Last refined  ·  2026·05·28
Business Model Canvas  ·  Investigation

Federated consortia

A governance variant — what if SPF was a federation of regional maker consortia rather than a single entity? The schema stays open; the operational layer becomes distributed. A horizontal-society interpretation of the same hypothesis.

FIG The canvas, in full Nine blocks · click to read
Key Partners I
  • Regional maker consortia (3-5 per major market)
  • The schema steering committee (cross-consortium)
  • Each consortium's local logistics partners
  • Open-standards bodies (Schema.org, JSON-LD)
Open ›
Key Activities II
  • Schema stewardship (committee-based, cross-region)
  • Local consortium operations (per region)
  • Cross-consortium coordination meetings (quarterly)
  • Maker education within each consortium
Open ›
Key Resources III
  • The SPF open schema (shared)
  • Per-consortium maker networks (3-5 regional groups)
  • Cross-consortium trust and reputation
  • Local-market knowledge per consortium
Open ›
Value Propositions IV
  • Schema ownership + agent-readable feeds (same as v1)
  • Locally-governed operational layer
  • Makers have a voice in their consortium's evolution
  • No central rent extraction (structural commitment)
Open ›
Customer Relationships V
  • Makers ↔ their consortium (peer relationships)
  • Consortia ↔ federation (governance representation)
  • Buyers ↔ individual maker domains (unchanged from v1)
  • No buyer ↔ central platform relationship
Open ›
Channels VI
  • Seller-owned domains (primary)
  • AI assistants + search (federated reading)
  • Consortium-level documentation and maker marketing
  • No central marketplace destination
Open ›
Customer Segments VII
  • Makers join via consortium membership (regional)
  • Discriminating-attribute categories (same as v1)
  • Excludes: commodity sellers (same as v1)
  • Adds filter — makers willing to participate in governance
Open ›
Cost Structure VIII
  • Per-consortium operational costs (distributed, largest line)
  • Federation coordination overhead (real, ongoing)
  • Schema stewardship (cross-consortium)
  • No platform engineering at the central level
Open ›
Revenue Streams IX
  • Per-consortium maker fees (set by each consortium)
  • Federation dues from consortia (modest, by design)
  • No transaction take at the federation level
  • Optional cross-consortium services (small)
Open ›

Refinement history

How this model has changed over time. Newest first.

  1. Ideation 2026·05·28

    Initial sketch. Each region's makers form a consortium that runs its own SPF instance; the schema steering committee is the only cross-consortium body. Drafted to explore whether the horizontal-society architecture is more durable than v1's single-entity structure.