Everyone argues about how to get more meetings. Almost nobody models what happens if the same meetings simply close more often. When you run that number, the argument tends to stop.
Meetings, times the new win rate, times gross profit per deal. Minus the same calculation at today's win rate.
Use gross profit, not revenue. Revenue makes the answer look roughly a third better than it is, and a CFO will catch it in the first thirty seconds, which costs you the room.
Model five points. It is small enough that nobody can call it fantasy, and on most mid-market numbers the answer still dwarfs any fee you are considering. If five points does not justify the spend, the spend is genuinely wrong and you should not do it.
Modeling a win-rate lift and a volume lift at the same time. Do them separately. Combined models are how people talk themselves into things, and the whole point of this number is that it survives a skeptic.
Win rate is where belief shows up in the P&L. Nothing else on this page converts as directly. Same meetings, same reps, same product, more of them close, because the buyer walked in having already read the honest answer to the thing that worried them. That is the entire product, expressed as one line on a spreadsheet.
Worked example
| Meetings held per quarter | 40 |
| Gross profit per deal ($40k ACV at 70%) | $28,000 |
| Win rate today, and at plus five points | 30% to 35% |
$56,000 more gross profit per quarter
That is two extra deals a quarter, about $224,000 a year, from five points on the same volume. Against a one-time $5,000 fee. Numbers illustrative, run yours on the CFO page.
No single number tells you much. Together they tell you where the trust is leaking and what it costs.
The Trust Diagnostic takes four minutes and costs nothing. The calculator on the finance page prices your own leak. Neither one asks for an email.
Score your site freeReady to talk? Book the 45 minutes →