These are draft, anonymized narratives—structured like real engagements and aligned with how we talk about hosting cutovers, email authentication, and WordPress performance. They are not third-party verified case studies yet; proof status is labeled on each card.
When a move touches DNS, TLS, redirects, and mail paths, the failure mode is rarely the file transfer alone. This draft follows the hosting framing: map dependencies, run cutover in order, validate after the change is live.
Draft anonymized narrative. No client-identifying details. No third-party uptime or performance benchmarks stated.
Aligned with the deliverability sequence in approved copy: find the cause, clean up the setup, validate the result. This draft centers SPF, DKIM, DMARC, and alignment with the actual sending stack—without claiming a measured inbox rate.
Draft anonymized narrative. No campaign metrics or inbox percentages claimed as verified results.
Matches the WordPress framing in approved copy: baseline the site, find the bottleneck across cache, runtime, database, plugins, and front-end delivery, then fix highest-impact issues first and verify. No synthetic lab scores claimed here.
Draft anonymized narrative. No before/after Core Web Vitals or LCP numbers stated as measured outcomes.
