From Series A to Exit: Mastering Metrics
5/8: Product
10 Min Read – What You’ll Take Away
Map your exit 18–24 months out: Build a strong business and become the obvious acquisition target for your ideal buyer.
Stick to vision - until you shouldn’t: Disrupt early. Once you start losing deals due to missing features, it’s time to compromise.
Strategic buyers pay for upside, financial buyers for certainty: Tailor your story, metrics, and valuation arguments to what each buyer values.
Point solutions win in M&A: All-in-one sells better to customers but point solutions are more attractive to platforms. Bonus points if you share mutual customers.
Push on the cross-sell story: Shared customers reduce risk and justify a premium in vertical integrations. Make sure to price that in.
History predicts the future: Buyers trust what’s been shipped, not promised. Your roadmap only matters if it’s backed by a track record of hitting targets.
Get clarity on IP ownership: If contractors or governments own your code, fix it long before you get into DD. Loose ends can kill a deal on the last mile.
Retain your talent post acquisition: Even if talent seems more commoditized than ever, disbursement of knowledge and ability to deliver on earn-out milestones are key to realize your full valuation.
Trust expedites due diligence: Give access, collaborate between teams, and be upfront about your skeletons. Being prepared and building trust through transparency is the best way to keep your DD on track.
Earn-outs need balance: Sellers want control, buyers want results. Mix qualitative and quantitative milestones to align incentives.
From Series A to Exit: Mastering Metrics
Despite what you may think, the recipe for reaching your next financial milestone doesn’t have to be a black box. In “From Series A to Exit: Mastering Metrics”, we break down what it takes to position your business as an attractive investment - be it for funding or a strategic exit. Each article focuses on a core function critical to your success:
Product,
Finance,
and People.
In addition to my own experience, my co-authors draw on their success stories from the likes of Uber, Booking, Dropbox, LinkedIn, Just Eat Takeaway, Lightspeed, Miro, EasyPark, Bynder, Squarespace, BlackRock, JP Morgan, Ares, and more.
Mastering Product Metrics
Joining me for today’s dive into Product metrics are FareHarbor’s Jae Chung and Bynder’s Peter-Paul Houtman.
As VP Strategy & Insights, Jae guides the strategic expansion of FareHarbor - whether organically or through M&A. Notably, it was during his time at Booking Holding, when he led their assessment and acquisition of FareHarbor - selecting the Hawaiian startup primarily for its strong product metrics. With experience on both sides of the table - including Investment Banking at Rothschild and Corporate Development roles at a variety of acquisitive companies - Jae brings sharp insights into what makes a product attractive to potential buyers and what raises red flags.
With over 25 years of engineering experience, Peter-Paul - currently CTO at Bynder - has seen the trenches of multiple big-ticket transactions. Most recently, he was part of Thomas H. Lee Partners’ USD 350M+ majority stake acquisition of Bynder. In 2021, Peter-Paul and I sat at the same side of the table - being part of PARK NOW's acquisition by EasyPark. With vast experience guiding product and engineering organizations through funding rounds, exits, and post-merger integrations, he understands exactly what buyers seek.
In today’s edition, we’ll explore how to build a Product that not only supports internal growth but withstands external scrutiny. From indicators of strong Product-Market Fit and creating stickiness that drives long-term growth and moat, over TAM expansion, to red flags in due diligence: we’ll dissect what really matters when evaluating your product.
Building a Product Investors & Buyers Crave
Valuation: Crafting a Narrative Both Sides Can Buy Into
Prep Like a Pro: Avoid Last-Mile Deal Killers
1. Building a Product Investors & Buyers Crave
We’ve talked about how - no matter what - your product needs to solve a real pain. But once you’re aiming for an exit, that might no longer be enough - it needs to fit the buyer’s future.
Build Two Adjacent Paths: Growth and Exit Strategy
There is a reason why VCs attach clear expectations to each round: while timing might be somewhat flexible, the goal is always the same - exit. I’ve seen plenty founders get lost by either fundraising and exit negotiations or by focusing too much on building a long-term business.
As in most things in life, it’s all about balance. You need to make sure you do both: build a thriving business and optimize for an exit. When I built a 5 year plan at Formitable/ Zenchef under PE firm PSG, I made sure our 3-5 year exit plan seamlessly slotted into our 5+ years product vision. What’s key, is that your product innovations, feature growth, and TAM expansion all materialize or at least show proper traction before you plan to exit. If you’re pouring capital into a new architecture that takes 3 years to finish, you won’t be able to price that into an exit planned to happen 18 months down the road.
Vision vs Iteration: When to Lead vs When to Listen
Of course, you can’t just build a business for its exit - context changes too quickly and too many variables are out of your control. But what’s relevant for both raising and an exit? Customer satisfaction.
Satisfying customer needs entirely depends on the market you’re in and the role you’re trying to play. Early on, when challenging assumptions and the status quo, you’re a disruptor: you win by doing things differently. But eventually, going for scale, you’ll have to meet the market where it is. I constantly see founders and visionaries struggle with balancing bold, visionary innovation with customer-driven iteration: one blazes a new trail, the other one smooths the one we’re already on - innovation changes behavior, iteration refines it.
In pen-and-paper markets, it’s all about that change in behavior. You can’t just ask customers what they want - they don’t know what to ask for. It’s on you to innovate. That’s what we had to do with Zenchef in France, where restaurateurs still took reservations by phone and jotted them down in a book. At Formitable, we were operating in more mature markets: customers had used digital systems before, we had captured early adopters, and once we got to the majority, many didn’t want to change how they worked. That’s when stubborn vision had to gradually give way to iteration. Great founders know when to apply which.
Partially due to false pride, at Formitable, we ignored the request for a key feature for years even though every competitor had it. Having been a disruptor, we didn’t want to just replicate the ‘table view’ that had become industry standard. We believed our Gantt-style layout was cleaner, more efficient, and overall better for the customer. But once we started losing significant deals, we had to get off our high horse - not because we believed in the customers’ way of working but because we needed mass adoption to reach scale.
While timing the moment for compromise might seem hard to determine, it’s actually quite simple in principle:
Still defining the category? Stick to your vision.
Experiencing significant ICP revenue loss (either churn or RFLs) attributed to known feature gaps? Start iterating.
After Booking took over FareHarbor, they had to decide whether ease of integrating the acquired inventory was worth disrupting customer workflows.
“At FareHarbor, we didn’t solve for scalability. We solved for the merchant. Even if we thought their workflow didn’t make sense, we’d still do it their way.”
Jae Chung
Being flexible on an innovation doesn’t mean selling out - it means knowing when to listen and adapt to earn mass-market adoption.
Stick, Then Spread
Getting to mass-market adoption means first defending where you are, then growing where you can. Winning and solidifying your current market builds your base - growing your TAM expands your opportunity. You’ll need both if you’re gunning for scale or a later-stage strategic exit.
Building Stickiness
We already talked about how true scale only works with solid customer retention - you’ll have to think past the initial sale and provide an experience customers love. Especially once you’re ready to exit, it’s not just about what you’ve built but what you have to show for it. Strategic buyers look at much more than just pure functionality - they look at adoption. On metrics, we’re no longer just talking overall churn and retention by cohort, segment, or use case - we’re looking at growth of product adoption across workflows or departments, API calls on production, number of integrations and custom workflows per customer, their time spent in the product, % of users logging in >3x per week (DAU, WAU, MAU), growth in seat count, and so on.
Ideally, your stickiness isn’t just about habit - it’s about business dependency. The goal is to build a product that’s part of your customer’s operating rhythm.
Do they love using it?
Would it hurt to rip out?
Are we embedded into the customer’s critical path?
Now, plans are great but your roadmap needs to allow for you to get there:
Build a product that minimizes the need for change of behavior,
Enable customers to build deep workflows they rely on every day,
Enable customization or automation that’s painful to lose,
Create data moats (if churning means losing critical data, you’re safe),
Expand your functionality to serve more than just one stakeholder or user type,
Expand your partner ecosystem and integrate deeply into other tools and platforms your customers are already using.
While CLT, churn, and CSATs are relevant indicators, they are lagging. Sometimes, quantifying the level of retention through qualitative insights can say much more: That’s why, when Booking did their research on potential acquisition targets, one company stood out.
“Their customers’ staff were so proud of using FareHarbor, they listed it on their CVs. When they changed jobs, they brought it with them: they were pitching it to their new employers before our Sales team even got there.”
Jae Chung
That sort of love for the product is what you strive for. It didn’t only give the acquisition team the confidence that FareHarbor would dominate the market - it reassured them on their bet of optimizing for merchant satisfaction and keeping workflows as they were.
Expanding Your TAM
Once you’ve managed to keep your customers (more on that in the next article on Retention), it’s time to grow the pie (i.e. your market). On metrics, we’re talking size of TAM, % of revenue from new markets, functionalities, or use cases, wallet share, and NRR.
1. Horizontal Expansion: Where else can I sell this?
This is about capturing new customer types with the same product (or only with comparably minor tweaks like regional requirements, that is).
New geographies – sell into new regions or markets,
New segments – go after different verticals, buyer personas, or company sizes (e.g. scheduling tools),
New use cases – reposition your product for a different problem or application (e.g. Viagra).
2. Vertical Expansion: What more can I sell to the same people?
In typical VC speak, 'vertical expansion' often refers to going deeper into a single industry - deepening the specialization of your product. Here, I use it slightly differently: increasing wallet share by selling more to the same type of customer - going deeper into their workflow or stack. Doing this right means vertical expansion can fuel horizontal expansion.
Note: Make sure you have enough capital left for KTLO (Keeping The Lights On)! It's the core of the product that's your bread & butter.New features – add adjacent capabilities (e.g. Lightspeed launching payments),
Workflow depth – own more of the customer journey, up or down the stack (e.g. HubSpot’s CMS Hub, EasyPark’s Off-Street inventory, or Lightspeed offering business loans).
Getting past Series C or to a favorable exit down the road is about proving you can hold your ground, grow your net retention, and expand your market.
Looking for expansion pockets but not sure where to start? Have a look at my Profitability Canvas!
“We didn't just look at product performance or reliability - we zoomed in on the customers and how they used it: are key features well adopted and are more users being set up to utilize the product over time?”
Jae Chung
All-in-One Vs Point Play
Speaking of stickiness, partnerships, and vertical expansion: API first and best-of-breed used to be what the craze was all about. Recently, however, customer preferences in the lower to mid-market are swinging back toward all-in-one platforms: simpler procurement, fewer vendors, and more native functionalities. Additionally, AI has recently helped shrink development timelines - allowing startups to build extensive feature sets early on.
This is relevant yet slightly contradicting when working towards an exit:
From a GTM perspective, point solutions often face longer sales cycles, more integration concerns, and narrower ICPs. As Ross Grainger, CFO of Paradox put it: “Point solutions face a steeper hill to climb commercially.”
From an M&A perspective, however, the dynamic flips. Point solutions may struggle to scale revenue, but they’re often more attractive to strategic buyers - especially to those building platforms. If you solve one problem deeply (see my point on traditional vertical expansion up top), you may have your pick from multiple potential buyers across adjacent verticals.
This differentiation also has significant impact on whether customer overlap is an additional asset or a reason to discount. When you’re looking to get acquired by competitors (horizontal M&A), you usually want minimal customer overlap. When I did a deal with Foodora at Lightspeed, we were both after new logos - I wanted to make sure their portfolio included a majority of new potential customers. But when you’re looking at existing partners or overarching platforms (vertical M&A), having some overlap can be of significant value. If you’ve got mutual clients, your buyer can see your products work in combination and cross-selling opportunities gain a lot more certainty. Off the back of a long standing partnership, it was that certainty, that saw us acquiring Chronogolf and ReUp.
Buy, Build, or Partner
That partnerships turn into acquisitions is nothing out of the ordinary. From a buyer’s perspective, most M&A activities synthesize out of one simple question: do we build, partner, or buy?
At Lightspeed, we used to break it down like this:
Build, if it’s core to your business, you have the talent and time, and if full control over roadmap and innovation is of concern.
Partner, if speed matters and ownership doesn’t, ongoing maintenance isn’t worth it, or the partner boosts your reach. As mentioned, it’s also a great on-ramp to a later acquisition.
When it comes to buying, there are multiple schools of thought. Opinions differ widely across the industry. Many say, a majority of acquisitions fail when compared to their initial goal - buyers overpay, businesses are bought for the wrong reasons, or integrations turn out to be a nightmare. The latter is one of the reasons why Apple does almost no acquisitions at all: they want to cultivate a culture in which every employee believes they are best equipped to building anything they want in-house (think: Apple’s Project Titan). Having been part of multiple vertical integrations myself, I’ve seen how difficult it is to merge cultures, where the seller thinks they were able to build a product the buyer wasn’t.
Most often, however, acquisitions are not even about capabilities - they are about the speed of execution.
“Building is always cleaner. But it’s slower. And when your strategy hinges on speed, buying becomes the shortcut.”
Jae Chung
The general thesis - even if often debunked - is that buying a business is going to accelerate your differentiation or your go-to-market. From the very off-set of this series, we’ve talked about the two core reasons, why strategic buyers typically choose the M&A route:
Critical mass of customers ((acceleration of) market entry, customer growth, revenue growth, or pricing power),
Unique IP ((acceleration of) gaining capabilities they don’t have or can’t easily build). While Talent alone no longer serves as a popular reason for acquisition, it does show proof of execution - playing a major role in de-risking a deal. And when it comes to AI, Upwork has recently shown that small acquisitions still happen with talent in mind: swallowing Objective (USD 19m) not just for its AI search but its AI talent bench.
“It was our hypothesis at Booking when we acquired FareHarbor: get to market faster by buying the best product already used by our customers.”
Jae Chung
But there are secondary - often decisive - drivers:
Defensibility: removing a competitor or threat (e.g. Facebook and Instagram),
Narrative & PR: making a bold move that shifts perception (arguably Adobe and Figma),
Innovation halo: increasing sales of their core product solely by association.
Looking at Adobe and Figma, paying 50x ARR wasn’t about the financial model. Adobe needed to stay relevant, needed a web-first collaborative design narrative, and to neutralize a threat (whether that’s Microsoft or Figma themselves). Paying a historic multiple at this size was about fear of missing out and becoming irrelevant.
Looking at MongoDB, it seems they simply tried what plenty of vendors attempt these days: ride the AI hype to boost their core business. While it might give some legacy platforms an innovation halo, it didn’t work for MongoDB. Despite Vector Search and the Voyage AI acquisition, Atlas demand only barely moved and the stock recently dropped 25%.
“Sometimes, however, even if the acquired product isn’t yet integrated, the package perception can still drive sales.”
Peter-Paul Houtman
In the end, it all comes down to understanding what the buyer really wants: speed, IP, customers, or narrative. You don’t need to tick every box but whichever one it is: make sure it matters deeply to them. The more clearly you anchor your value to their strategy, the higher the price and the faster the deal.
Know Your Customer
Knowing what you can price is all about understanding who’s on the other side of the isle. Once you’re 18 – 24 months away from a potential exit, it’s time to start mapping your ideal buyers.
Ask yourself:
Who else is selling to my customers?
Who are my top partners?
Who’s acquiring similar companies?
What gaps are those buyers trying to fill?
Once you know who’s a likely buyer and why, you’re ready to walk both paths:
Build and grow a sustainable, healthy business and
Become the most logical acquisition for the buyer you’re targeting.
Don’t stop innovating but make sure every new investment serves both paths: support growth and prove value before a buyer steps in.
“Buying Parkling wasn’t about revenue - it was about relevance: to have a place earlier in the customer journey and to show much needed innovation.”
Peter-Paul Houtman
2. Valuation – Crafting a Narrative Both Sides Can Buy Into
Rule of thumb: Strategic buyers pay for upside - financial buyers for certainty. Both need a story they can underwrite. Let’s go over how different buyers value your product, how to craft a narrative that resonates with both Product and Finance leaders, which metrics matter most, and how to structure a deal both sides consider a win.
Valuations are fluid: while based on hard numbers in principle, it‘s the narrative that determines the mix of metrics and multiples. You have to tell a story the buyer can believe in and help them justify the valuation to their CFO, IC, or board.
Who’s Who
Different buyers price that story differently:
VCs and PE firms may buy into a growth story but they price based on the status quo. They look for repeatable revenue and assess how confident they are in future outcomes based on past performance.
While some VC and PE firms may try to leverage synergies, they remain financial buyers/ investors - funding ventures solely for the sake of a future exit. They look for businesses that can both scale and attract high-value acquirers within a set timeframe:
A massive market,
Hard-to-replicate tech (unique IP and strong moat),
Long runway for growth/ solid unit economics/ profitability,
Broad applicability of the asset (clear potential for TAM expansion).
Those characteristics give investors and financial buyers confidence you’ve got the potential for positive ROI.
Strategic buyers, however, have an additional angle: they can extract value by combining acquired assets with their own. They don’t just pay for what’s there today - they’ll price in strategic potential.
While statistics vary, overall consensus remains: strategic buyers pay significantly more than financial ones - often reaching premiums of more than 1.5x on EBITDA.
“Strategic buyers still try to pay only for the known value but want to capture as much of the upside as possible - considering there is execution risk tied to it.”
Jae Chung
Since you can only sell once, you want to leverage the additional value you bring to a strategic buyer. And with all the uncertainties that come with execution post-acquisition, you want it paid out up front. It’s on you to make the upside feel real enough to the buyer for you to price it in - without having to rely on an earn-out.
Telling a Story That Resonates Across the Table
To price in your potential upside, you’ll have to win over two audiences with different view points:
Product leaders, who care about integration, roadmap alignment, and tech quality.
Finance leaders, who care about risk, return, and certainty.
Your narrative has to speak to both:
Proof of product-market fit, adoption, workflow-depth, and customer stickiness.
Clear upside: roadmap acceleration, cross-sell potential, or access to new segments.
As a seller, the cross-sell narrative is one of the most powerful levers you have: ”Your customer base is 10x our size. If just 20% adopt our product, you make your money back in months - not years.”
That kind of upside won’t show up in your financials but you have to bake it into your post-merger synergies & forecast. It’s what gets buyers excited and stretches valuation potential - even if they initially refuse to pay for it.
“The finance side doesn’t want to pay for imagination. We usually try not to price in uncertain upside but to put milestones against it in the earn-out.”
Jae Chung
The Earn-Out Dance
The compromise usually comes in the form of an earn-out: a deal structure where parts are only paid out once certain post-acquisition targets are met. The more upside you pitch, the more buyers will want to de-risk through earn-outs. I remember managing the team of Parkimeter and their earn-out after the acquisition by EasyPark in 2021 - it taught me how misalignment on earn-out incentives can kill momentum:
Sellers want binary, qualitative milestones: Did we ship it? Did we integrate it?
Buyers want quantitative outcomes: Revenue lift, customer migration, product adoption.
In our case specifically, the Parkimeter team remained in place yet had little influence over development priorities at EasyPark. Their earn-out relied on product integration but they couldn’t steer the roadmap.
“At SDL, I saw so many acquisitions become painful because earn-outs were solely tied to commercial results. But the sellers had no control over GTM after the acquisition.”
Peter-Paul Houtman
Especially in big organizations, a misalignment between earn-out milestones and allocated resources is why acquisitions die. Either you give sellers control over the things they’re being measured on, or you have to make sure earn-out milestones are directly tied to resources. The best earn-outs balance both:
Let sellers deliver against what they control.
Tie upside to business impact in a way buyers can confidently underwrite.
3. Prep Like a Pro, Avoid Last-Mile Deal Killers
We’ve all seen deals fall apart on the last stretch. Sometimes, it’s just misalignment: people couldn’t get on the same page. But often, it’s something that could’ve been prevented: unclear IP ownership, missing documentation, limited access to engineering teams, or no clear evidence the seller can deliver on their own plans. Buyers want to see your future promises are grounded in past execution. You need to run a product and tech DD process that builds mutual trust not just in your stack - but in your team and their ability to follow through.
You Can Only Lose
Due Diligence is neither a box-ticking exercise nor is it the time to sell your company - you’ve done that long before. At this point, investors and buyers are simply looking for reasons not to do the deal - or to get a discount. When raising a round from multiple investors, you can often leverage different term sheets to get the deal you want. When closing a sale, however, you've likely signed an LOI or MOU with exclusivity (no-shop clause) - granting the buyer a set amount of time (often 90 days) to conduct due diligence and negotiate final terms without competition. In other words: in theory, you‘re bound to negotiate with just one party. Buyers constantly use those circumstances to their advantage: dropping the price or pushing for new terms at the last minute. Best way to avoid being squeezed on the final stretch is making sure you have enough runway to afford to wait or pass, pushing for a go-shop clause, or a shorter exclusivity period. You should also make sure you don’t start from scratch: put your feelers out towards existing partners early on to make sure you have alternatives with shorter deal cycles in case the wedding is off.
Preparing for a good DD then means uncovering your own skeletons - ideally cleaning them up but at least prepping counter arguments before buyers ask questions. For investors or buyers, it‘s about de-risking:
Can we trust the numbers?
Can we trust the tech?
Can we trust the team?
You won’t win the deal here but you may very well lose it. Let’s talk about Product and Tech pitfalls you need to avoid to make sure your deal crosses the finish line.
Your History Doesn’t Match the Future
The best predictor of future execution is past delivery. Buyers want to know: have you historically made good on your own plans?
Do your internal metrics match your narrative?
If you're pitching scale, do you have the reliability and usage data to back it up? If you’re claiming PMF and stickiness, does NRR support it?Is your team shipping or firefighting?
One of the most telling indicators is how engineering resources are allocated.
“If 90% of your teams are patching bugs and keeping things afloat, your promised roadmap probably won’t materialize.”
Peter-Paul Houtman
This is why showing what’s already live and working matters. Especially when it comes to integrations and customer value.
Do you have an overlap in or integrations with mutual clients?
If your product is already embedded in the buyer’s ecosystem, it gives confidence - not just technically, but commercially.
“If we see the product integrated with 15+ of our own clients, that doesn’t just bring technical confidence - it tells us the market really wants it.”
Peter-Paul Houtman
That kind of proof of concept isn’t just a green flag during due diligence - it ties in with your story during valuation talks: buyers no longer have to imagine the cross-sell opportunity - they can see it.
Clean Code Is a Reflection of a Healthy Org
Clean code is another way to de-risk the investment: it buys time post acquisition and allows for resources to be spent elsewhere. Buyers looking into your code aren’t trying to pry - they’re trying to gauge whether their asset is going to break the second they own it.
If the team claims to be innovating but engineers are firefighting 90% of the time - the story doesn’t add up. That being said, sloppy product quality metrics rarely exist in isolation - if your uptime is weak, it’ll likely show in churn already.
Technical Ownership: Don’t Let Legal Kill the Deal
While code quality might be less relevant in case you plan to migrate customers anyways, ownership issues are definitely a killer. It’s murky answers to ownership questions that get buyers spooked:
IP stuck with early contractors,
Unclear licensing agreements,
Government-linked IP,
Over-reliance on LLMs or third-party models with murky differentiation and little clarity on what’s truly proprietary.
“Since you cannot easily transfer IP in Germany, we had to track down old contractors and sign retroactive license agreements before we could close the deal with Parkling. The code was fine - the ownership was the problem.”
Peter-Paul Houtman
The takeaway: even if you don’t plan to sell anytime soon, get your house in order.
Document everything and clean up contracts. You only sell once - don’t let this tank your deal.
Access Builds Trust
Nothing cultivates doubt like a black box. Buyers don’t just want a slick demo - they want real access.
“When I was at Booking, FareHarbor invited our teams to fly over and go line-by-line through their code. That level of transparency set the tone for the rest of the process.”
Jae Chung
Access also gives buyers a feel for your people: how decisions are made, how you operate, whether your product and tech teams can actually collaborate with each other. If you're worried about exposing your IP to a direct competitor, use a trusted third party. Just know it won’t build the same trust as working side-by-side.
Post-Merger Stability: People, Not Just Product
Your tech might survive the deal - but will your team? As sellers, we often over-estimate the value of our team. We try to convince the buyer everyone would be vital for the product’s success post-acquisition. However, there actually are key people, we need to retain to extract the asset’s value. Doing so is in the interest of both sellers (due to their earn-out or in case of a stock-deal) and buyers. The key is in good documentation, disbursing critical knowledge (bus-factor), and identifying and retaining the ones vital for achieving the objectives post-acquisition.
“We also looked at the team behind the product. Did they understand the full customer funnel? Had they built the capabilities to keep improving and optimizing at scale?”
Jae Chung
This affects deal structure, too. If earn-outs or retention packages only reward commercial outcomes, technical leadership might disengage. Make sure to build resilience into your team and try to tie a fair chunk of an earn-out to technical delivery - not just revenue.
“You don’t just acquire code. You acquire the knowledge inside the org. If your senior engineers walk post-acquisition, part of the value walks with them.”
Peter-Paul Houtman
Need Help?
Already applying these best practices? If you’re wondering where your team stands or if you need a fresh perspective: I offer performance scans that pinpoint the gap between your status quo and your next financial milestone.
With years of experience advising entrepreneurs and leading businesses through multiple successful exits, I bring a unique toolkit of frameworks, strategies, and best practices to position you for fundraising or help guide you through a strategic exit.
Let’s connect and explore how to set you up for your next major milestone. Happy to help you navigate these waters.
Coming Up…
The following 3 articles go into other core business areas and their most relevant metrics. Fueled with the insights of experts in their fields, they will help you get each business unit in shape for your next financial milestone. Next up is …
Forging great customer relationships is just the beginning. Learn how to build true retention machines: understand and forecast churn triggers, drive stickiness through integration partnerships, and grow NRR drawing on proven land & expand strategies.
Man this is awesome. Marked improvement from previous newsletters! Really enjoyed the personal antidotes from Peter and Jae.
Excellent write-up again! Especially the struggle of vision vs. iteration is one I've seen up close at several businesses. Looking forward to read your views on customer retention.