Loading
We help leadership understand pricing, unit contribution, acquisition economics, capacity and business-model constraints, so growth decisions improve more than revenue alone.
These are the symptoms that bring owners and executives to this work: a business that keeps growing without getting easier. Open any symptom for the economic question underneath it.
Growth that doesn't create economic value is expensive to unwind: the customers have been promised, the capacity hired, the discounts normalised. The cheapest time to find the leak is before committing to more of it.
Profitable growth is not cost cutting with better branding. It means growing revenue quality, not just revenue: winning work that contributes after the full cost of acquiring, delivering and supporting it. It means contribution: knowing what each product, customer and job adds once its true costs are counted. It means cash, with growth funded at a pace collections can sustain. It means capacity: expanding where the business can deliver without degrading, and fixing the bottleneck before scaling into it. And it means resilience, with economics that survive a demand dip or cost shock, not ones tuned to a best case. The question this work answers is rarely 'how do we grow more?' It is 'which growth is worth having, and what has to be true first?'
The gap between list price and realised price, and what the architecture of prices, tiers and discounts is doing to contribution.
Whether additional volume still contributes at the margin, or growth has pushed past the point where it pays.
How the blend of products, customers and channels shifts overall economics, often more powerfully than price or volume alone.
Acquisition cost against the contribution a customer actually delivers, and how long payback really takes.
The delivery, support and service costs that cluster unevenly across customers, and quietly decide which relationships pay.
Where the bottleneck sits, what an hour of it is worth, and at what volume the current model stops working.
The output is not a report about the business. It's a basis for the specific calls leadership is already trying to make.
Which products, segments and channels earn more investment, because their marginal economics say so, not because they're the loudest.
Where price is leaking contribution, what a defensible architecture looks like, and what each change risks in volume, stated as a range, not a promise.
Offers and service models whose cost-to-serve has outgrown their price: candidates for restructuring before they're candidates for discontinuing.
Where capacity or cost-to-serve constraints are worth engineering away, and the contribution case that justifies the build.
The work, customers or expansion moves whose economics don't clear the bar, and the evidence that makes that call defensible internally.
Where the honest answer is 'the data can't decide this yet', and the smallest experiment or sample that would.
Profitable Growth is the problem; these are the pathways that address it. The diagnostic locates which economic question matters most. The specialist work then goes deep on that one.
Owns: revenue that outruns profit · unclear margins · spreading discounts · rising CAC · overloaded delivery · untested expansion cases.
The economic question isn't defined yet.
A fixed-scope baseline of where the business creates and loses value.
The entry point: it identifies which of the specialist pathways the evidence actually points to.
No. Your accountant tells you what happened, correctly, for compliance. This work is decision economics: what a price change, expansion, account or hiring round is likely to do to contribution, cash and capacity, expressed in ranges leadership can act on. It complements accounting; it doesn't replace it, and it isn't tax or financial product advice.
Usually not: almost nobody has clean cost-to-serve or cohort data at the start. We work with what exists, fill gaps with sampling and explicit assumptions, and present results as ranges with the assumptions attached. What we won't do is dress a guess up as a measurement. If the data genuinely can't support a decision, the honest output is 'test this first', and we'll say so.
That's often the best time. Growth locks patterns in (pricing, account structures, capacity models), and they're cheapest to correct before scale multiplies them. If the economics are genuinely strong, the analysis confirms which growth to double down on, which is a useful answer too.
By design: estimates are shown as ranges, every material assumption is written into an assumption register, sensitivity analysis shows which assumptions the decision actually hinges on, and sample-based numbers are labelled as such. A decision made on an honest range beats one made on a precise-looking number that nobody could defend.
No, and treat anyone who does with suspicion. The analysis identifies where value is created and lost and what each decision is likely to do; results depend on the business making and executing those decisions, and on conditions no analysis controls. What we commit to is that every number comes with its basis attached.
The Business Economics Health Check comes first: a short self-assessment that identifies the single most material economic question facing the business. The Unit Economics Calculator goes deeper (contribution, break-even and payback) and is worth using once you have usable inputs like prices, volumes and rough costs. Neither requires an account for basic use; an account only becomes relevant if you want to save scenarios.
It starts with a short economics fit check, then typically a Business Economics Diagnostic, a fixed-scope baseline of how the business makes and loses money and which economic question matters most. From there, the specialist pathways (unit economics, pricing, capacity, forecasting, business model, expansion) are scoped individually, so you only go deep where the evidence points.
They share the business-economics pathway and complement each other. Marketing performance work asks whether acquisition is executing well; this work asks whether the customers being acquired are worth what they cost. Rising CAC is often a symptom both ends meet in the middle on: economics sets the ceiling, marketing works within it.
Yes, where the roadmap calls for it. Repricing support, forecast models handed over as working tools, capacity dashboards or automation that relieves cost-to-serve can be built by our engineering team, but the analysis stands alone, and you're free to implement internally or with other partners.