals, cards, evidence ratings, month after month.
A Special Report is the opposite instrument. It appears when a development is worth more than a monitoring entry — when the interesting question is not what happened but whether the thing everyone is repeating is actually true, and what follows if it is. Each report states a thesis, tests it rather than asserting it, works only from sources a reader can check, and publishes its own limits alongside its findings.
That last part is deliberate. Where a claim originates with a company, it is labelled as a company claim. Where credible sources disagree, the disagreement is described rather than resolved for convenience. Where something could not be verified, it is published as unverified rather than quietly dropped. An analysis that hides its gaps is asking to be trusted; one that shows them is asking to be checked.
Reports are long by design and split into parts, each carrying one complete argument.
The first Special Report is in preparation. Reports appear irregularly — only when a development genuinely warrants one — so there is no fixed schedule to follow. The newsletter carries an announcement when one is published, and the recurring Market Insights briefings continue monthly in the meantime.