CULTIVO Machine-age agriculture
Cultivo value engine

Put a number on drift

instrument CV.I · continuous reading

The plan says one thing. The floor does another. The ledger finds out later. Read what it is worth to keep all three true—with cash savings, working capacity and operational upside kept on separate gauges.

CULTIVOMachine-age agriculture · value instrument

The economics of staying true

Model live
IntentExecutionOutcomeEvery decision becomes a record
01 · Facility pattern

Start with a pattern, then replace every assumption with your own.

02 · Work the machine can return

Enter time currently spent chasing status, reconciling records, re-keying work and rebuilding the plan.

RolePeopleWork / personLoaded rate
Cultivation techsminutes / workday
Managershours / week
Admin + inventoryhours / week
Owner / senior leadhours / week
How labor is calculated

Technicians: people × minutes per workday × five days × operating weeks × loaded rate. Weekly roles: people × hours per week × operating weeks × loaded rate. Cultivo's capture rate is applied once; only the redeployed share enters modeled annual value.

03 · Leakage, risk and upside
04 · Fit the powertrain

Choose the operating model. Package assumptions remain editable; pricing is shown plainly.

Otto's contribution lives in the workload-capture gauge—not in magic math. Need evidence first? A 90-day agentic proof is scoped at $15,000–$18,000 with baselines, event receipts and a value reading.

Value map
Planner + agentReturned coordination and reconciliation timeCapacity
Ledger + safeguardsPrevented write-offs, oversells and reworkHard savings
Owner's ledgerYield, throughput and harvest-to-cash improvementStrategic upside
Market reference

Peer cannabis operations vendors publish examples of roughly 125–200 staff hours per month returned. This model starts from your actual roles and discounts that workload by Cultivo's capture and redeployment rates.

Trym pricing benchmark ↗Distru ERP benchmark ↗