Creator Seeding Planner — Free TikTok Shop Tool
Work out what a sample budget actually buys: published videos, the winner band the 6-month model implies, and what each winner costs you in samples.
Samples are not videos, and videos are not winners
Three conversions sit between a sample budget and a result: creators who accept, accepting creators who actually post, and posted videos that become winners. Skip any of them and a sample budget looks like a content plan when it is really a lottery-ticket count. This planner walks the funnel forwards from the volume you control and prices each step — cost per published video, and cost per winner at the published 3–5% rate.
Why 500 units is a floor, not a target
The published model is explicit that sample volume is a threshold rather than a slope. At a 3–5% winner rate, halving the samples costs far more than half the outcome, because most months simply produce no winner at all — and no amount of accept-rate or post-rate optimisation rescues a base that small. The planner names that case outright rather than reporting a fractional winner as though it were a small one.
Your accept and post rates, never a borrowed one
There is no default accept rate on this page and no default post rate. The site publishes neither, and a borrowed funnel rate is the fastest route to a confident wrong answer — it puts someone else's creator relationships, category and brief quality underneath your number. Blank inputs stay blank and the output that needs them stays blank with them.
The constraint is samples per SKU
Your catalog divides the sample budget before a single creator sees it, so per-SKU volume — not total volume — is what decides whether any individual product gets tested. The published reference is about 25 samples per SKU per month; the planner prints your figure against it, so a budget that looks healthy in total but thin per product is visible rather than flattering. The 20–50 SKU rule exists to keep that division honest.
What this planner does not model
GMV, and therefore how many creators it takes to reach a revenue goal. Running the funnel backwards needs a GMV-per-creator baseline, the repo carries no such corpus, and inventing tier baselines to divide a goal by would put a fabricated benchmark under the loudest number on the page. The same applies to the notion that offering more SKUs multiplies your matchable creator pool by a fixed factor — the honest version of that insight is the samples-per-SKU figure above, which comes from published work rather than from a coefficient with nothing behind it.
Get the plan
The result above is yours with no email. The prioritised plan covers:
- The seeding programme behind the rates