views
Most roofing CEOs will tell you: “I run a roofing business.” The smart ones say something else entirely: “I run a sales and marketing business that happens to sell roofs.” That distinction is the difference between a $10m local contractor and a $500m platform. Because operations are table stakes. You
views
In business (and private equity especially), the danger isn’t always in the obvious losses. It’s in the near-wins. The times when you think you’ve got it wrapped up, only to watch it slip away through complacency, ego, or poor execution. I’ve seen deals where the thesis
views
Most firms treat rainmakers like anomalies. The ones that last treat them like a strategy. Why? Because rainmakers aren’t just talented individuals, they create leverage. • A great fundraiser doesn’t just bring in capital once. They create durable LP relationships that fund multiple vintages. • A sourcing MD doesn’t
views
But it is going to make large chunks of the industry look embarrassingly outdated. • Deal Sourcing: The average associate spends ~60% of their time sifting through teasers, scraping LinkedIn, and chasing bankers. An AI-driven sourcing engine can screen tens of thousands of businesses against an investment thesis in minutes. Pattern
views
It sounds clever: neat pieces, predictable moves, a brilliant strategist “seeing 10 moves ahead.” But the problem is, chess is finite. You win, lose, or draw. Outcomes are immediate and visible. Once the king falls, it’s game over. That’s not business. Business is Go. In chess, the board
views
They’re the cotton candy of marketing metrics.....sweet for about 3 seconds, then you realise you’ve ingested air. Impressions don’t pay salaries. Clicks don’t cover debt covenants. Cash flow does. Customer LTV does. Gross margin does. Yet, I still see portfolio company boards patting themselves on
views
But who are we actually serving? LPs, obviously. They give us the money. But portcos… they make us the money. So here’s the uncomfortable truth most GPs won’t say out loud: PE firms treat LPs like customers. But treat portcos like cost centers. You pitch the LPs. You
views
Every week I hear a new acronym agencies are peddling: • LLM SEO • Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) • AIO (AI Optimization) • Conversational SEO • Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) • RAI (Retrieval-Augmented Indexing) Pick your flavour of alphabet soup.....none of it has a foundation. I’ve spoken to a dozen agencies in the last
views
Plenty think they have. They’ll show you their org charts, explain how value creation is now a “core capability,” and proudly announce that every portfolio company has a VCP tracked in Asana. But scratch the surface, and what you find is usually a muddled mix of consulting theatre, internal
views
Why? Because the call center model is a perfect storm of inefficiency: • High cost, low value-add: Average U.S. call center agent wage is ~$38k. Add training, turnover (30–45% annually), and management overhead… the true cost per seat is easily $60k+. • Customer experience is broken: Long waits, scripted answers,
views
We’ve been here before. The dot-com bubble. Social media “revolutions.” Crypto and web3. Same playbook: • Hype attracts capital. • Capital attracts consultants. • Consultants attract grifters. • Then the floor falls out. AI isn’t special, it’s just next in line. Signs are everywhere: • PE firms bragging about “AI initiatives” that
views
The old model was deceptively simple: • Load up on cheap debt. • Buy a business at 8x, sell it at 12x. • Slap on a board of grey-haired ex-CEOs. • Add a 100-day plan, mostly cost-cutting and vague “strategic priorities.” • Hope the market bails you out with multiple expansion. That model worked. And