Boucher & Jones Fuels — case-study source material, v1 (parent index)

Status: First client to land under the client-case-studies scope. Compiled May 24, 2026 from the project knowledge base, repo CLAUDE.md, and Kevin's working memory. A v2 ingest is expected with more material once Michael DeLeye is interviewed and operational baselines are gathered.

What this collection is for

Source material — not finished copy — for a Candid Creative case study, portfolio entry, sales-call talking points, or any derivative writing about the B&J engagement. Every claim carries a confidence label so downstream writers can decide what is publishable, what needs verification, and what is still unknown.

How the entries are organized

• Customer profile — B&J customer profile — legal entity, sub-brands, verticals, geography, sites, leadership
• Engagement scope — B&J engagement — active workstreams, status, and Candid services rendered
• Tech stack — B&J marketing site stack (bj-next, dev URL bjweb.candidcreative.ca) — VERIFIED LIVE STACK, B&J CRM platform — PLANNED stack (not yet built), Manifold data platform — Candid Creative product powering embedded widgets on the B&J site
• Data model & architecture — B&J data model — first-class entities, including TANKS (the most quotable architecture decision), B&J architectural decision: custom platform vs Manage Petro / PDI / Cargas — why custom won
• Positioning — B&J positioning — "walk with quiet confidence" (editorial discipline, NOT a public tagline)
• Live site facts — B&J live site inventory — page count, IA, what is planned (headline KPI: ~50 pages live vs ~6 before), B&J content quality — what the pre-launch audit explicitly called out as strong, B&J technical SEO posture — old vs new, with explicit gaps to close pre-launch
• KPIs — B&J KPI candidates — every defensible metric, with source and confidence
• Architectural decisions worth surfacing — B&J architectural decisions worth surfacing in case-study narrative — eight, ranked
• What was hard — B&J — what was hard (for the "what surprised us" section)
• Roadmap — B&J roadmap — what is next (Phase 2 marketing site, CRM phases 1-3, Manifold Phase 3)
• Quotes — B&J quotes — what is available verbatim, what still needs to be gathered
• Visuals / confidentiality / method — B&J case study — visual assets needed, confidentiality unknowns, method appendix
• Critical overclaim guards — B&J case study — critical overclaim guards (READ BEFORE WRITING)
• Narrative angles — B&J case study — suggested narrative angles, ranked, with a recommended hybrid lead
• Source documents — B&J — source documents in the project knowledge base (so the KB knows what is and is not ingested here)
• Data gaps — B&J — known unknowns that need a human conversation or a tool query before publication

Top-level caveats — do not overclaim

1. The marketing site is on a dev URL (bjweb.candidcreative.ca), not the production domain. Production cutover from WordPress has not happened. Write "in build with the agriculture vertical and ~50 pages live on the development surface" — not "launched."
2. The CRM is scoped and schema-designed but not built. Describe the data model and architecture; do not claim the CRM is live, used by staff, or replacing spreadsheets.
3. The customer portal (Phase 2 of CRM) is not built.
4. "Walk with quiet confidence" is editorial discipline, not a public tagline. Never use it as a slogan.
5. Manifold is its own Candid Creative product with its own URL — name it that way, not as part of the B&J build.
6. Davis & McCauley is being absorbed via a transition page strategy, not retired.
7. The repo CLAUDE.md is the live source of truth for the marketing site stack. The historical BoucherJones_MarketingSite_TechStack.docx is partially superseded (Next.js 15 → 16, no Tailwind → Tailwind v4 + shadcn, Express 5 → Route Handlers).
8. No production-traffic data exists yet — no meaningful CrUX, GSC, or GA4. Do not invent KPIs from those sources.