AFA V7 creative review: one selected ad, V7B-100K

Superseded by v2.2.0 · kept for history

V7B-100K: Three advisers, three answers (tax debt over $100,000)

One ad, two placement formats. 15 s, no audio track, captions complete. Version v2.1.0, 1 Nov 2026 AEST: your three end-of-ad changes. The previous v2.0.0 is kept below under Previous concepts.

What changed in v2.1.0

• The "Book a free initial assessment" button is gone from the whole video: no button shape, text, shadow or animation, and nothing replaces it before 9 s.
• The line "Illustrative options. Eligibility applies." is gone from the video, with its strip in the panel. (The proposed primary text below still explains that the approaches are examples and that eligibility applies; it is outside this edit.)
• The close is now one sentence, shown whole from 9.0 to 15.0 s: "We'll compare all the options before you decide to book a free initial assessment." There is no separate button on the closing screen.

On-screen text by scene (exact)

Decisions for Jonathan

• Approve, revise or drop this version as the single V7 candidate.
• On-video qualifier: removed as you asked. Whether a compliance reviewer or Meta wants an on-video qualifier back is unknown; approving copy is not Meta or regulatory clearance.
• Hook amount: the scoped pre-launch Meta policy review flag on "Tax debt over $100,000?" is unchanged.
• Meta button: Learn more (proposed) or Book now. The booking and attribution flow on the destination is unproven either way.
• Voice-over: still VO_PENDING. The script below now ends on the new closing sentence.
• Test card: budget, read dates and linkage verification (below). Nothing runs until you approve them in writing.

First frames

Proposed Meta fields (proposed only, not entered in Meta; unchanged by this edit)

Primary text

Tax debt over $100,000?

Put the same ATO debt question to an accountant, a finance broker and an insolvency practitioner and each may suggest a different approach: an ATO payment plan, a business loan to pay the ATO, or business restructuring.

These are illustrative examples, not a complete list. Which options are open depends on the business's circumstances and eligibility, not on the size of the debt alone. Finance depends on a lender's own assessment, and restructuring is not suitable for every business.

Australian Financial Advisory offers business owners a free initial assessment to help compare the options before deciding. We are an assessment-and-referral business: where specialist work is needed, we refer to appropriately licensed professionals.

General information only. Not legal, financial or tax advice.

Voice-over script (VO_PENDING, not recorded)

Tax debt over a hundred thousand dollars?
Three advisers. One ATO debt question.
Three possible approaches.
We'll compare all the options before you decide to book a free initial assessment.

Frames

Previous version and this one, beat by beat

QA summary, V7B-100K v2.1.0 (superseded)

• Hyperframes check: 0 errors on both compositions; contrast 38 of 38 text checks pass WCAG AA.
• Composition and timeline: no button element and no qualifier element remain; the closing sentence sits only in the clip from 9.0 s to 15.0 s; no clip before 9.0 s contains booking or qualifier text. A planted-defect control (button, qualifier, early closing) was caught.
• Rendered frames, read back by OCR every 0.5 s: 64 frames, 0 failures. No booking text before 9 s, no qualifier anywhere, the full closing sentence from 9.0 s to 14.9 s. The same check flags the old button and qualifier in v2.0.0.
• Full decode clean; 450 of 450 frames per clip, none blank.
• Nothing on this page is a Meta policy decision.

V7B-100K-9x16: 10 visible strings; copy-lock missing 0, extra 0
  closing sentence clip cs4: 9 s for 6 s (to 15 s)
  clips before 9.0 s checked: brand-sm@0, dev@0, cs1@0, cs2@3, cs3@5
  FLAG "ATO payment plan" : approach label beside an adviser role; the on-video qualifier was removed at Jonathan's request (COPY-LOCK policy_flags); not a recommendation or availability claim
  FLAG "Business loan to pay the ATO" : approach label beside an adviser role; the on-video qualifier was removed at Jonathan's request (COPY-LOCK policy_flags); not a recommendation or availability claim
  FLAG "Business restructuring" : approach label beside an adviser role; the on-video qualifier was removed at Jonathan's request (COPY-LOCK policy_flags); not a recommendation or availability claim
  WAIVED "Tax debt over $100,000?" : Jonathan's exact approved hook. Audience description, not a threshold, deadline or price.
  FLAG "Tax debt over $100,000?" : debt amount in the hook: scoped pre-launch Meta policy review flag; not an eligibility threshold
  FLAG "We'll compare all the options before you decide to book a free initial assessment." : operator-approved closing: describes AFA's assessment, not a promise of every product or outcome (COPY-LOCK policy_flags)
V7B-100K-4x5: 10 visible strings; copy-lock missing 0, extra 0
  closing sentence clip cs4: 9 s for 6 s (to 15 s)
  clips before 9.0 s checked: brand-sm@0, dev@0, cs1@0, cs2@3, cs3@5
  FLAG "ATO payment plan" : approach label beside an adviser role; the on-video qualifier was removed at Jonathan's request (COPY-LOCK policy_flags); not a recommendation or availability claim
  FLAG "Business loan to pay the ATO" : approach label beside an adviser role; the on-video qualifier was removed at Jonathan's request (COPY-LOCK policy_flags); not a recommendation or availability claim
  FLAG "Business restructuring" : approach label beside an adviser role; the on-video qualifier was removed at Jonathan's request (COPY-LOCK policy_flags); not a recommendation or availability claim
  WAIVED "Tax debt over $100,000?" : Jonathan's exact approved hook. Audience description, not a threshold, deadline or price.
  FLAG "Tax debt over $100,000?" : debt amount in the hook: scoped pre-launch Meta policy review flag; not an eligibility threshold
  FLAG "We'll compare all the options before you decide to book a free initial assessment." : operator-approved closing: describes AFA's assessment, not a promise of every product or outcome (COPY-LOCK policy_flags)
COPY public strings (proposed Meta fields and VO_PENDING script): 16
  WAIVED "Tax debt over $100,000?" : Jonathan's exact approved hook. Audience description, not a threshold, deadline or price.
  FLAG "Tax debt over $100,000?" : debt amount in the hook: scoped pre-launch Meta policy review flag; not an eligibility threshold
  WAIVED "Not legal, financial or tax advice." : the disclaimer sentence itself (proposed primary text), not an advice claim
  FLAG "We'll compare all the options before you decide to book a free initial assessment." : operator-approved closing: describes AFA's assessment, not a promise of every product or outcome (COPY-LOCK policy_flags)
  (primary-text sentences on illustrative examples and eligibility are outside this edit and kept; the on-video qualifier ban applies to the video only)
TOTAL failures: 0

| Element | Visible (s) | Dwell | Floor | Result |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Hook (4 words) | 0.0 to 3.0 | 3.0 s | 1.2 s | OK |
| Three advisers headline (6 words) | 3.0 to 5.0 | 2.0 s | 1.8 s | OK |
| Three possible approaches (3 words) | 5.0 to 9.0 | 4.0 s | 0.9 s | OK |
| Closing sentence (14 words, 4 line breaks, final full stop) | 9.0 to 15.0 | 6.0 s | 4.9 s (0.3 s per word + 0.1 s per line break + 0.3 s for the full stop) | OK |
| Roles (3 labels) | 0.0 to 15.0 | 15.0 s | 0.8 s each | OK |
| Answers (2 to 6 words each) | from 5.3, 5.8, 6.3 to 15.0 | 8.7 s or more | 0.8 to 1.8 s | OK |

Close load: the sentence needs 4.9 s; the 6.0 s hold leaves 1.1 s to re-read the three rows. Scene 3 introduces the answers (about 4.1 s of reading against 4.0 s) and they stay to 15 s. The removed qualifier no longer adds 1.5 s of reading to scene 3.

== AFA_TAX_MOTION_V7B-100K_SINGLE-AD_9x16_REVIEW-DRAFT_v2_1_0
streams.stream.0.codec_name="h264"
streams.stream.0.profile="High"
streams.stream.0.codec_type="video"
streams.stream.0.width=1080
streams.stream.0.height=1920
streams.stream.0.pix_fmt="yuv420p"
streams.stream.0.color_space="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_transfer="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_primaries="bt709"
streams.stream.0.r_frame_rate="30/1"
streams.stream.0.nb_frames="450"
format.nb_streams=1
format.duration="15.000000"
format.size="6592109"
== AFA_TAX_MOTION_V7B-100K_SINGLE-AD_4x5_REVIEW-DRAFT_v2_1_0
streams.stream.0.codec_name="h264"
streams.stream.0.profile="High"
streams.stream.0.codec_type="video"
streams.stream.0.width=1080
streams.stream.0.height=1350
streams.stream.0.pix_fmt="yuv420p"
streams.stream.0.color_space="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_transfer="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_primaries="bt709"
streams.stream.0.r_frame_rate="30/1"
streams.stream.0.nb_frames="450"
format.nb_streams=1
format.duration="15.000000"
format.size="4806035"

Changed transition (8.8 to 9.4 s)

Blank-frame check

Phone scale (300 px wide; 9:16 overlay bands shaded)

Export hashes (SHA-256 of the files on this page)

Superseded by v2.1.0 · kept for history

V7B-100K: Three advisers, three answers (tax debt over $100,000)

One ad, two placement formats. 15 s, no audio track, captions complete. Original V7B structure and look, revised with your exact copy. Version v2.0.0, 1 Nov 2026 AEST.

On-screen text by scene (exact)

Decisions for Jonathan

• Approve, revise or drop this ad as the single V7 candidate.
• Hook amount: the on-screen "Tax debt over $100,000?" is your approved wording. It carries a scoped pre-launch Meta policy review flag (a debt amount next to a hardship topic). It is an audience description, not an eligibility rule. Meta acceptance is unknown until a real review.
• Button: the CTA pill drops the full stop of "Book a free initial assessment." because it is set as a button. Say if you want the stop kept.
• Meta button: Learn more (proposed) or Book now. The booking and attribution flow on the destination is unproven either way.
• Voice-over: still VO_PENDING. Supply an approved sample path if a voiced version is wanted; the 30-word script below is ready to record at natural pace.
• Test card: lead definition, budget and read dates (below). Nothing runs until you approve them in writing.

First frames

Proposed Meta fields (proposed only, not entered in Meta)

Primary text

Tax debt over $100,000?

Put the same ATO debt question to an accountant, a finance broker and an insolvency practitioner and each may suggest a different approach: an ATO payment plan, a business loan to pay the ATO, or business restructuring.

These are illustrative examples, not a complete list. Which options are open depends on the business's circumstances and eligibility, not on the size of the debt alone. Finance depends on a lender's own assessment, and restructuring is not suitable for every business.

Australian Financial Advisory offers business owners a free initial assessment to help compare the options before deciding. We are an assessment-and-referral business: where specialist work is needed, we refer to appropriately licensed professionals.

General information only. Not legal, financial or tax advice.

Voice-over script (VO_PENDING, not recorded)

Tax debt over a hundred thousand dollars?
Three advisers. One ATO debt question.
Three possible approaches.
We'll help you compare the options before you decide.
Book a free initial assessment.

Frames

Original V7B and this ad, beat by beat

QA summary, V7B-100K v2.0.0 (superseded)

• Hyperframes check: 0 errors on both compositions; contrast 42 of 42 text checks pass WCAG AA.
• Copy lock: both formats show exactly the 12 approved strings, none missing, none extra. Banned-wording and Unicode scan: 0 hits (planted controls detected).
• Full decode clean; 450 of 450 frames per clip, none blank.
• Nothing on this page is a Meta policy decision.

V7B-100K-9x16: 12 visible strings, 12 unique; copy-lock missing 0, extra 0
  FLAG "Accountant" : adviser role label; no quotation, no claim about what every adviser recommends
  FLAG "ATO payment plan" : illustrative approach label beside an adviser role (qualifier "Illustrative options. Eligibility applies." on screen from 5.0 s); not a recommendation or availability claim
  FLAG "Finance broker" : adviser role label; no quotation, no claim about what every adviser recommends
  FLAG "Business loan to pay the ATO" : illustrative approach label beside an adviser role (qualifier "Illustrative options. Eligibility applies." on screen from 5.0 s); not a recommendation or availability claim
  FLAG "Insolvency practitioner" : adviser role label; no quotation, no claim about what every adviser recommends
  FLAG "Business restructuring" : illustrative approach label beside an adviser role (qualifier "Illustrative options. Eligibility applies." on screen from 5.0 s); not a recommendation or availability claim
  WAIVED "Tax debt over $100,000?" : Jonathan's exact approved hook (PROMPT-V7B-SINGLE-AD-100K-v1_0_1). The amount names the intended audience; it is not a threshold, deadline or price. Nothing on screen says the viewer qualifies; the primary text says options depend on circumstances and eligibility, not on the size of the debt alone.
  FLAG "Tax debt over $100,000?" : debt amount in the hook: audience descriptor, scoped pre-launch Meta policy review flag (COPY-LOCK policy_flag); not a statutory eligibility threshold
V7B-100K-4x5: 12 visible strings, 12 unique; copy-lock missing 0, extra 0
  FLAG "Accountant" : adviser role label; no quotation, no claim about what every adviser recommends
  FLAG "ATO payment plan" : illustrative approach label beside an adviser role (qualifier "Illustrative options. Eligibility applies." on screen from 5.0 s); not a recommendation or availability claim
  FLAG "Finance broker" : adviser role label; no quotation, no claim about what every adviser recommends
  FLAG "Business loan to pay the ATO" : illustrative approach label beside an adviser role (qualifier "Illustrative options. Eligibility applies." on screen from 5.0 s); not a recommendation or availability claim
  FLAG "Insolvency practitioner" : adviser role label; no quotation, no claim about what every adviser recommends
  FLAG "Business restructuring" : illustrative approach label beside an adviser role (qualifier "Illustrative options. Eligibility applies." on screen from 5.0 s); not a recommendation or availability claim
  WAIVED "Tax debt over $100,000?" : Jonathan's exact approved hook (PROMPT-V7B-SINGLE-AD-100K-v1_0_1). The amount names the intended audience; it is not a threshold, deadline or price. Nothing on screen says the viewer qualifies; the primary text says options depend on circumstances and eligibility, not on the size of the debt alone.
  FLAG "Tax debt over $100,000?" : debt amount in the hook: audience descriptor, scoped pre-launch Meta policy review flag (COPY-LOCK policy_flag); not a statutory eligibility threshold
COPY public strings (Meta fields and VO_PENDING script): 17
  WAIVED "Tax debt over $100,000?" : Jonathan's exact approved hook (PROMPT-V7B-SINGLE-AD-100K-v1_0_1). The amount names the intended audience; it is not a threshold, deadline or price. Nothing on screen says the viewer qualifies; the primary text says options depend on circumstances and eligibility, not on the size of the debt alone.
  FLAG "Tax debt over $100,000?" : debt amount in the hook: audience descriptor, scoped pre-launch Meta policy review flag (COPY-LOCK policy_flag); not a statutory eligibility threshold
  WAIVED "Not legal, financial or tax advice." : the disclaimer sentence itself (denies advice; required wording), not an advice claim
TOTAL failures: 0

| Element | Text | Visible (s) | Dwell | Floor | Result |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Headline s1 | Tax debt over $100,000? | 0.0 to 3.0 | 3.0 s | 1.2 s | OK |
| Headline s2 | Three advisers. One ATO debt question. | 3.0 to 5.0 | 2.0 s | 1.8 s | OK |
| Headline s3 | Three possible approaches. | 5.0 to 9.0 | 4.0 s | 0.9 s | OK |
| Closing message s4 | We'll help you compare the options before you decide. | 9.0 to 15.0 | 6.0 s | 2.7 s | OK |
| Role 1 | Accountant | 0.0 to 15.0 | 15.0 s | 0.8 s | OK |
| Role 2 | Finance broker | 0.0 to 15.0 | 15.0 s | 0.8 s | OK |
| Role 3 | Insolvency practitioner | 0.0 to 15.0 | 15.0 s | 0.8 s | OK |
| Answer 1 | ATO payment plan | 5.3 to 15.0 | 9.7 s | 0.9 s | OK |
| Answer 2 | Business loan to pay the ATO | 5.8 to 15.0 | 9.2 s | 1.8 s | OK |
| Answer 3 | Business restructuring | 6.3 to 15.0 | 8.7 s | 0.8 s | OK |
| Qualifier | Illustrative options. Eligibility applies. | 5.0 to 15.0 | 10.0 s | 1.2 s | OK |
| CTA pill | Book a free initial assessment | 0.0 to 15.0 | 15.0 s | 0.8 s | OK |

Scene load (new information per scene, sequential reading):

- Scene 1 (0 to 3 s): hook 4 words 1.2 s plus three roles 2.4 s = 3.6 s against 3.0 s. The roles stay on screen to 15 s and are re-read in scene 2 (2.0 s, headline 1.8 s), so the combined 0 to 5 s load is 1.2 + 1.8 + 2.4 = 5.4 s against 5.0 s: 0.4 s short if read strictly in sequence inside the window; the roles carry on to the close.
- Scene 3 (5 to 9 s): headline 0.9 s, three answers 3.2 s, qualifier 1.5 s = 5.6 s against 4.0 s.
- Close (9 to 15 s): closing message 2.7 s plus CTA 0.8 s = 3.5 s against 6.0 s, leaving 2.5 s for any re-read of the rows, answers and qualifier.
- Whole clip: every element's dwell clears its floor; the cumulative sequential load is 14.5 s against 15.0 s.

Note: SOP 038 asks the hook to hold 4 s or more. Jonathan's approved script fixes the hook at 0 to 3 s; the operator brief wins and this is recorded as an override, not a defect. The hook question stays answerable because the adviser panel is on screen from frame 0.

== AFA_TAX_MOTION_V7B-100K_SINGLE-AD_9x16_REVIEW-DRAFT_v2_0_0
streams.stream.0.codec_name="h264"
streams.stream.0.profile="High"
streams.stream.0.codec_type="video"
streams.stream.0.width=1080
streams.stream.0.height=1920
streams.stream.0.pix_fmt="yuv420p"
streams.stream.0.color_space="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_transfer="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_primaries="bt709"
streams.stream.0.r_frame_rate="30/1"
streams.stream.0.nb_frames="450"
format.nb_streams=1
format.duration="15.000000"
format.size="6721163"
== AFA_TAX_MOTION_V7B-100K_SINGLE-AD_4x5_REVIEW-DRAFT_v2_0_0
streams.stream.0.codec_name="h264"
streams.stream.0.profile="High"
streams.stream.0.codec_type="video"
streams.stream.0.width=1080
streams.stream.0.height=1350
streams.stream.0.pix_fmt="yuv420p"
streams.stream.0.color_space="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_transfer="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_primaries="bt709"
streams.stream.0.r_frame_rate="30/1"
streams.stream.0.nb_frames="450"
format.nb_streams=1
format.duration="15.000000"
format.size="5028247"

Blank-frame check

Phone scale (300 px wide; 9:16 overlay bands shaded)

Export hashes (SHA-256 of the files on this page)

What changed across the round, in plain language

• The lead the test measures is a verified submitted enquiry lead, counted from the intake record. A button click, a page view, a video play or a booking-page visit never counts. Bookings, reached and qualified are reported separately. Whether a website submission can yet be matched to an intake record is UNKNOWN until Jonathan runs that verification; nothing was tested or submitted for this page.
• MOTION_07 is an observational benchmark, not a control cell: it differs in length, structure and launch date, so any comparison with it is reported as observational.
• The ATO rule in V7A is stated the way the ATO states it. Deductions for general interest charge and shortfall interest charge are denied for interest incurred on or after 1 July 2025, whatever year the debt relates to; interest incurred before that date stays deductible for 2024-25 and earlier years. One exception, stated in full: entities with a substituted accounting period lose the deduction from their next accounting period starting after 1 July 2025. The primary text carries this as "with limited exceptions". Nothing in the ad says or implies that earlier deductions are cancelled.
• The first-round scores (38 of 40, 36 of 40, 31 of 40) and the "none of eight advertisers led with the deduction change" note were one reviewer's rubric and one Ad Library capture on one day. They ranked ideas for drafting. Performance of any idea is UNKNOWN.
• Every clip now carries its useful proposition at frame 0 and explains it visually inside the first 1 to 1.5 s, instead of holding the point back to about 4 s.
• The old four MP4s are kept unchanged under Earlier drafts, for history. They are not candidates.

V7A: The deduction has changed (revised, v1.1.0; REVIEW DRAFT, 12 s, silent, VO_PENDING)

What changed:

• Hook was "ATO interest used to be tax deductible." It is now "ATO interest. The deduction has changed."
• The fictional tax-return card ("ATO interest charge: CLAIMED") and the NOT DEDUCTIBLE stamp are gone. They read as a customer's past deduction being cancelled. The card is now a neutral two-row rule card in the ATO's own wording: interest incurred before 1 July 2025 is deductible, interest incurred on or after 1 July 2025 is not.
• "That changes the maths on every option." is removed. Nothing sources it.
• The rule is on screen from frame 0 and highlighted at 1.0 s, instead of arriving at about 4.2 s.
• Scene 2 now says "Carrying a tax debt now costs more.", which the ATO newsroom page says in almost those words.

First frames

On-screen text by scene

First useful message, measured on the rendered frames: 0.0 s: headline and both rule rows are on screen at frame 0. Visual hit: 1.0 s: the ring lands on the Not deductible row.

Proposed Meta fields (PROPOSED REVIEW DRAFT)

Primary text

The deduction for ATO interest has changed. General interest charge and shortfall interest charge incurred on or after 1 July 2025 can no longer be claimed, with limited exceptions. Interest incurred before that date is still deductible in the year it was incurred. In the ATO's own words, this means a business will pay more to carry a tax debt.

Which options are open depends on eligibility, and a lower repayment over a longer term is not always the lower total cost.

Australian Financial Advisory offers business owners a free initial assessment. We are an assessment-and-referral business: where specialist work is needed, we refer to appropriately licensed professionals.

General information only. Not legal, financial or tax advice.

Voice-over script (VO_PENDING: not recorded, drafts are silent)

ATO interest. The deduction has changed.
Interest incurred on or after the first of July 2025 is no longer deductible. Carrying a tax debt now costs more.
Compare the options before you decide. Start with a free initial assessment.

Contact sheets (0, 1, 2, 3, 5.9, 6.4, 8.9, 9.4, 11.9 s)

V7B: Different options (revised, v1.1.0; REVIEW DRAFT, 12 s, silent, VO_PENDING)

What changed:

• Hook was "Three advisers. One ATO debt question." then "Three different answers." It is now "One ATO debt question. Different options."
• The adviser rows (Accountant, Broker, Insolvency practitioner) and the ASKED chips are gone. The panel shows three generic options: Payment plan, Business finance, Restructure. No adviser roles, no winner.
• "Each is right from its own lane. None of them lays the three out together." is removed everywhere (video, primary text, voice script). It claimed what other professionals do and do not do, and nothing sources that.
• The qualifier "Illustrative options. Not advice." is inside the video for the whole first scene, not only in the primary text.
• Scene 2 now says "Which one fits depends on eligibility and cost.", which is AFA's own stated principle.

First frames

On-screen text by scene

First useful message, measured on the rendered frames: 0.0 s: question, qualifier and all three option cards are on screen at frame 0. Visual hit: 0.3 to 1.1 s: the three cards settle one by one.

Proposed Meta fields (PROPOSED REVIEW DRAFT)

Primary text

One ATO debt question can have more than one answer. A payment plan, business finance and a restructure are three of the options, and they are not the same decision. Which options are open depends on eligibility, and a lower repayment over a longer term is not always the lower total cost.

A free initial assessment lays the options out side by side. Australian Financial Advisory is an assessment-and-referral business: where specialist work is needed, we refer to appropriately licensed professionals.

General information only. Not legal, financial or tax advice. The options shown are illustrative, not a recommendation.

Voice-over script (VO_PENDING: not recorded, drafts are silent)

One ATO debt question. Different options.
Which one fits depends on eligibility and cost.
Compare them side by side, starting with a free initial assessment.

Contact sheets (0, 1, 2, 3, 5.1, 5.6, 8.7, 9.2, 11.9 s)

V7C: Compare more than the repayment (new, v1.0.0; REVIEW DRAFT, 12 s, silent, VO_PENDING)

What changed:

• New third idea (idea 5 of the first-round idea board): "Compare more than the repayment." A compare card lists three criteria, Repayment size, Total cost and Eligibility, with tick circles. Repayment size is ticked at frame 0; the other two tick at 1.0 and 1.5 s. Scene 2: "A lower repayment is not always the lower total cost."
• It shows no amounts, no rates and no proportional bars, so it makes no product comparison and no claim about the viewer.
• V7C is not the dropped direction C. Direction C was the viewer-debt or threshold framing (a debt size, a dollar threshold, a statement about the viewer's circumstances). V7C has none of those.

First frames

On-screen text by scene

First useful message, measured on the rendered frames: 0.0 s: headline, eyebrow and the three criteria rows are on screen; Repayment size already ticked. Visual hit: 1.0 s and 1.5 s: Total cost and Eligibility tick.

Proposed Meta fields (PROPOSED REVIEW DRAFT)

Primary text

When you compare ways to deal with an ATO debt, the repayment is the number that gets the attention. It is not the only one. A lower repayment over a longer term is not always the lower total cost, and which options are open depends on eligibility.

A free initial assessment puts repayment size, total cost and eligibility side by side. Australian Financial Advisory is an assessment-and-referral business: where specialist work is needed, we refer to appropriately licensed professionals.

General information only. Not legal, financial or tax advice.

Voice-over script (VO_PENDING: not recorded, drafts are silent)

Compare more than the repayment.
A lower repayment is not always the lower total cost.
Compare all three before you decide. Start with a free initial assessment.

Contact sheets (0, 1, 2, 3, 4.9, 5.4, 8.5, 9.0, 11.9 s)

Earlier draft and revision, frame by frame (0, 1, 2, 3 s and the close at 11.0 s)

Corrected test card (for Jonathan's decision; nothing is authorised by this page)

# Test card, AFA V7 revision r1 (PROPOSED, not approved; nothing uploaded)

Status: proposal for Jonathan's decision. No Meta object exists for V7. MOTION_07 stays ACTIVE and unchanged. This card replaces TEST-CARD-v1_0_0.md as the current card; the old card stays in the pack unchanged and is annotated as superseded on the review page. The decision owner for lead definition, comparison design and website acceptance is AFA-V7-DECISION-PACK-v1_1_0.md; where that pack and this card differ, the pack wins. Field set follows 043 (monitoring standard) section 17.

## 1. Question

Which of three concept bundles (V7A r1, V7B r1, V7C), if any, produces verified submitted enquiry leads at a cost per lead the business accepts, read against MOTION_07 as an observational benchmark?

## 2. Primary outcome, denominator and attribution unit

- Primary outcome: a verified submitted enquiry lead, meaning a successful assessment-enquiry submission that the intake record confirms (decision pack decision 6). A button click, an outbound click, a landing page view, a video play or a booking-page visit never counts as a lead.
- Primary metric: cost per verified submitted enquiry lead (CPL). Denominator: Meta spend for the cell over the read window. Numerator: verified submitted leads attributed to that cell.
- Attribution unit: the ad set (one per concept bundle). Attribution follows the account's Meta attribution setting as observed in Ads Manager at launch (weekly review: 1-day view, 7-day click). No custom click-window rule replaces it.
- Separate counts, never the primary: bookings (CloudMeet), reached, qualified. Submitted, reached, booked and qualified are four different claims (051 line 81).
- Linkage status: the link from a website submission event to an intake record is UNKNOWN. No tracking was tested or implemented under this revision, no trial submission was made, and no customer record was read. Until Jonathan runs the 042 and 049 verification workflow, the primary read cannot be produced and must be reported as UNKNOWN, not estimated from clicks.

## 3. Independent variable and controls

- Independent variable: the concept bundle. V7A r1 (rule change), V7B r1 (different options), V7C (compare more than the repayment). Each bundle is a whole creative: hook, visual, scene 2, primary text and description differ together. The test does not isolate one element.
- Held constant across the three cells: destination, button (Learn more), headline (Free initial assessment), daily budget per cell, audience, placements, schedule, optimisation event, attribution setting, launch time.
- MOTION_07 is an observational benchmark, not a control cell. It differs in length (32 s), structure, creative and launch date, and its budget and settings are not changed for this test. Any comparison with it is confounded and is reported as observational.

## 4. Initial shortlist (proposal)

Run V7A r1 and V7C first, V7B r1 second if the budget allows a third cell. Reason: V7A r1 carries the only sourced, dated fact in the set and sits furthest from MOTION_07's proposition, so it teaches the most. V7C carries no illustrative-option risk and no date, so it is the cleanest comparison with V7A r1. V7B r1 depends on Jonathan accepting the generic option cards as a fair illustration; it waits for that ruling.

## 5. Read-back

- T0+3: delivery and policy status only. No decision.
- T0+7: first read of secondary measures (CPM, 3 s plays over impressions, outbound CTR, landing page views, cost per landing page view). No decision unless a stop rule fires.
- T0+14: decision read on the primary metric for the common window T0 to T0+7, taken after that window has settled under the account's attribution setting (at least 7 days after the window ends). Clicks after T0+7 are read at T0+21 for the window T0+7 to T0+14.
- The old card's custom rule (a booking counts to a cell if it follows a click within 7 days) is withdrawn. It must not stand in for Meta attribution, and bookings are not the primary outcome.

## 6. Budget

A$100 per day total with A$75 to the V7 cells is the decision pack's proposal. It is UNAPPROVED. No spend exists until Jonathan approves an amount in writing.

## 7. Success measures and minimum evidence

- Success for a cell: a CPL on verified submitted leads that Jonathan accepts at the T0+14 read, with the secondary measures not worse than MOTION_07's observed range for the same week.
- Minimum evidence before any cell is called better or worse: the settled common window, the linkage in section 2 verified, and the read taken from Ads Manager and the intake record on the same day. No universal lead-count threshold is set; the test ends on the read dates.

## 8. Stop rule (each needs Jonathan's decision; no auto-pause)

- Meta rejects or restricts any V7 ad.
- A cell spends above the daily cap Jonathan set.
- A complaint, a negative comment thread, or a request to take an ad down.
- At T0+7 a cell has spent a full week with zero landing page views (delivery problem, not a creative verdict).
- A change in ATO or tax law that affects the V7A r1 statement.

## 9. Approval

Nothing in this card runs until Jonathan approves, in writing: the cells to run, the budget, the attribution setting read from Ads Manager, the linkage verification result, and the read dates.

## 10. Not authorised by this card

Meta upload, review submission, campaign, ad set, ad, form or audience creation, activation, pausing, budget changes, paid subscriptions, voice upload, customer contact, CRM or Worker changes, tracking implementation, trial submissions, production website edits.

## Correction record (30 October 2026, revision r1)

What changed from v1.0.0 and why:

- The learning question was about booked assessments. Bookings are now a separate count; the primary outcome is the verified submitted enquiry lead (decision pack decision 6, finding F1).
- The old card said the lead event was recorded in the AFA lead Worker ledger. The Worker ledger holds Meta lead events; website submission linkage is UNKNOWN and is stated as such (finding F1).
- The old card called MOTION_07 the control. It is an observational benchmark; A, B and C are concept bundles, not single-variable arms (finding F2).
- The old card's custom 7-day-click convention replaced Meta attribution without saying so. Withdrawn (finding F2).
- Added: an initial shortlist with its reason, and the 043 section 17 fields (question, independent variable, controls, read-back, budget, success measures, minimum evidence, stop rule, approval).
- Unchanged: A$100 per day is a proposal, no auto-pause, no universal threshold, read points T0+3, T0+7 and T0+14.

QA, revision r1

Banned-wording scan (exit 0; waivers listed)

V7A-r1-9x16: 12 strings, 0 unwaived hits
V7A-r1-4x5: 12 strings, 0 unwaived hits
V7B-r1-9x16: 11 strings, 0 unwaived hits
V7B-r1-4x5: 11 strings, 0 unwaived hits
V7C-9x16: 11 strings, 0 unwaived hits
V7C-4x5: 11 strings, 0 unwaived hits
COPY V7A: 7 strings, 0 unwaived hits
COPY V7B: 7 strings, 0 unwaived hits
COPY V7C: 7 strings, 0 unwaived hits
Waived (listed):
  "before 1 July 2025" : statutory date in the ATO own wording (GIC and SIC incurred on or after 1 July 2025): a date the law set, not an advertiser deadline; number-rule waiver recorded in the r1 QA report
  "on or after 1 July 2025" : statutory date in the ATO own wording (GIC and SIC incurred on or after 1 July 2025): a date the law set, not an advertiser deadline; number-rule waiver recorded in the r1 QA report
  "from 1 July 2025" : statutory date in the ATO own wording (GIC and SIC incurred on or after 1 July 2025): a date the law set, not an advertiser deadline; number-rule waiver recorded in the r1 QA report
  "Not legal, financial or tax advice." : the disclaimer sentence itself (denies advice; required wording), not an advice claim
  "the first of July 2025" : statutory date in the ATO own wording (GIC and SIC incurred on or after 1 July 2025): a date the law set, not an advertiser deadline; number-rule waiver recorded in the r1 QA report
Flags for Jonathan (not banned by the scan):
  "Deductible" : label on a neutral card (device word, not a claim about a customer; semantic claims matrix section D)
  "Not deductible" : label on a neutral card (device word, not a claim about a customer; semantic claims matrix section D)
  "Payment plan" : label on a neutral card (device word, not a claim about a customer; semantic claims matrix section D)
  "Business finance" : label on a neutral card (device word, not a claim about a customer; semantic claims matrix section D)
  "Restructure" : label on a neutral card (device word, not a claim about a customer; semantic claims matrix section D)
  "Repayment size" : label on a neutral card (device word, not a claim about a customer; semantic claims matrix section D)
  "Total cost" : label on a neutral card (device word, not a claim about a customer; semantic claims matrix section D)
  "Eligibility" : label on a neutral card (device word, not a claim about a customer; semantic claims matrix section D)
TOTAL unwaived hits: 0

Reading time

| Idea | Scene (s) | Words | Device labels | Needed | Available | Result |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| V7A | 0.0-6.0 | 6 | 5 | 5.8 s | 6.0 s | OK |
| V7A | 6.0-9.0 | 7 | 0 | 2.1 s | 3.0 s | OK |
| V7A | 9.0-12.0 | 6 | 1 | 2.6 s | 3.0 s | OK |
| V7B | 0.0-5.2 | 6 | 4 | 5.0 s | 5.2 s | OK |
| V7B | 5.2-8.8 | 8 | 0 | 2.4 s | 3.6 s | OK |
| V7B | 8.8-12.0 | 5 | 1 | 2.3 s | 3.2 s | OK |
| V7C | 0.0-5.0 | 5 | 4 | 4.7 s | 5.0 s | OK |
| V7C | 5.0-8.6 | 10 | 0 | 3.0 s | 3.6 s | OK |
| V7C | 8.6-12.0 | 6 | 1 | 2.6 s | 3.4 s | OK |

ffprobe (codec, profile, size, fps, frames, pixel format, duration)

== AFA_TAX_MOTION_V7A_4x5_REVIEW-DRAFT_v1_1_0
streams.stream.0.codec_name="h264"
streams.stream.0.profile="High"
streams.stream.0.codec_type="video"
streams.stream.0.width=1080
streams.stream.0.height=1350
streams.stream.0.pix_fmt="yuv420p"
streams.stream.0.color_space="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_transfer="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_primaries="bt709"
streams.stream.0.r_frame_rate="30/1"
streams.stream.0.nb_frames="360"
format.nb_streams=1
format.duration="12.000000"
format.size="5165547"
== AFA_TAX_MOTION_V7A_9x16_REVIEW-DRAFT_v1_1_0
streams.stream.0.codec_name="h264"
streams.stream.0.profile="High"
streams.stream.0.codec_type="video"
streams.stream.0.width=1080
streams.stream.0.height=1920
streams.stream.0.pix_fmt="yuv420p"
streams.stream.0.color_space="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_transfer="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_primaries="bt709"
streams.stream.0.r_frame_rate="30/1"
streams.stream.0.nb_frames="360"
format.nb_streams=1
format.duration="12.000000"
format.size="6768441"
== AFA_TAX_MOTION_V7B_4x5_REVIEW-DRAFT_v1_1_0
streams.stream.0.codec_name="h264"
streams.stream.0.profile="High"
streams.stream.0.codec_type="video"
streams.stream.0.width=1080
streams.stream.0.height=1350
streams.stream.0.pix_fmt="yuv420p"
streams.stream.0.color_space="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_transfer="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_primaries="bt709"
streams.stream.0.r_frame_rate="30/1"
streams.stream.0.nb_frames="360"
format.nb_streams=1
format.duration="12.000000"
format.size="4857482"
== AFA_TAX_MOTION_V7B_9x16_REVIEW-DRAFT_v1_1_0
streams.stream.0.codec_name="h264"
streams.stream.0.profile="High"
streams.stream.0.codec_type="video"
streams.stream.0.width=1080
streams.stream.0.height=1920
streams.stream.0.pix_fmt="yuv420p"
streams.stream.0.color_space="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_transfer="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_primaries="bt709"
streams.stream.0.r_frame_rate="30/1"
streams.stream.0.nb_frames="360"
format.nb_streams=1
format.duration="12.000000"
format.size="6466637"
== AFA_TAX_MOTION_V7C_4x5_REVIEW-DRAFT_v1_0_0
streams.stream.0.codec_name="h264"
streams.stream.0.profile="High"
streams.stream.0.codec_type="video"
streams.stream.0.width=1080
streams.stream.0.height=1350
streams.stream.0.pix_fmt="yuv420p"
streams.stream.0.color_space="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_transfer="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_primaries="bt709"
streams.stream.0.r_frame_rate="30/1"
streams.stream.0.nb_frames="360"
format.nb_streams=1
format.duration="12.000000"
format.size="4931439"
== AFA_TAX_MOTION_V7C_9x16_REVIEW-DRAFT_v1_0_0
streams.stream.0.codec_name="h264"
streams.stream.0.profile="High"
streams.stream.0.codec_type="video"
streams.stream.0.width=1080
streams.stream.0.height=1920
streams.stream.0.pix_fmt="yuv420p"
streams.stream.0.color_space="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_transfer="bt709"
streams.stream.0.color_primaries="bt709"
streams.stream.0.r_frame_rate="30/1"
streams.stream.0.nb_frames="360"
format.nb_streams=1
format.duration="12.000000"
format.size="6539027"

Full decode and blank-frame check

Every frame of every clip was decoded (ffmpeg, no errors). Blank-frame test: per-frame standard deviation of a 96 px grey downscale; a frame under 4.0 counts as blank.

Phone-scale montage (300 px wide)

Export hashes, revision r1 (SHA-256 of the files on this page)

Earlier draft V7A v1.0.0: The deduction is gone (30 Oct 2026 first round; not a candidate; files unchanged)

Superseded by V7A r1. Why: the hook "used to be tax deductible", the CLAIMED tax-return prop and the NOT DEDUCTIBLE stamp together read as a customer's past deduction being cancelled, which the law does not do; "That changes the maths on every option" is unsourced; the rule arrived at about 4.2 s instead of frame 0. The ATO rule itself (interest incurred on or after 1 July 2025 is not deductible) was correct and is kept in the revision.

On-screen text as drafted (superseded)

Proposed Meta fields as drafted (superseded)

Primary text as drafted (superseded)

ATO interest used to be a tax deduction. Interest charged from 1 July 2025 generally can't be claimed, so carrying a tax balance now costs more than it did.

That changes the maths on a payment plan, a loan and a restructure. Which options are open depends on eligibility, and a lower repayment over a longer term is not always the lower total cost.

Australian Financial Advisory offers business owners a free initial assessment. We are an assessment-and-referral business: where specialist work is needed, we refer to appropriately licensed professionals.

General information only. Not legal, financial or tax advice.

Contact sheet from the first round: 9:16, 4:5.

Earlier draft V7B v1.0.0: Three advisers, three answers (30 Oct 2026 first round; not a candidate; files unchanged)

Superseded by V7B r1. Why: "Three advisers, three answers" and the sentences "Each is right from its own lane. None of them lays the three out together." assert what accountants, brokers and insolvency practitioners do and do not do, and nothing sources that; the ASKED chips and adviser rows carried the same claim visually. The options comparison itself is kept, reframed as illustrative options.

On-screen text as drafted (superseded)

Proposed Meta fields as drafted (superseded)

Primary text as drafted (superseded)

Ask an accountant, a broker and an insolvency practitioner the same ATO debt question and you can get three different answers: a payment plan, a loan, a restructure. Each is right from its own lane. None of them lays the three out together.

Which options are open depends on eligibility, and a lower repayment over a longer term is not always the lower total cost.

Australian Financial Advisory offers business owners a free initial assessment. We are an assessment-and-referral business: where specialist work is needed, we refer to appropriately licensed professionals.

General information only. Not legal, financial or tax advice. Adviser answers shown are illustrative.

Contact sheet from the first round: 9:16, 4:5.

Export hashes, first round (unchanged)