Document begins

Case Study Cleaned Verification Register

Purpose: Separate verified facts about each named case study from Cygnet-specific hypotheticals, and flag any place where a Cygnet projection has drifted into being presented as something a case-study subject actually did.

Decision discipline:

• FACT — verified from a cited public source
• ASSUMPTION — plausible but not verified; no source contradicts it
• HYPOTHETICAL — explicitly a Cygnet analogy or projection, not a fact about the case-study subject
• UNVERIFIED — stated as fact but no primary source is cited
• DEBUNKED — contradicted by a primary source
• RISK — a claim that could mislead the public or harm project credibility if repeated

Last reviewed: 2026-05-19. Reviewed scope: internal/case-study-verification.md, internal/research/case_study_validation_report.md, internal/research/case_study_verification.md, docs/website_content/australian_community_pub_case_studies.md, docs/website_content/case_studies_fact_check.csv, internal/assumptions-register.md, internal/finance_assumptions_book.md, site/meeting-17-may.html, site/index.html.

Drift summary

Total claims reviewed across all case studies: 57 Verified (FACT): 34 Plausible / Assumption: 9 Hypothetical correctly labelled: 4 Unverified (stated as fact, no primary source): 5 Debunked: 5 Drift flags (Cygnet hypothetical presented as case-study fact): 2 — both in site/meeting-17-may.html; both already noted and partially mitigated by site/index.html copy

The main drift is in the Castlemaine section. All other Australian pub case studies in the public register (docs/website_content/australian_community_pub_case_studies.md) are clean: they are properly labelled as verified, historical, or candidate, and no Cygnet projections appear inside their write-ups.

The older internal registers (internal/research/case_study_verification.md, internal/research/case_study_validation_report.md) contain a second cluster of drift: governance examples (Mondragon, Enspiral, Earthworker, Endenburg) and UK pub cases (The Old Crown Birmingham) that have been used or considered for use in a way that overstates their relevance to a Tasmanian rural pub. These are not yet fully removed from all internal documents.

Public-facing granular register

This is the compact identity/structure layer for the cases already published in docs/website_content/australian_community_pub_case_studies.md. Use this table before citing a case in a briefing or transcript-derived note.

Adjacent co-operatives, not pub precedents

1. Castlemaine Community Investment Co-operative Ltd (Victoria)

Identity note (primary sources verified 2026-05-18): Entity = Castlemaine Community Investment Co-operative Ltd (ABN verified via ABN Lookup). Asset = The Hub, 233 Barker St, Castlemaine — a mixed-use commercial building with 19 office spaces, meeting room, kitchen, cafe space, and community garden. This is not a hotel or pub. The co-op’s own website and disclosure statement confirm the asset and debenture terms. ABC News reporting confirms the $1.95M debenture target. The meeting transcript’s “local hotel” wording is a mischaracterisation of the asset. The meeting-reported figures ($1.5M raise, “up to 5%” interest) are both contradicted by the co-op’s public offer documents: verified figures are $1.95M–$2.0M and 0–4%. See assumptions register AR-12 and AR-13 (now labelled CORRECTED).

Verified facts from primary sources

Corrected claims (meeting transcript figures contradicted by primary sources)

Still unverified (meeting-reported only)

Drift flags (Cygnet hypotheticals in Castlemaine context)

Castlemaine verdict (updated): Entity and asset are FACT-verified. Key meeting figures ($1.5M, 5% interest) are CORRECTED by primary sources ($1.95M–$2.0M, 0–4%). Asset is not a pub — it is a commercial/office building. Castlemaine is therefore a useful capital-instrument reference (community debenture structure, verified terms) but not a hospitality analogue. For pub-specific precedents use Sea Lake, Lockington, Grong Grong, Nandaly, or Broomehill.

Public-copy implication: The website’s existing caveating (“reference point from a different town, building, and market”) remains accurate. No urgent public edits required. If the Castlemaine reference is updated in any future copy, use the verified figures ($1.95M, 0–4%) rather than the meeting-reported ones.

2. The Old Crown, Birmingham (UK)

This case was in the earlier internal registers (internal/research/case_study_verification.md, internal/research/case_study_validation_report.md) and in the CSV fact-check. It has been used in some earlier internal documents as “community-owned pub, raised £365,000 from community shares.”

Old Crown verdict: The Birmingham “Old Crown” claim is DEBUNKED. It must be removed wherever it appears. The Hesket Newmarket “Old Crown” (Cumbria) is a VERIFIED, confirmed case study and should be labelled as such. These two are frequently confused. Any internal or public document using “The Old Crown” must specify which one.

3. Sea Lake Hotel Co-operative / Royal Hotel, Victoria

Sea Lake verdict: Clean. 6 of 7 claims are FACT from sourced documentation. One governance detail is ASSUMPTION. No Cygnet drift. This is one of the two strongest analogues for Cygnet.

4. Lockington Community Hotel, Victoria

Lockington verdict: Clean. 3 FACT, 1 ASSUMPTION. No Cygnet drift.

5. Royal Hotel Grong Grong, New South Wales

Grong Grong verdict: Clean. 5 FACT from sourced documentation. No Cygnet drift.

6. Nandaly Community Hotel, Victoria

Nandaly verdict: Clean. 4 FACT. No Cygnet drift.

7. Broomehill Village Co-operative / Imperial Hotel, Western Australia

Broomehill verdict: Clean. 5 FACT from sourced documentation. No Cygnet drift.

8. Hotel Theodore, Queensland (Failure case)

Hotel Theodore verdict: Clean. 3 FACT. No Cygnet drift.

9. Hotel Renmark, South Australia

Hotel Renmark verdict: Clean. 3 FACT. Not a CNL precedent — correctly labelled “Historical analogue.”

10. George & Dragon, Hudswell, North Yorkshire (UK)

George & Dragon verdict: Clean. 6 FACT from sourced documentation. UK context — correctly treated as international reference, not direct Australian CNL analogue.

11. Old Crown (Hesket Newmarket, Cumbria, UK)

Hesket Newmarket verdict: Clean. 6 FACT. UK context — useful comparison but not CNL-transferable directly. Should not be confused with The Old Crown Birmingham.

12. Governance examples (Mondragon, Enspiral, Earthworker, Endenburg / Sociocracy)

These cases appear in internal/research/case_study_verification.md and internal/research/case_study_validation_report.md. They have been considered for use in governance sections of the operating model.

13. Debunked cases — flagged for removal

These cases are in earlier internal registers and should not appear in any future public or internal claim-making documents:

Consequential corrections — do not edit these files; corrections listed here for human review

Corrections that should flow into docs/website_content/australian_community_pub_case_studies.md

1. Castlemaine is not currently in this file — it appears only in the meeting transcript and internal documents. Before adding it to the public register, a primary source must be found (ABN / co-op registry / BCCM listing / media article identifying the entity). Until then, Castlemaine should be in the “Candidate / needs source work” table, not the verified or historical analogues section.

2. No corrections needed to the current shortlist or case write-ups — the file already uses a clean evidence-status system and no Cygnet hypotheticals have drifted into its case-study prose. The “Lesson for Cygnet” sections correctly label themselves as Cygnet-specific reflections, not facts about the case study.

Corrections that should flow into internal/finance_assumptions_book.md

3. Section 5.0A (Castlemaine membership and debenture figures) — this section already correctly labels all three figures (AR-03, AR-12, AR-13) as MEETING-REPORTED ASSUMPTION. No change needed to the label. However, a TODO item should be added: Identify the Castlemaine co-op entity by name and ABN; verify the $1.5M debenture figure and 4–5% interest term against a primary source before these figures are used in any capital modelling or public communication.

4. All capital-stack sections that reference Castlemaine debenture terms as a design guide should carry an explicit flag: “The Castlemaine debenture terms cited here are meeting-reported and have not been independently verified. They should not be used as a design precedent until a primary source is found.”

Corrections that should flow into site/meeting-17-may.html

5. Lines 309–313 ($200–$500 membership hypothetical): Add a disambiguation sentence making explicit that this figure was offered as a Cygnet working hypothesis, not as a fact about Castlemaine. Suggested wording: [Note: the $200–$500 figure was offered as a working hypothesis for Cygnet, not as a fact about Castlemaine’s actual membership pricing.]

6. Lines 406 ($200+ membership pool sentence): The sentence blends the $1.5M Castlemaine debenture fact (meeting-reported) with a Cygnet membership projection in a single paragraph. Recommended: split into two paragraphs — one for the Castlemaine reference, one for the Cygnet hypothetical — matching the framing already used in site/index.html.

Cases to remove or heavily caveat in any internal document still citing them

7. The Old Crown Birmingham — remove all claims of community ownership. If the Hesket Newmarket Old Crown is intended, use its full name: “Old Crown, Hesket Newmarket, Cumbria.”

8. Mondragon — remove from any public-facing or near-public precedent list. Retain at most as a footnote in internal governance brainstorming, with an explicit note that it is not analogous to a single Tasmanian pub.

WP R.3 — Stream routing table

Which verified findings should each stream seat prioritise? Use this table as the first filter before reading individual case write-ups.

Notes on scope:

• UK cases (Hesket Newmarket Old Crown; George & Dragon): International references only. Their structures (tenanted models, community shares, CAMRA support) are useful comparisons, but the legal and regulatory context differs from Australian co-operative and liquor-licensing law. Do not cite as CNL precedents.
• Castlemaine: Community debenture instrument reference only — not a pub. Verified figures: $1.95M–$2.0M, 0–4% interest. Three claims remain UNVERIFIED in the cleaned register (C-2, C-4, C-5) — do not rely on those.
• Historical analogues (Hotel Renmark; Vine Inn Barossa; Ceduna; Loxton; Dwellingup): Useful lineage, but no CNL structure data available. Excluded from Finance and Legal/Governance streams because insufficient operational detail exists for those purposes. Community Comms may draw on narrative framing only.

This file is internal-only. Do not publish or include in build artifacts. It feeds the finance assumptions book and public briefings review — corrections to those files require human sign-off per CLAUDE.md.