Arguments, not evidence. Where the fashion of the month collides with the maths a CFO actually reads. The formal working papers live in Resources. This is the plain-spoken version.
Sales and finance both live in numbers anyone can check. Marketing spent fifteen years and 15,000 tools building an industry to borrow a share of sales' number, instead of owning the one the CFO actually wanted: fully loaded CAC.
Read →Nobody wanders into the finance team with a view on the deferred revenue policy, yet it happens to marketing daily. The gap is not talent or seniority; it is that the business never understood what marketing is for. That is ours to close.
Read →The fractional pitch turns on one untested word: afford. You do not fund a marketing leader out of revenue, but out of the return on what marketing already spends, and that return is measurable.
Read →A third of the Fortune 500 has dropped the CMO title. The uncomfortable reading is not that marketing was demoted, but that the seat is going to whoever answers for the commercial number, and that number is sitting unowned.
Read →Sales owns the revenue line, and two functions cannot own the same number. Marketing's number is the one nobody else holds: the efficiency of how customers are won.
Read →The panic, and the tools sold to chase dark channels, are not real. The honest answer is not a cleverer way to see. It is a brand worth recommending and unit economics worth watching.
Read →B2B marketing built the most sophisticated measurement function in business history, and still cannot answer its simplest commercial question. How the ecosystem came to answer everything except the one that matters.
Read →A $300M business spending $3M a year to win customers worth roughly $40 each. What the unit economics question revealed, and what changed once someone finally asked it.
Read →No posts under that filter.