Blog

9 min read

The body was discovered in a boardroom.

The victim was an enterprise deal.

By all accounts, it should have survived.

The solution was strong. The pricing was competitive. The vendor was experienced. The proposal was polished.

Yet somehow the deal died anyway.

The detectives arrive and begin collecting evidence.

Marker #1: CFO Concern.

Marker #2: Weak Business Case.

Marker #3: Too Much Risk.

Marker #4: No Internal Champion.

The final report comes back with an unexpected conclusion:

Cause of death: Perfect Proposal.

Not because the proposal was bad.

Because the proposal was asking the buyer to make a decision they weren’t ready to defend.

This is why enterprise deals stall, and where most B2B deals die.

Not because the solution is wrong.

Because the decision feels too risky.

I learned this lesson a few years ago when a client came to me with a problem that looked like a sales issue on the surface.

Successful company. Great product. Profitable book of business from existing contracts.

But they hadn’t closed a new customer in years.

The team was excellent at keeping clients happy, always adding value, always doing good work. But when it came to landing net new logos, every opportunity ended the same way.

Prospects would listen, nod, ask good questions, then disappear into the procurement black hole.

So when I took over, I decided we needed to stop trying to sell software.

Instead, we introduced a paid process audit. A diagnostic.

The prospect paid a small amount. We mapped their operation, identified inefficiencies, and delivered recommendations.

No software pitch. Just a clear report showing what wasn’t working and what it was costing them.

Three things happened immediately.

First, my client became a supplier on record. That meant access. Real access.

Not a single discovery call with a gatekeeper, but meetings with department heads, finance, operations, and the people living with the problem every day.

Second, they stopped showing up as vendors trying to close a deal. They showed up as advisors who had already done the work.

By the time the diagnostic was complete, they knew almost as much about the client’s operation as the client did.

Third, the software sale became obvious.

The recommendations in the report pointed directly to the solution they’d been trying to sell for years.

But now the buyer was asking for it instead of being sold to.

In the first three months, they closed two million dollars in new business.

The software didn’t change. The pricing didn’t change. The offer changed.

The Murder Weapon Was Risk

Every failed deal leaves evidence behind.

Rarely is the evidence a bad product.

More often it’s risk.

Risk of looking foolish.

Risk of wasting budget.

Risk of choosing the wrong vendor.

Risk of having to explain the decision six months later when somebody asks why it didn’t work.

When you send a proposal, you think the buyer is evaluating features, timelines, deliverables, and pricing.

They’re not.

They’re asking completely different questions.

What happens if this doesn’t work?

How do I explain this to my CFO?

What’s the smallest commitment I can make to test this?

Is this worth the political risk of championing internally?

How quickly will I see results?

Your proposal answers almost none of these questions.

It explains what you’ll deliver.

The buyer isn’t buying what you deliver.

They’re buying the decision to move forward.

And that decision has to survive a gauntlet you never see.

This is where most deals stall.

The Crime Scene Is Getting More Complicated: Why Enterprise Deals Stall

Twenty years ago, one or two people could approve a purchase.

Today, every deal has a growing list of suspects.

Procurement.

Finance.

Operations.

Legal.

Executive leadership.

Department heads.

Each one brings another opportunity for hesitation, objection, delay, or outright rejection.

The average B2B purchase now involves 13 stakeholders. Nearly 89% of buying decisions cross multiple departments.

For larger deals over $250,000, you’re looking at 19 external stakeholders just to close.

And here’s the part that kills deals.

Seventy-four percent of buying teams experience unhealthy conflict during the decision process.

Not healthy debate.

Unhealthy conflict.

The kind that creates delay, indecision, and eventually ghosting.

On top of that, 79% of purchases now require CFO approval regardless of who owns the original budget.

Your champion might love you.

But if they can’t build a business case that survives finance scrutiny, the deal dies quietly.

And you’re only getting 17% of the buyer’s total purchasing time, split across every vendor they’re considering.

More stakeholders. More scrutiny. More risk aversion.

More stakeholders. More scrutiny. More risk aversion.

The companies that close faster aren’t just better at selling. Their offer is designed to move through a committee with the least friction.

Your Champion Is Standing in the Line of Fire

Buying decisions today aren’t about better, faster, or cheaper.

They’re about making the person championing the decision feel safe.

Your buyer has to stand in front of their CFO, operations lead, executive team, and procurement department.

They have to defend the purchase.

If they can’t do that confidently, the deal stalls.

Not because your solution is wrong.

Because the decision feels dangerous.

This changes everything.

You’re not selling to a company.

You’re equipping a person to sell internally on your behalf.

If your offer doesn’t help them do that, you’ve left them exposed.

The Premature Pitching Trap

Most vendors pitch far too early.

You get a meeting.

You run discovery.

You send a proposal.

Then you wait.

The problem isn’t the proposal.

The problem is you’re asking someone to make a significant decision before they’ve experienced your thinking.

Before they trust you.

Before they’re confident you understand their business better than anyone else.

It’s actually a terrible idea to start pitching your thing if you don’t know whether the customer even wants you.

The diagnostic-first approach solves this.

Not as a sales tactic.

As a genuine service that creates the conditions for a sale.

You’re not giving away free consulting.

You’re charging for a small engagement that does three things simultaneously.

First, it qualifies the buyer.

If they won’t invest a small amount to understand their problem, they won’t invest in the larger solution.

Second, it positions you as a trusted advisor rather than a vendor.

You’ve already delivered value.

The relationship begins with proof rather than promise.

Third, it maps the buying committee before the major proposal arrives.

You’re no longer selling blind.

You know who makes the decision, what they care about, and what objections are likely to surface.

The Four Elements of the Easy Yes

Risk Reversal

The buyer needs a way to test your thinking without committing to the full engagement.

At Tech Torque, we use the Market Decider.

It’s a small paid engagement where we frame the business, identify opportunities, and uncover commercial bottlenecks. Low commitment. High clarity.

Low commitment.

High clarity.

By the time it’s complete, the customer recognises we understand their business as well as they do.

I often describe it as a first date.

We need to discover whether they’re a good fit for us.

They need to discover whether we’re a good fit for them.

That way, nobody gets trapped in a long-term engagement that was never going to succeed.

The result?

We close Market Deciders significantly faster than trying to move someone into a long-term commitment.

It reduces risk for the customer and for us.

Internal Sellability

If your buyer can’t explain your offer to their CFO in one sentence, the deal stalls.

You need a simple value proposition.

A one-page summary.

A clear ROI framework.

Your champion is already doing the difficult work of selling internally.

If you haven’t equipped them with language they can confidently use, you’ve made their job harder.

Clear Next Step

Not “contact us.”

Not “book a demo.”

A specific, low-friction action.

Book a Market Decider.

Schedule a 20-minute review.

Download a diagnostic framework.

The next step should feel smaller than the final decision.

You’re not asking them to buy.

You’re asking them to build confidence.

Outcome Framing

Lead with the result.

Not the method.

“We help SaaS companies identify exactly where their commercial system is leaking revenue.”

That’s far stronger than:

“We provide strategic consulting including market analysis, positioning workshops, and sales enablement.”

Buyers don’t care about your process.

They care about the outcome.

Frame everything around what changes for them.

The Easy Yes Solves the Case

The diagnostic isn’t charity.

It’s a designed entry point.

When we introduced this model at Tech Torque, conversion rates changed immediately.

Prospects who completed the Market Decider moved to the next stage at three times the rate of those who didn’t.

Not because we became better salespeople.

Because they had already experienced the value.

Stephane Budo at Vigilant.IT experienced this firsthand:

“The questions Matthew asked spoke to things we’ve always known, but never really analysed in a strategic way. Apart from highlighting some critical shortfalls in how we were going about trying to grow our business, one of the biggest revelations was that we weren’t focusing on our best target clients. Originally, we never really believed in marketing, and we didn’t want to invest in marketing. This process has changed us, mainly because it does work. For me it’s been a total turnaround. Now I see the light.”

The Market Decider was the Easy Yes.

The ongoing engagement followed because the first step delivered proof.

The role of the offer is not to close the sale.

The role of the offer is to progress the sale.

Stop Trying to Write a Better Proposal

If your deals keep dying, don’t ask how to improve the proposal.

Ask what killed the last one.

Follow the evidence.

Was it budget?

Risk?

Internal politics?

Lack of an executive champion?

Too many stakeholders?

No compelling business case?

Most enterprise deals don’t die from bad solutions.

They die from difficult decisions.

The companies that grow fastest aren’t necessarily the ones with the best products.

They’re the ones that make buying feel safe.

Because the easiest decision almost always wins.

At Tech Torque, we’ve built our entire offer ladder around this principle.

The Market Decider is the Easy Yes.

A small engagement that builds trust, reduces risk, and proves fit.

The Growth Accelerator is the longer partnership that follows.

Each step is designed to make the next step obvious.

If your proposals are going quiet, if deals are stalling, or if you’re getting meetings without conversions, the problem may not be your service.

It may be your offer.

Book a Market Decider session and we’ll show you exactly where friction is slowing your commercial growth.

5 min read

TL;DR: Google submitted a compliance plan to the EU after a €2.95 billion fine, but instead of structural change, they’re proposing product tweaks. Brussels wants a breakup. The lesson for SaaS businesses: when your growth problem is structural, tactical fixes won’t save you.

Google submitted its compliance plan to the European Commission this week after a €2.95 billion fine for favouring its own adtech services.

They met the 60-day deadline. They also filed an appeal.

Instead of accepting a breakup, they’re offering product tweaks. More pricing flexibility. Better interoperability. Surface-level changes.

You’re not Google. You don’t have €13 billion for legal battles or 40% to 90% control of an entire industry.

But here’s why this matters: the same dynamic plays out in every market. Big player controls the infrastructure. Smaller players need access. When the rules change, who survives?

What Market Dominance Looks Like

Google controls 40% to 90% of every step in online advertising. Buy side, sell side, exchange. The whole stack.

The numbers tell the story:

$264.6 billion in advertising revenue (2024)

  • 75.6% of Google’s total revenue comes from ads
  • Fourth major EU penalty in a decade (€4.3B in 2018, €2.42B in 2017, €1.49B in 2019)

Fines don’t change behaviour when they’re line items on a balance sheet.

Publishers argue only a structural breakup will unlock the €120 billion European adtech market. Google argues divestment would be “technically unworkable” and destabilise the ecosystem.

Translation: breaking up the business would hurt revenue.

What this means for SaaS businesses: When someone else controls your distribution, pricing, and customer access, you don’t have a growth strategy. You have permission to exist.

Bottom line: Platform dependency isn’t a partnership. It’s a vulnerability dressed up as a distribution channel.

Why Behavioural Fixes Fail

Google’s compliance proposal includes pricing flexibility in Ad Manager and better tool interoperability. Product changes, not structural reform.

The European Commission’s position: when you own the buy side, sell side, and exchange, you control the entire transaction. That’s not a behaviour problem. That’s a structural conflict of interest.

Behavioural remedies have been tried twice before in EU history. They’re rare because they’re hard to reverse. Brussels says behavioural changes won’t fix this.

The US Justice Department agrees. Google faces trial on 22 September 2025 after a judge found illegal monopolies in its adtech business. The DOJ wants Google to sell its ad exchange AdX and divest its publisher ad server DoubleClick for Publishers.

Two continents. Same diagnosis.

The SaaS lesson: Product tweaks don’t fix business model problems. More features won’t fix positioning. Better onboarding won’t fix targeting. New messaging won’t fix a broken ICP.

When the issue is structural, the solution is structural.

Key insight: If you’re solving the same problem every quarter with different tactics, you’re treating symptoms. Go deeper.

Three Questions Every SaaS Business Should Ask

I’ve watched companies try to fix structural problems with tactical workarounds for 25 years. The outcome is always the same.

Where Are You Vulnerable to Platform Control?

List every platform that controls your customer acquisition, pricing, or distribution.

What happens if they change terms tomorrow? Increase fees by 30%? Prioritise competitors in search results? Cut off API access?

If you don’t have an answer, you have a dependency problem.

Google built a business where they control supply (publishers), demand (advertisers), and the marketplace connecting them. When one player owns all three sides, they set the rules.

Where do you lack control in your business?

Are You Fixing Symptoms or Structure?

High churn? Adding onboarding won’t fix it if you’re targeting the wrong customers.

Long sales cycles? More content won’t help if your positioning is unclear.

Stalled growth? New features won’t move the needle if your market is saturated or your ICP is wrong.

Google is offering product changes to avoid structural reform. Most SaaS businesses do the same thing. They add features instead of changing strategy. They optimise funnels instead of rethinking who they sell to.

Structural problems need structural solutions.

What Happens When Market Structures Shift?

Regulatory changes create opportunities. The EU and US are both forcing Google to restructure. Publishers will get new options. Advertisers will have new choices. The market will redistribute.

When dominant players get disrupted, there’s space to move.

Are you positioned to take advantage when structures crack?

Reality check: Most businesses aren’t ready because they’re too dependent on the current structure to pivot when it shifts.

What to Do Next

This isn’t about Google. It’s about what you do when you don’t have market dominance.

You won’t out-feature them. You won’t out-spend them. You need a different approach.

Audit Your Dependencies

Make a list of every platform, partner, or channel that controls access to your customers.

For each one, write down:

  • What percentage of your revenue depends on them
  • What happens if they change pricing or terms
  • Whether you have a viable alternative

That’s your vulnerability map.

Identify Structural Problems

Stop putting tactical fixes on strategic problems.

If your churn is high because you’re targeting the wrong customers, better onboarding won’t save you. If your sales cycle is too long because your positioning is muddy, more sales enablement content won’t shorten it.

Go to the root. Change the ICP. Rebuild the positioning. Shift the business model.

Build Owned Infrastructure

Own your customer relationships. Own your data. Own your distribution channels where possible.

It’s slower. It’s harder. It’s also the only way to control your own growth trajectory.

Google’s strategy works because they own the infrastructure. Publishers and advertisers need Google more than Google needs any individual publisher or advertiser.

The SaaS equivalent: own your audience, own your data, own your customer relationships. Don’t rent them from platforms that change the rules whenever it suits them.

Final word: Most companies choose cosmetic fixes because they’re cheaper, faster, and don’t threaten the existing business model. Real change requires breaking things that currently make money. The question isn’t whether you’ll need to make structural changes. The question is whether you’ll make them before the market forces them on you.

4 min read

Everything you know about building digital authority is about to become obsolete.

The warning signs started quietly. Google representatives like John Mueller and Duy Nguyen began saying backlinks matter less. Google now uses more signals to rank sites, with the main focus shifting to content quality and relevance.

That was the polite version.

Here’s what’s actually happening: AI systems bypass SEO-gamed sites entirely.

The Citation Economy Has Arrived

Want to know who’s winning the AI citation game?

Reddit leads at 40.1%. Wikipedia follows at 26.3%. Large language models lean heavily on user-generated content and community-maintained sources rather than traditional authoritative backlinks.

Think about that for a moment. Reddit. Not your carefully optimised, backlink-rich corporate website.

This represents a fundamental shift in how AI systems determine credibility. And the numbers get more uncomfortable from here.

Google’s AI Overviews show a 49% increase in impressions coupled with a 30% decrease in click-through rates. You get visibility without engagement. You get seen without being clicked. But invisibility? That guarantees irrelevance.

Brand mentions now matter more than traffic.

The Correlation That Tells the Story

Neil Patel. ( Globally recognised authority on SEO) did an analysis of 8,000 AI citations reveals the truth, and it’s not pretty for traditional SEO.

There’s a strong 0.65 correlation between Google first-page rankings and ChatGPT mentions. Encouraging, right?

Then comes the gut punch: only a weak 0.10 correlation between backlink quantity and LLM citations.

Read that again. All those backlinks you’ve been building? They barely register.

Backlinks don’t directly influence LLM mentions. Their impact on search rankings creates an indirect pathway to AI visibility. That pathway narrows every month.

The citation preferences tell the real story. ChatGPT cites Wikipedia at 27% and Reuters at approximately 6%. User-generated content like forums and social media remains virtually absent. Vendor blogs get cited less than 3% of the time.

Understanding these preferences matters for positioning your brand.

What Drives AI Citations

Neil noticed three things that determine whether AI systems cite your content. These aren’t optional anymore.

Depth of content. Regurgitated advice fails to get AI citations. ChatGPT cites sources with substance. Surface-level content gets ignored. Think comprehensive, not clickable.

Originality. AI systems favour intellectual authority over link manipulation. You need original thinking, not keyword stuffing. They can spot the difference.

Reputation. Reputation building happens through consistent, valuable contributions. Entity establishment typically requires 3-6 months of consistent signals across multiple authoritative sources. No shortcuts here.

What this means practically: structured data markup increases visibility by 30-40% in search results when properly implemented. Entity-based SEO helps search engines understand meaning and context beyond keywords.

The Feedback Loop

Here’s where it gets interesting.

Research reveals 60-74% of Google’s AI Overview citations come from top-ten search results. This creates a feedback loop. Traditional SEO success amplifies AI visibility.

So backlinks still matter, right?

Not quite. ChatGPT exhibits entirely different preferences, gravitating towards specific domain types that align with its training biases. The correlation exists, but it’s weakening.

75% of pages cited in Google’s AI Overviews rank in the top 12 organic results. Strong backlink profiles improve organic rankings, which in turn increases the likelihood of AI Overview citations.

The loop works until it doesn’t.

And then there’s YouTube. It commands a 200x citation advantage over its nearest rival. 29.5% of Google AI Overviews cite YouTube, making it the top domain overall.

Video content represents a critical new frontier for AI citations. Ignore it at your peril.

What This Means for You

Let’s be clear.

Being directly cited by an AI model can be more impactful for establishing content authority than merely ranking high in traditional search results. AI citations prioritise direct, verifiable sources over traditional Google clicks for fact sourcing and trustworthiness.

Most SEO strategists misunderstand this shift. They keep building backlinks when they should be building intellectual authority.

They’re running yesterday’s playbook.

Traditional SEO practitioners must adapt to AI search engines that favour genuine usefulness over link manipulation. The transition happens faster than most people expect.

By 2026, citation networks replace backlinks as the primary currency of digital authority.

That’s not a prediction. It’s what’s already happening.

Genuine usefulness drives AI-era success.

You can’t game this system. AI systems bypass SEO-gamed sites. They look for depth, originality, and reputation. That’s what determines whether your content gets cited. Nothing else matters as much.

Start building for citations now. The backlink era ends soon.

And when it does, you’ll either be ready or you’ll be invisible.

Business
1 min read
OpenAI just gave McKinsey an award for processing over 100 billion tokens on their platform....
Perspective
3 min read
The Recognition Gap in Sales When you're unknown, every conversation starts from zero. You explain...
Perspective
3 min read
Tech Torque’s Next Chapter About 18 months ago, my family and I took a holiday...
Perspective
3 min read
Richard Branson nearly died crossing the Atlantic in 1985. His speedboat capsized. A banana boat...
Perspective
3 min read
I love live music. During a recent Friday night out, I found myself in a...
Perspective
4 min read
The phone stopped ringing in 2008. Not literally. But the nature of those calls changed...

Why tech companies trust Tech Torque

We understand the unique challenges of B2B tech sales and deliver precision-driven solutions.

We've been in your shoes

 Our founder, Matthew Whyatt, built and sold a software company that hit $100M in revenue. We’re not consultants who read about your problems in a case study – we’ve lived them.

We understand both sides

Most agencies know marketing or sales. We know both, and how they need to work together. We’ve built the systems, hired the teams, and closed the deals ourselves.

We know what works

No “growth hacking” or flavour-of-the-month tactics. We build repeatable systems based on what we’ve proven works for B2B software companies, not what worked for a DTC brand last quarter.

Let's talk about your business.

Book a 30 minutes free strategy call with Matthew.
 
He’ll ask about your business, your challenges, and your goals. You’ll get clarity on what’s holding you back, whether we’re the right partner or not.