Selling an Asset

Which direction does this asset have a credible claim on — and does the architecture support it?

A sophisticated buyer will push on the growth story in the first meeting. Not the numbers — the structural argument behind them. Why will this company be worth more in three to five years? Which buyers believe in that move most — and which ones are you targeting because of it?

Most CIMs answer those questions with aspiration — market size, roadmap, competitive position. A buyer who has seen a hundred of these knows the difference between a narrative assembled for the document and one rooted in what the company is structurally positioned to do. The two-move framework surfaces that argument before you go to market — Move 1: what question the company is really organized around. Move 2: whether it's becoming workflow or environment — and tells you honestly which version of it the asset warrants.

The question every buyer asks
"Why will this be worth more in three years than it is today?"
The answer is either a claim or an argument. Claims invite pushback. Arguments invite conviction. The difference shows in the room — and in the multiple at close.
The question most CIMs can't answer
"What specifically is the move — and does the product architecture actually support it?"
Specificity is what separates a premium multiple from a negotiated one. A buyer who finds the gap between the narrative and the architecture during diligence uses it to reprice. A seller who finds it first uses it to position.
The problem

Most growth narratives are built. The right ones are found.

There is a difference between a narrative assembled from market data and a genuine argument rooted in what the company is structurally positioned to do. The two-move framework identifies which one you have — and builds the CIM around the honest version: the optionality argument if both moves are real, the infrastructure argument if they aren't.

Argument 01
The TAM argument
Market size projections tell a buyer how large the category could be. They do not tell a buyer why this specific company will capture a disproportionate share — or why that share will be worth more than the current multiple suggests. Every competitor in the category can make the same argument.
Invites skepticism
Argument 02
The roadmap argument
Future features are a bet, not an argument. A buyer pricing an acquisition is pricing what exists and what is credibly executable — not what the team hopes to build. A roadmap that depends on new capital and new ownership to materialize is the buyer's thesis, not the seller's.
Invites skepticism
Argument 03
The competitive position argument
Telling a buyer you are better than your competitors answers the question of execution inside the existing category frame. It does not answer whether the frame itself still has room to run — or whether AI is about to compress the multiple for everyone competing inside it.
Invites skepticism
The argument that holds
The two-move argument
This asset is positioned to address the underlying challenge its category was built to solve — and it has begun building the environment agents will depend on to do it. Here is the evidence both moves are real. Here is the buyer who will pay the most for that specific combination. Here is the argument that holds up in the room. If only one move is real, the honest infrastructure argument is built instead — targeted at the buyers for whom that is exactly what they want.
Invites conviction
The framework

Two questions that determine which argument your asset warrants.

The answer to both questions shapes everything: the equity story, the buyer universe, the management presentation brief, and the honest version of the CIM growth narrative. Getting the argument wrong — claiming optionality the architecture doesn't support — is more expensive than claiming infrastructure at the right multiple.

Move 01 — Question Diagnosis
Is this asset solving the right underlying challenge — or the one the category inherited?
Every category inherits a question from the problem that founded it. Most companies optimize that answer for years without examining whether it's still the right question. A company that has identified the underlying challenge — and is genuinely moving toward it — has a structural argument available that competitors inside the inherited frame can't make. That argument is the most defensible thing in a CIM. It's also the most frequently missing.
What this means for the equity story
If Move 1 is real, the growth narrative can make a category argument: the company is positioned ahead of where the market is moving. If it isn't, the honest story is operational — execution, expansion, infrastructure value. Both are legitimate. Only one of them is true for this asset.
Move 02 — Agentic Positioning
Is this an environment agents will depend on — or a workflow they'll automate away?
In 2026 every sophisticated buyer is asking some version of this question. Most sellers aren't ready for it. A product where something irreplaceable has accumulated — something agents have to operate inside rather than recreate from outside — has an agentic argument available. A workflow product doesn't. The difference isn't just about AI risk. It's about which buyers will pay a premium, and why, and what the value creation thesis looks like under their ownership.
What this means for buyer targeting
Move 2 determines which buyers should be prioritized. A PE firm with an operational thesis prices a workflow asset differently than one underwriting an environment. A strategic acquirer who can supply what's missing in Move 2 sees a different asset than one who can't. The matrix tells you who to call first.

The honest version of the CIM is the most valuable version. A buyer who is sold optionality and finds infrastructure will reprice on the way to close. A buyer who is sold a clear, specific thesis they believe in — whether that's infrastructure at the right multiple or a genuine category argument — will protect the multiple.

The two-move framework produces whichever version is true. If the asset warrants the optionality argument, it builds that case with analytical foundation rather than aspiration. If it doesn't, it builds the infrastructure argument honestly — and targets the buyers for whom that is exactly what they want.

The worked example

See the framework applied to a real sell-side process.

The sell-side category brief applies both moves to a real category — where each vendor sits on the two-move matrix, what the equity story looks like for two different asset profiles, and the two questions a sophisticated buyer will ask in the management presentation. The worked example covers Revenue Intelligence. The underlying framework — the two moves, the matrix, and buyer targeting by quadrant — applies to any B2B SaaS category.

Inside the Sell-Side Category Brief — Revenue Intelligence
Section 01
The question the category has been answering for 32 years
  • The inherited question and where it came from
  • Why the answer hardened into the category's identity
  • Where the ceiling is — and when buyers started finding it
Section 02
The two-move framework applied to Revenue Intelligence
  • Move 1: the underlying challenge vs the inherited question
  • Move 2: environment vs workflow in an agentic world
  • How the two moves interact — and why the sequence matters
Section 03
Fifteen vendors assessed on both dimensions
  • Where each vendor sits on Move 1 and Move 2
  • The open position — vacant, and what it means for positioning
  • Three directions and which assets have a credible claim on each
Section 04
Which direction does your asset have a credible claim on?
  • Direction 1, 2, and 3 — the sell-side claim each supports
  • What the product architecture needs to support the claim
  • How to verify the claim before the buyer does
Section 05
Two CIM narratives — the honest versions
  • Infrastructure narrative: what to say when the asset is inside the inherited frame
  • Optionality narrative: what to say when both moves are real
  • Why the honest version is the most valuable version
Section 06
Buyer targeting — who to call first and why
  • How the matrix determines the buyer universe
  • PE buyer vs strategic acquirer — what each quadrant means for each
  • The buyer who will pay the most for each asset profile
Section 07
The two questions a sophisticated buyer will ask
  • What each question is designed to surface
  • How to prepare the CEO to own the argument in the room
  • What deflection signals — and how to fix it before the management presentation
Get the full brief

The sell-side category brief — Revenue Intelligence.

Two CIM narratives. Buyer targeting by quadrant. The two questions a sophisticated buyer will ask — and how to prepare the CEO to answer them. Sent directly to your inbox.

No list. No sequence. One brief, sent once.