Read from your Gmail: 41 threads involving [email protected] over the last 60 days. Quotes below are his exact words.

---

Read this first: the price contradiction

On July 27 Bob wrote, in his own words:

The price is now $1149 until three days after the Workshop on Aug 18th, then $1199.

That is not what we shipped today. Today you told me $1,149 was the standing price for all cohorts, and on that basis I removed every mention of an expiring price from the campaign and swept the repo, replacing the old $1,200 and the retired $1,099 early bird with a flat $1,149 and no deadline.

By Bob's July 27 message, $1,149 is a limited price that expires around Friday, August 21, three days after the August 18 workshop, and then becomes $1,199. That is 12 days away.

Three things follow, and none of them should be guessed at:

1. All 57 campaign emails currently quote $1,149 with no expiry. If Bob's July 27 terms still hold, they are quoting a price that dies before many people would act on it.
2. The deadline is the honest urgency lever the fall email lost when the July 24 early bird expired. If it is real, it is worth using.
3. Bob's own live site still says $1200 for the September cohort, so the site disagrees with both versions.

You may well have newer information from him than a July 27 email. I have not changed anything back. Tell me which is right and it is a one line fix plus a rebuild.

---

The FDAS campaign, August 4 to 9

The most active thread. In date order.

August 4, asking for it in the first place

I had another complaint about the text results. Can we prioritize taking all past tests and delivering an update? I think this will help convert people who have not signed up.

August 5

Can Claude Code create the reports you showed me for the 108 assessment takers in this file? I can send them out manually if we can't do this automatically.

August 6, first review. He liked them and flagged the AI tell:

I'm still reviewing the sample letters. They are very good, but I'll make them sound a little less AI-like.

Those edits have still not arrived. They are the last thing gating the send.

His three wording changes that day:

He also explained the list and his reply policy:

I am checking with Sparrow to see if she still sends our standard response for Almost Always and Usually. We decided not to reply to Sometimes, but we can revisit that. In any case, I sent out replies to Frank, Lucas, and Kajal.

I've sorted the list by remotes (outside of our area) and DND, then by date of last activity. I also added a "reply sent" column with the date of my reply. Now we have 58 to send to.

August 6, second review. Three more changes:

August 7, the nine held contacts. You asked what to do about the nine who answered the suicidal-thoughts item. His whole answer:

Yes, send those nine, too.

Note: he never separately answered your question about the one "Almost Always" contact marked "n/a" for reply sent. "Send those nine" resolved the send, not the record.

August 9, tonight. You emailed him about the two conflicting dates on the workshop page:

What would I do without you? Fixed.

Verified: the stale "Tues, July 21st" text is gone from the live page. The seminar card on that same page still advertises $1200.

---

The daily task emails: 4 replies out of 22

The "one thing a day" sequence from [email protected] ran July 11 to August 1, 22 emails. Bob replied to four of them, Days 1 through 4, and every reply was sent on the evening of July 27 between 5:03 and 5:22 p.m. Mountain. He batched thirteen days of backlog into twenty minutes and then never replied to another one.

His Day 1 reply in full, because it carries two decisions and is the origin of the price question at the top of this page:

Thank you! Will send the request with the August newsletter. I do not want to create email fatigue with all-graduate messages. If I'm struggling to fill by August 22nd, I'll consider sending the one-off. The price is now $1149 until three days after the Workshop on Aug 18th, then $1199.

Two things worth noticing about the format itself. The single most consequential fact in sixty days of email, a price change with a deadline, arrived as an unprompted last line on a reply to an unrelated task. And an 18 out of 22 non-response rate suggests the daily cadence is not how he actually works, given he answers direct one-topic emails within hours.

---

Decisions he made

Filling the cohort (July 27). No standalone all-graduate email unless the cohort is still short on August 22. The ask rides along with the August newsletter instead. Quoted in full in the daily-tasks section above.

Facilitator and location wording (July 6). He rewrote it himself:

Led by Bob Manthy, LPC, and Kathy Decker, LPC. In-person seminars in Boulder & Denver.

replacing "Kathy Decker, MA, LPC" and "Boulder & Cherry Creek". Full credentials, when needed: Bob Manthy, LPC, Owner and Kathy Decker, LPC, CAC II, PLCC.

The graduate survey. Across four messages:

• Delete the crossed-out events block, Q7 to Q10, keep Q10b. Delete Section 6, About You.
• On the event and pricing questions you argued to keep: "I have recently surveyed graduates about their interests, what would make it easier for them to attend, how much they would be willing to pay, etc... The survey is already long, and I already have this information, so please delete." He also noted "We allow Rebuilders to bring one guest."
• Add a value question: "Please rate the value of the Rebuilding Seminar, social activities, and the included Graduate Community versus the price", with Poor / Moderate / Good / High.
• Section 3: "Other (please specify)" needs a box that pops up when selected.
• Section 3: change "Weekend retreat" to "In person weekend retreat".
• Section 4: delete "When you've described Rebuilding to someone curious about it, what do you usually say?" His reason: "too hard".
• He wants ownership: "Can you give me access? I want to manage this from the rebuildingseminars workspace."

Google Business Profile access (June 15). He said yes to posting, no to free rein:

I'm a little uncomfortable with this, not with you, but with Claude being able to make changes. Specifically, any change to my business address would be devastating.

I already have an AI auto-reply to reviews. They are posted automatically, but I get a chance to edit them afterward. I show as available 24/7, and that shouldn't change.

I need the upcoming seminars and workshops posted on the RB business profile at the appropriate time before the event. I typically post only the very next event and seminar.

Website and hosting (June 18 and 19). He accepted your redirection of the whole plan:

You never cease to amaze me. Of course, you are right. This is much more in line with my skills and joys of service. How do you see this so easily? Let's proceed! I should cancel (or rehost) Counseling with Bob. I pay $59/month, and it gets no traction.

I used to own bobmanthy.com, but let it go. The domain is available.

He also flagged that he has two Psychology Today profiles, and that "CounselingwithBob.com doesn't generate enough business to pay for the Psychology Today posting."

Referral materials (July 5). Add a website page titled "Why Therapists, Attorneys, and Financial Services should Refer to Rebuilding Seminars", and replace the old description with his own rewrite, which leads on being a complement to the professional's own work:

Rebuilding Seminars is a 10-week, therapist-led seminar that provides a stable base for your clients navigating the challenges of divorce or relationship loss... It is a safe, effective complement to your legal, financial, or therapeutic process.

Also: "Pls give a referral sheet to Hanna."

The flyer and rack card (July 5 and 6). A voice note worth keeping:

I'd rather use a quote that talks about community. "Hard" is not the best word for someone healing.

He supplied full back-of-card copy built on three pillars: the Fisher Model, therapist-led guidance, and a built-in network, closing on "True healing happens in community."

The logo (July 5)

Please tell me what you think. The logo doesn't currently say what we do!

He wants the tagline "Divorce Support and Community" added in some places, and listed font matches: script options include Alex Brush, Great Vibes, Allura, Satisfy; subtext options include Montserrat Light or Regular, Questrial, Poppins.

Simple approvals

• Video scripts, recording session: "Yes please."
• Testimonial for verityagentic.ai: "Absolutely. Please give me the top three things you want my testimonial to communicate to a customer. Or I can just rewrite this."
• Analytics access: "Done!" Search Console access: "Done. Thank you!"
• NAP consistency: "720-600-2763 and 195 Second Ave, Niwot are already in the website footer, and yes, please ensure these are consistent throughout."

buildamensgroup.com review (June 14). His most detailed critique of your work, and he approved launch: "Launch it and keep track of the views & clicks! I can reference on my RB site." Four substantive notes:

1. Opening night structure. A tight structure at the first meeting is essential and does not conflict with the shoulder-to-shoulder approach. He attached his own opening program.
2. Photos. First is old men, "a turn-off". Second is "college boys with beer. Too young." Third is right "though men don't drink white wine." He wants a mix including Hispanic and Asian men, a "slightly manly look", and a shoulder-to-shoulder doing-something shot.
3. Empathy deserves its own section, placed before "me too." His clinical point: "It is so hard for men to share vulnerability that 'me too' comments are usually not helpful." He linked Brené Brown on empathy.
4. Separate group work from therapy. Move "The methods that help", "What the research still can't tell us" and "The Bottom Line" into the therapy section, since they are about counseling rather than group work.

---

Questions he asked that were never answered

These are his, sitting open in the thread.

1. "Should I be making other posts as well?" (June 15, GBP). Charlie drafted an answer, but Bob never confirmed which of the two access options he wanted.
2. "How do we integrate this into RB360 (GoHighLevel)?" (July 9, about the score mockup he called "SO GREAT"). This is the question the whole FDAS import still hangs on.
3. "Pls confirm my next task is to complete all of the linked article reviews." (July 9). He is waiting on you to say yes before he proofreads the rest.
4. "Do I need to hire someone to run it? Or have I already hired you?" (July 5, offline and local press plan). You answered that one. His follow-ups did not get answered: should the one-page referral sheet become a two-sided rack card, and should there be business cards for professionals to hand to clients?
5. "I'm wondering how much we prioritize getting a revised website up." (July 10). He wants to offer Premium packages and says it is "proving difficult though go high level."
6. "What are the next steps for me?" (June 19, Cloudflare hosting).
7. The FDAS scoring check (July 5): "I am not yet confident that it is scoring correctly, and I would like to test it periodically. An agent should be able to distinguish the most 'recovered' answers from those indicating the most in-pain answer. If not, I can have Sparrow test it." He supplied three source documents for it: FDAS Scoring, Rebuilding Test Summary, and Interpreting the FDAS.
8. Cathy and the second Google location. He wants a second GBP location for Kathy's seminar site, but "Cathy does not have a study location where she can receive a postcard from Google." He asked Sparrow and Kathy for a stable address on July 5 and raised the blocker again on July 10.

---

Smaller items in passing

• July 16, forwarded the GoHighLevel API access thread from Kevin Van Liere: "FYI. I'll work on this tomorrow." On July 14 he had confirmed "I have put in the API request to Kevin."
• July 10, forwarded a cold website audit pitch from Sparrow's son: "Maybe Claude can evaluate the evaluation."
• July 7, his own marketing email went out promoting a "90-min Intro Session on July 21st". That is the event whose stale text lingered on the site until tonight.
• July 6, sent five professional photos of himself and one of him with Kathy, no message.
• June 25, introduced you to Sparrow Gabriel: "Annette is my GF, an expert in AI and digital marketing, and a strong advocate for Rebuilding Seminars."
• June 21, hit a Google org policy blocking service account key creation.
• August 7, forwarded the automated consult test firing correctly.

---

What I would do next

1. Settle the price. Bob's July 27 terms and today's instruction disagree, and there is a deadline inside one of them that lands in 12 days.
2. Chase the "less AI-like" edits. Six edits arrived on August 6 and he said more were coming. Nothing since. They are the only thing left gating 57 emails.
3. Answer the RB360 integration question, because it is the mechanical blocker on the import even after Bob signs off on wording.
4. Give him the one-line yes on finishing the article reviews. He has been waiting a month.
5. Fix the $1200 on his live seminar card while you are in GoHighLevel anyway.