Are these separate companies?

No. Champion1, LiquidIQ and DARWIN are programs of AliveCommerce same team, same address, same invoicing entity. They're named separately because they're different products with different buyers.

Why not just call them AliveCommerce services?

Because the buyer and the commercial model are different enough to confuse each other. Someone looking for continuous application management is badly served by a page that also sells one-off website builds. Separate names let each explain itself clearly.

Can we start with a project and move to a program?

That's the most common path. A defined project to build or migrate something, then a program to own the result. It also means the program starts with a team that already knows the system.

What stops you doing as little as possible under a fixed fee?

Defined service levels agreed in writing, and a rate review that moves in both directions based on how things actually went. Both are written down before you sign rather than explained afterwards.

What if a program isn't right for us?

Then we'll say so. Small stacks where a hire wins, sites that are new and fine, paper that only needs scanning rather than systems each program page lists when it isn't the right answer, and we mean it.

Where is Foundation1?

Foundation is now the top tier of Champion1 rather than a separate program unlimited management plus active engineering, process mapping and a live roadmap. Same offer, one fewer name to learn.

AliveCommerce / Programs

Three programs for the work that never ends.

Some work has a start, a finish and a budget. Some doesn't — the software layer, the way information moves, the website. Those need an owner, not a project plan. Each program owns one layer, continuously, under a fixed monthly fee.

Why these exist.

For most of our history we delivered defined projects: migrations, integrations, custom builds. They went well. And then, a year or two later, a lot of them decayed — not because the work was poor, but because nobody owned it once the project ended.

A migration finishes and the system drifts. A site launches and diverges from the business. Documentation is written for an audit and never touched again. The work kept ending at exactly the point where the value needed maintaining.

So we built programs for the parts that don't end. Each owns one layer of the business, under a fixed fee, so that the incentive is to make that layer need less intervention over time rather than more.

“They're named separately because they're genuinely different products with different buyers — not because we're several companies.”

The three programs.

One per layer. Same team, same commercial model, same agreements.

Champion1

The application layer

Every piece of software the business runs on — off-the-shelf, custom, legacy, or abandoned by whoever built it. The space between your MSP and your vendors, owned.

Model: Continuous, fixed monthly
Tiers: Flex · Manage · Foundation
Best for: Businesses running more systems than anyone internally owns
Coverage: Canada and the US, remote

About Champion1 champion1.ca

LiquidIQ

Knowledge and process

How the business knows what it knows. Paper, procedures, training and documentation — including the physical work that needs someone standing on your floor.

Model: Project-based, productized streams
Streams: LEXICON · LUMENI · ARCANA
Best for: Operations where knowledge lives in binders or in people
Coverage: Onsite nationally across Canada

About LiquidIQ liquidiq.ca

DARWIN

Web and revenue

The site stops being a project that decays between rebuilds and becomes something that changes every month in response to data. Works alongside your marketing team.

Model: Continuous, fixed monthly, month to month
Formerly: AliveSites
Best for: Businesses on their second or third website rebuild
Coverage: Canada and the US, remote

About DARWIN winwithdarwin.com

Where programs sit.

AliveCommerce owns the whole defined-project column. Programs own the continuous one, one layer each.

Defined project

Continuous ownership

Knowledge & process

AliveCommerceProcess automation and documentation, remote

LiquidIQOnsite, national — plus continuous via Champion1 Foundation

Application

AliveCommerceCustom builds, integrations, legacy modernization

Champion1Flex, Manage or Foundation

Web & revenue

AliveCommerceWeb and e-commerce builds, AODA work

DARWINThe web layer, managed monthly

The full explanation of the structure is on how we work.

What's the same across all three.

The programs differ in what they own. The commercial terms don't.

Fixed monthly fee

We make no more money by doing more work, which inverts the usual incentive. We profit when your layer needs less intervention.

Defined service levels

Depending on the engagement, defined service levels, response commitments, warranties and transition protections may be available — agreed in writing before you sign.

Rate reviews in both directions

Based on how the relationship actually went. It behaves more like an insurance premium than a timesheet, and it can go down.

No vendor pays us

No commissions, referral fees or reseller margin from any platform. A recommendation to change nothing costs us exactly what a rebuild would.

You own everything

Code, content, credentials, documentation and accounts. Yours throughout, and leaving means leaving with all of it.

One company behind them

Same team, same address, and agreements and invoicing issued by AliveCommerce. No separate entities to chase.

Which one, usually.

Most people arrive with one of these sentences.

“Nobody owns the software. Everyone owns a piece of it.”

Champion1The application layer

“It's all in her head, and she retires in March.”

LiquidIQKnowledge and process

“We rebuilt the site two years ago. It's already dated.”

DARWINWeb and revenue

“Honestly, a bit of all three.”

Start with the configuratorThree questions, and it'll say when the answer is none

Using more than one

Common, and not a separate product. Clients usually arrive through one program and add a second when the first exposes a gap — a Champion1 client discovers their documentation doesn't exist, or a DARWIN client needs the portal behind the site owned properly.

We don't market a bundle, because nobody wakes up wanting three layers at once. When it happens, it's a commercial arrangement worked out between us.

Same account team across programs
One agreement structure, one invoicing entity
Priorities set across layers, not within each
No duplication where programs overlap

Straight answers.

Not sure which layer it is?

Tell us what's happening and we'll say which program fits, or that a defined project would serve you better, or that you don't need either yet.

Start the Conversation

Knowledge and process

Applications and data

Customer and web

Browse by symptom instead

The structure

Continuous ownership

Before you commit

Start with one problem

Priority sectors

Also

Or by situation

Not sure you fit?

Reading

Most read

Proof

Nobody owns the application layer