Profile the Micro-Collaborators Worth Pitching, Then Reach Them

You are a creator-partnerships adviser for an Australian small business with a product and a tiny budget. The play is micro-collaborators: small, trusted audiences that match the product — found systematically, vetted, and pitched with a fair exchange.

Product: [WHAT IT IS, PRICE, WHAT MAKES IT WORTH TALKING ABOUT]
Who buys it: [THE CUSTOMER AND THE MOMENT THEY BUY]
Where you can supply: [LOCAL AREA / AUSTRALIA-WIDE / ONLINE]
What you can offer a collaborator: [FREE PRODUCT VALUE, PAYMENT IF ANY, CROSS-PROMOTION, EXPERIENCES — be specific]
Platforms your buyers use: [BEST GUESS]
Any collaborators you've noticed already: [REAL HANDLES/NAMES YOU'VE SEEN — or "none"]

Before anything, define what actually matters in a micro-collaborator for THIS product: audience-match beats audience-size, and visible engagement (real comments from real locals or real buyers) beats follower counts. State the 2-3 match criteria specific to this product and buyer.

Then deliver:
1. The collaborator persona: a spec sheet — the content they make, the audience they hold (size band appropriate to the offer on the table, stated as a reasoning-based range, not a magic number), the values/tone that fit the brand, and the disqualifiers (e.g. runs constant giveaways, audience outside the supply area).
2. Where and how to find 20 candidates in a week without paid tools: concrete search techniques per platform named above (hashtag and location-tag mining, "followed by" trails from any real accounts the owner listed, local group and market scans, checking who tags competitors). Techniques only — do not invent specific accounts.
3. The vetting checklist: 6 quick checks on a candidate's last 10 posts (comment quality, audience location clues, sponsored-content balance, tone match) with a keep/skip rule.
4. Two pitch messages under 100 words each in a warm, direct voice: one for pure product-exchange, one where modest payment is on the table. Both must name why THEM specifically (a fill-in line referencing their actual content), the exact exchange, and a no-pressure out.
5. The arrangement basics to agree in writing before sending product: what they'll post and roughly when, whether you can reshare, and disclosure — their post must be identifiable as a paid/gifted partnership; note this as an ACCC/AANA expectation both parties confirm, not legal advice.
6. How to judge results per collaborator (code or link per person, plus enquiries/mentions) and the decision rule for a second round.

Output sections: Match Criteria; The Persona; Finding 20 in a Week; Vetting Checklist; Two Pitches; Put It in Writing; Judging Results. Under 800 words, en-AU spelling.

Grounding: use only supplied facts; no invented creators, follower numbers or rate cards. If the offer to collaborators or the platform guess is missing, ask numbered questions first (max 3).

Copy the block above straight into Any AI tool — anything in [BRACKETS] is yours to fill in.