1. Understanding the current situation
We began with a situation analysis so the founders could see clearly where the business stood. We rebuilt the profit and loss into a standard format, brought the numbers together across the company’s entities in two countries, and built a cash and runway model under base, upside and downside cases. We also mapped how cash moved through the business, from winning the work to finally being paid for it.
This showed that the squeeze was a timing problem, not a broken business. The work was there and the margins held. Cash simply came in long after the work that earned it, because of how large corporates contract and pay. That changed the question in front of the founders: not whether the business worked, but how to fund the gap between doing the work and getting paid, while still investing in the product they were building.
2. Shaping the capital strategy
With the situation clear, we set out a capital strategy built around how the business actually makes money. Because the real problem was timing, we led with working-capital and receivables financing to close the gap between doing the work and getting paid. We added convertible funding for the product the team was building, and kept selective equity and strategic options open for later. We built the financial model and the materials behind the plan, including an information memorandum and a pitch deck, so each option had a clear and consistent case behind it.
This gave the founders a clear set of funding options, ordered by what fit the business best, instead of one broad ask. Each option came with its own requirements and cost, so it was easy to see what to pursue first and what would take longer. It also kept the plan tied to the real problem, which was getting cash in sooner rather than simply raising more.
3. Taking cost out of the base
Alongside the funding work, we reviewed the cost base to slow the cash going out and bring breakeven closer. We went through the costs line by line and showed the founders exactly where they could cut, including headcount and a number of technology costs the business no longer needed. We also compared the cost base with similar firms.
This gave the founders a clear, specific list of what to cut and how much each cut would save, so they could bring costs down carefully rather than across the board. Together with the capital strategy, it gave them two ways to close the same gap: bring cash in sooner, and spend less.
