Priced Too High We represented a founder who developed innovative technology to enable the transmission of documents through the Internet, without an Internet connection (hey, it was 1995). We argued that having a low price-point would make it less likely that others would reverse engineer and launch competing technology. The company argued it had first-mover advantage and opted to price high as a means to generate near-term operating profit while assuming they could lower prices as competition evolved. What happened? Another company developed a similar technology, priced-low and as they started to gain market share, their company was acquired for $180+ million. Meanwhile, the company who invented the category struggled to survive.

Passed On Acquisition We represented a founder in the real estate services sector. In 2019, the company was contacted by a failing business that we thought had great infrastructure, solid traction, good management and significant upside potential. We argued that acquiring the business would add significant strategic value and substantially increase the valuation of the business. The company dismissed the idea without serious consideration. What happened? The failing business completed a reverse merger, raised capital, regained its footing and ultimately became NASDAQ listed with a $1+ billion valuation. 

Too Myopic The founder of our business started his second public company when he was about 29 years old. With no background in the sector, no connections and limited investment capital, but using an innovative growth-hack, he was able to scale very substantially within a very short period of time. Rather than recruiting additional management talent, he personally oversaw every aspect of the business. It was the classic mistake of working "in the business" rather than "on" the business. While successful by most measures, the business never got enough scale to fully capitalize on the unique opportunity it had. Easily, a nine figure doozie.