We read models, board packs and diligence files for a living. These are the patterns that keep repeating.
Published roughly twice a month, with no sales sequence attached
Every observation here comes from work we have actually done. Client details are removed; the arithmetic is not.
Top-down revenue is the single most common reason a model fails its first diligence call. Here is what investors do with it, and what to build instead.
Read the article
Saad Khalid Partner | 6 min read
When we rebuild a model bottom-up, the runway date moves. Almost always earlier, and almost always for the same three reasons.
Proof of cash, owner benefit, revenue cut-off. If you have not tested these on yourself, someone else will test them on you.
What separates the two groups is not the business. It is whether the founder could defend their own assumptions in the room.
Lead with the number, then the reason. Most packs do the opposite and spend 11 pages arriving at the point.
Buyers negotiate the multiple in public and the peg in private. The peg is where the money quietly moves.
A single valuation method produces a figure. Three produce a range, and the disagreement between them is the useful part.
A close that lands on a date is worth more than a close that is technically perfect four weeks later.
15 of the last 30 models we reviewed had a hardcoded figure hiding inside a formula. Investors find them, and then they stop trusting the file.
Nothing published under that topic yet.
We are not neutral on all of these, and we say which way we lean and why.
Twice a month, one observation from a real file, with the arithmetic shown. No drip sequence, no webinars, and unsubscribe in one click.
Used for the newsletter and nothing else. We do not share it and we do not sell it.
Drawn from a real model, board pack or diligence file, anonymised.
The numbers behind the claim, so you can test it against your own file.
Something specific to look at in your own model this week.
