The psychology of self-deception can be potent, perhaps even insidious. When you're looking at an established, often modest, software business that’s suddenly convinced it has found the philosopher's stone in the form of a new module, it’s almost quaint at first. But quaint turns dangerous when confidence outruns data.
You see these a fair bit. Decent little businesses, ticking
along in a niche, maybe making a comfortable living for the owner. They’ve got
a solid, if unspectacular, customer base. Revenue is flat, or growing at a
snail's pace, often for years. Then, when the conversation turns to a potential
sale, out comes the "transformative module."
I recall one such case. Let's call the company
"SteadySoft." They’d been in their vertical for nearly two decades.
Reliable product, loyal customers, but sales had been bumping along the same
low ceiling for the better part of a decade. We were doing our usual due
diligence, understanding the core business, when the owner, let's call him
Arthur, unveiled "ModuleX." His eyes lit up. This, he explained with
fervent conviction, was the game-changer. This was going to take SteadySoft from
a $2 million-a-year operation to a $10 million, maybe $20 million, player. The
hockey-stick projection chart for ModuleX was a thing of beauty, a steep ascent
into the stratosphere, leaving the gentle slopes of the core business far
behind.
The pitch for ModuleX was passionate. Arthur genuinely
believed it. He'd poured his heart, soul, and a good chunk of the company's
(modest) R&D budget into it for the last couple of years. The problem
wasn't his belief; the problem was how that belief was coloring everything,
especially his valuation expectations for the whole company.
When you dig into these "transformative module"
narratives, you start to see familiar patterns of self-persuasion:
- The
Past is Another Country: Suddenly, the fifteen years of
flat-lining sales are dismissed as ancient history. ModuleX is so
revolutionary, apparently, that the company’s established performance, its
ingrained sales processes, its existing customer inertia, are all
irrelevant. "This changes everything," they'll say. Does it,
really?
- Aspirational
Adoption Rates: When you ask how many existing customers have
signed up for ModuleX, or even committed to a pilot, the answers often get
a bit… fuzzy. "Oh, there's huge interest." "We've had lots
of positive conversations." "A few are testing it." But
firm commitments? Signed contracts for the new, premium-priced module?
Often, they are conspicuously absent or very, very few. The projections
are built on hope, not on hard purchase orders.
- Underestimation
of the "Lift": Selling a new, potentially complex,
module into an existing, often change-averse, customer base is hard graft.
It requires a different sales motion, perhaps different skills. The
assumption that because customers like the old product, they'll automatically
flock to the new, more expensive one, is a leap of faith. And if it's
meant to attract new customers, then you're essentially
launching a new product into the market, with all the attendant risks and
costs, but often without a new product launch budget or team.
- The
"Sunk Cost" Fallacy, Glorified: Arthur had invested so
much in ModuleX, emotionally and financially, that to admit it might not be
transformative was unthinkable. It had to work. So, every
polite nod from a customer during a demo was interpreted as a pending
sale. Every "that's interesting" was mentally logged as
"they're in."
It's not that new modules can't be valuable. They absolutely
can. Incremental improvements, new features, add-ons – these are the lifeblood
of a healthy software business. But the narrative of a single module suddenly
catapulting a historically slow-growth company into hyperdrive needs an
extraordinary level of scrutiny.
This is where, again, you realise the easiest person to fool
is yourself. Arthur wasn't trying to deceive us. He had thoroughly
convinced himself that ModuleX was the key to unlocking a
valuation that the core business, on its own, simply couldn't justify. His
pitch was less about the existing, proven (if modest) business, and more about
the unproven, high-potential (but high-risk) future he’d pinned on this one
development.
Our job, then, isn't to crush dreams, but to separate the
dream from the P&L, the aspiration from the auditable. The mental checklist
adapts:
- Baseline
Reality: What is the sustainable performance of the core business,
stripping away the ModuleX projections for a moment? That’s your anchor.
- Evidence
of Module Traction: Not "interest," but actual sales,
commitments, or at the very least, advanced-stage pilots with clear
success metrics. How many, and at what price point?
- The
"Why Now?" for Transformation: If this module is so
obviously brilliant, why wasn't something like it developed and successful
years ago? What has fundamentally changed in the market or the company's
capabilities to make this the moment?
- Risk
Assessment of the Module Itself: What if it takes twice as long
to get traction? What if adoption is half of what's projected? What's the
downside to the core business if resources continue to be poured into a
module that doesn't fly?
- Seller's
Detachment (or Lack Thereof): Can Arthur discuss ModuleX with a
degree of objectivity? Can he acknowledge the risks and uncertainties, or
is any questioning met with unwavering, almost defensive, faith? This is a
big tell.
- Capability
to Execute the "New": Does the existing team have the
skillset, the bandwidth, and the sales & marketing oomph to actually
make this new module take off in a transformative way? Often, the very
stasis of the core business suggests limitations in these areas.
We've walked away from deals where the core business was
okay, but the valuation was being driven sky-high by an unproven
"transformative module." The sellers had looked at their creation,
fallen in love with its potential, and priced the entire company based on that
dream fully materializing. They’d forgotten the years of hard-won, steady, but
unspectacular, reality that formed the bulk of the asset.
Richard Feynman (Nobel Physicist) was right. It’s easy to construct a narrative that makes you feel good, that justifies your efforts, that paints a rosy picture. And when you’re selling your business, that narrative can become incredibly powerful, especially to yourself. The challenge for the buyer is to see the whole tapestry, not just the shiniest new thread, and to understand if the weaver has perhaps become a little too enchanted by their own design.