Fractional & Interim CEO for technical founders and I Acquire and Grow B2B SaaS and Digital Agencies

I help high-growth SaaS and tech companies scale faster by integrating sales leadership, growth marketing, operational discipline, and AI-powered strategies. Over the last decade, I’ve taken on founder, executive, and turnaround roles where I’ve delivered measurable impact in fast-moving environments.

- Scaled a SaaS product from $0 → $10K MRR in 3 months
- Increased revenue by 40% as CEO (Promoted twice) while reducing churn 33% in less than 6 months
- Doubled customer reviews (2★ → 4★ on Capterra) 
- Built and led high-performing sales teams in SaaS, VC/PE, healthcare analytics, fintech, and executive search 

Now, after running my own agency and gaining experience in SaaS, healthcare analytics, and quantitative high-frequency trading, I’m seeking my next opportunity to drive growth inside a high-potential company. I’m open to leadership, fractional, or advisory roles where I can deliver immediate revenue impact while helping shape long-term strategy.

Alongside leadership and growth strategy, I’m also an experienced copywriter. From landing pages and email sequences to pitch decks and brand positioning, I use words to convert traffic into revenue. For SaaS and VC-backed companies, this means I can both architect the growth engine and create the customer-facing messaging that fuels it.

I primarily focus on long-term growth leadership, but I’m also open to fractional or advisory roles where I can deliver immediate impact. If you’re building something ambitious and need a leader who thrives in scaling environments, let’s connect.

😎 Kris Curran 😎

Creating financially healthy and independent millionaires. One person at a time. Daily educational and inspirational posts.

If you’re a senior IT professional earning well into six figures, your biggest risk probably isn’t income.

It’s concentration.

Concentration in public markets.
Concentration in W-2 income.
And concentration in strategies that grow taxes faster than wealth.

I work with high-earning IT executives who are excellent at making money but want a more thoughtful, lower-stress approach to keeping and compounding it. Many come to me with portfolios heavily weighted toward stocks and RSUs, and a growing concern that they’re exposed to more risk than they intended.

I help clients diversify beyond Wall Street using passive real estate and private lending, with a strong tax lens. This is not about chasing returns or timing markets. It’s about reducing single-point-of-failure risk and building durable wealth alongside a demanding career.

My approach is hands-on and education-first. I don’t pitch deals or push decisions. I walk clients through the mechanics, risks, and tradeoffs so they understand what they’re doing and why. Confidence comes from clarity, not hype.

My background includes Big 4 experience, degrees in finance and accounting, and more than nine years of personal investing in real estate and private markets. I’m also the author of the Amazon bestselling book Your Legacy on Main Street and a TEDx speaker on long-term wealth and risk.

This is not for flippers, speculators, or anyone looking for shortcuts. It is for thoughtful professionals who want to protect what they’ve built and decide whether passive real estate belongs in their long-term strategy.

If this resonates, the next step is a short clarity call: an education and fit conversation only. No pitch. No pressure.

https://tidycal.com/callwithalina/15-minute-meeting

Alina Trigub

When capital gets blocked, it looks for a new home.


Last week, the New York Post reported:
“Donald Trump signs order to block Wall Street from buying single-family homes.”

Politics aside, that headline signals something much bigger than policy.

It’s about where capital goes next.

For more than a decade, institutional money has quietly poured into single-family rentals. Entire neighborhoods acquired by funds chasing yield and inflation protection.

If that door starts to close, those dollars don’t disappear.
They redirect.
Into what?

Most likely:
• Multifamily
• Build-to-rent communities
• Private partnerships that preserve housing exposure without owning the front door

Every regulation creates friction somewhere and opportunity somewhere else.

Smart investors don’t argue with policy.
They watch capital flows and adapt.

It’s the same in every cycle.
When one door closes, capital builds a new one.

Where do you think institutional capital moves next if single-family ownership is off the table?

$350K+ IT Executives Diversifying Beyond Wall Street with Tax-Efficient Real Estate | Compliance, Operations & Financial Oversight | TEDx Speaker, Amazon Bestselling Author

If IRR is the first number you look at in a deal, you’re already at a disadvantage.


Every investor loves IRR.
It looks scientific.
Precise.
Objective.

But it’s one of the most misleading numbers in real estate.
Most tech leaders I work with have only seen IRR in pitch decks.

Here’s what they’re often missing: IRR tells you the rate at which returns grow if everything goes exactly as modeled.

What it doesn’t tell you:
• The quality of those cash flows
• The risk behind them
• When the money actually shows up

Two deals can both show a 15% IRR.
One pays steady cash flow for five years.
The other pays nothing for four years and everything in year five.
Same IRR.
Completely different risk profile.

Sponsors love IRR because it rewards timing and optimism.
Serious investors know better.

They focus on:
• Equity multiple
• Cash-on-cash return
• Downside protection

Those are the real drivers of long-term wealth.
IRR sells a story.
Discipline builds one.

When you review a deal, which metric do you trust most and why?

I Killed a “17% IRR” Deal in 90 Minutes and Here’s Why


I passed on an $8.2M Phoenix multifamily deal three weeks ago.

On paper, it looked great:
• 17.3% IRR
• 2.1x equity multiple (5 years)
• $100k minimum investment
• Sponsor with 4 exits since 2019

My tech exec clients were asking about it.

So I did what most investors don’t do:
I stayed on the investor call for 90 minutes.
And that’s when I caught it.
Current occupancy: 94%
Pro forma occupancy (Year 2): 96%
Market average: ~91%

They were underwriting above-market occupancy
while assuming 6% rent growth every year.

I asked:
“What’s your plan if occupancy drops to market average?”

The answer:
“We’ve never seen that in our portfolio.”

That’s not a plan.
That’s hope.

Here’s the math they didn’t show:
• 3% occupancy drop → ~$147k less NOI per year
• At a 5.5% cap rate → ~$2.67M less in exit value
On an $8.2M deal, that’s ~33% of total value erased
from one optimistic assumption.
I passed.

And I explained why to my clients.
They thanked me.

One wired $100k into a different deal I introduced instead.

Senior IT engineers will recognize this:
The code that handles edge cases matters more than the happy path.

Same rule applies to real estate underwriting.

What’s one assumption in your portfolio you’ve never stress-tested?

Most high earners misunderstood Martin Luther King Jr. by celebrating the message while ignoring the method.


Real progress wasn’t built on inspiration alone.

It was built on discipline, consistency, and delayed gratification.

I learned this lesson early.
When my mom and I came to the U.S., we started from zero and worked multiple odd jobs while attending college full-time just to stay afloat during those first few years.

There were no shortcuts.
No overnight wins.
Only stability, resilience, and building options long before we needed them.

That experience shaped how I think about wealth today.

It’s also why I wrote 'Your Legacy on Main Street' book and why I work with senior leaders who have done everything “right” in tech, yet still feel exposed.

Here’s what I see repeatedly with IT executives:
• Maxed-out 401(k)
• Company equity
• Index funds
• Heavy reliance on market performance

On paper, it looks solid.
In reality, it’s concentrated risk.

When most of your wealth moves in lockstep with the market and your W-2, volatility hits harder than expected.
This is where Main Street real estate comes in.

Strategic, cash-flowing assets can offer diversification, tax advantages, inflation protection, and long-term legacy planning that traditional portfolios alone can’t provide.

Right now, I’m working closely with a small group of IT executives, helping them rebalance stock-heavy positions with tangible assets that aren’t tied to tech’s ups and downs.

If you’ve been thinking about diversifying beyond Wall Street but haven’t found the right framework yet, what’s been holding you back?
DM me.

The Most Dangerous Line in Any Pitch Deck: “We’re Using Conservative Assumptions.”


I’ve reviewed hundreds of real estate pitch decks.
Almost all of them include one comforting phrase:
“We’re using conservative assumptions.”

It sounds responsible.

But in practice, it often hides the very risks investors should be questioning.

Here’s what “conservative” really means when no one defines it:
• Rent growth projections built on the last three hot years.
• Expense growth that ignores rising insurance or property taxes.
• Exit cap rates only 25–50 bps higher than entry, when history and rate cycles suggest 50–100 bps would be more realistic.

I once reviewed a deal underwritten to “conservative” rent growth of 4% annually.

The market’s five-year average? 1.8%.
That single assumption inflated the projected equity multiple by nearly 25%.

The sponsor wasn’t dishonest.
They were optimistic.
And optimism is expensive.

The best investors I know never rely on adjectives.
They rely on math. 

So next time you read “conservative assumptions,” ask yourself: Conservative compared to what?

Waiting feels safe.



That’s why it’s so expensive.

Every investor knows fear is costly.
But comfort often costs more.

Sitting on the sidelines feels rational when headlines scream uncertainty.

Rates. Elections. Policy shifts. There’s always something that makes waiting feel smart.

But every month you wait for “the right time,” someone else compounds quietly in the background.

Opportunity doesn’t announce itself.
It expires quietly.

Inaction never feels risky because the loss is invisible.
No red numbers.
No trade you regret.
Just time you don’t get back.

Great investors don’t act because they have certainty.
They act because they have a framework for uncertainty.

Perfect timing is a myth.
Consistent judgment isn’t.

What opportunity have you been waiting to feel “safer” before acting on?

The 5-Question Filter I Use Before Every Passive Real Estate Call


I review 40–50 deals per year.
I invest in 3–4.

Here’s how I eliminate ~90% of opportunities in under 10 minutes:

Question 1
What’s the actual rent growth in this submarket over the last 36 months?
🚩 Red flag
“Strong growth” or city-wide averages
✅ What I want
ZIP-code-level data with sources

Question 2
Show me your last 3 exits: actual vs. projected returns.
🚩 Red flag
Only showing winners
or
“We’re still holding everything”
✅ What I want
Full track record with IRR variance analysis

Question 3
What's your promote structure and when does it kick in?
🚩 Red flag
Early promote structures that reward the GP
before meaningful performance
✅ What I want
No pref is fine.
Waterfall only after a real hurdle: 15%+ IRR achieved.
(Alignment matters more than labels.)

Question 4
What happens to my capital if you need more money mid-project?
🚩 Red flag
Vague answers or
“That’s never happened”
✅ What I want
Clear capital call policy and defined downside protections

Question 5
How much of your capital is in this deal?
🚩 Red flag
Token GP checks or
“I’m diversified across many projects”
✅ What I want
At least 5% of total equity from the GPs
(real skin in the game)

I’ve walked away from 18% IRR deals that failed Questions 2 and 5.
I’ve invested in 12% IRR deals that cleared all five.

Returns matter.
Operator quality matters more.
If these questions feel uncomfortable to ask, that’s usually your answer.

DM me "CHECKLIST" and I'll send you my full due diligence framework with 23 specific line items I review before every investment.

Every cycle rhymes.
It just shows up with new acronyms.


When optimism starts needing leverage to work, the cycle is already turning.

Last month’s Fortune headline said it plainly:
“‘Big Short’ investor Michael Burry piles misery onto tech stocks after Oracle fails to close AI debt deal.”
The headline matters less than the pattern behind it.

U.S. household wealth is now more concentrated in stocks than in real estate, a setup last seen before the dot-com crash.
At the same time, corporate borrowing tied to the AI boom has reached roughly $200B this year, nearly one-third of all new corporate debt issuance.

Different decade.
Same rhythm.
When enthusiasm outpaces earnings, credit fills the gap.
When credit fills the gap, risk hides in plain sight.

AI.
Crypto.
Dot-coms.

The labels change.
The cycle doesn’t.
Enthusiasm → Credit → Correction.

The best investors I know don’t predict crashes.
They notice when stories start needing leverage to survive.
It’s the same in real estate.

If a deal only works at today’s debt cost, it’s not a deal.
It’s a story.

Where do you see enthusiasm starting to depend on credit right now?

Your 401(k) might be your biggest risk.

Especially if you make $300k+ and think you’re diversified.


I’m not anti-401(k).
I’m anti-concentration.

Here’s what I see over and over with senior tech leaders earning $500k plus.

After about 8 years of:
·      Maxing their 401(k)
·      Accumulating RSUs
·      Doing everything “by the book”

They end up with:
• Retirement accounts: $1.2M
• Real estate: $0
• Alternative investments: $0

Which means 100% of their wealth is tied to two things:
1.    Their job continuing
2.    Public markets cooperating

Both dropped 30%+ in 2022.

Now compare that with a different allocation strategy
(same income, same discipline):
• 401(k): $800k
• Real estate: $450k
• Tax savings from depreciation: ~$180k

Total net worth: Higher
Market correlation: Lower

The conventional advice is: “Max your 401(k) first.”

The reality for $300k+ earners:
Diversification means asset class, not just account type.

When 85%+ of your net worth is your W-2 + the S&P 500,
you’re not diversified.
You’re concentrated.

If you’re earning $300k+ and want to see how your portfolio actually stacks up:
=> DM me “PORTFOLIO”

I’ll send you a 2-page framework showing how to calculate your real concentration risk — and what high earners should consider beyond default advice.

No pitch.
Just the math.

Japan just repriced your real estate deal. Quietly.


Not because of the Fed.

Last month, Japan raised rates to 0.75%, the highest level in 30 years.

That single move is forcing a global adjustment many real estate models have not accounted for.

For decades, Japanese institutions were major buyers of U.S. Treasuries.

Higher yields at home pull capital back to Japan.
Lower Treasury demand pushes U.S. yields higher.
Higher yields raise the risk-free rate.

When the risk-free rate rises, every asset is repriced.

Especially real estate.
Cap rates move up.
Asset values compress.

Debt assumptions from 2023 stop working.
What concerns me is not volatility.

It is that I am still seeing deals modeled with 5% exit caps, cheap bridge debt logic, and appreciation heavy exits.

That is not conservative underwriting.
That is outdated math.

The question worth asking before committing capital:
What happens if rates stay elevated through 2027?

If someone cannot walk through cap rate sensitivity and downside scenarios clearly and calmly, that is the signal.

Markets evolve.
Models must update.

If you want the stress test framework I use before taking any deal seriously, comment MACRO or DM me. Happy to share.

The most used financial model in the world runs on a known error.


Excel thinks the year 1900 was a leap year.
It wasn’t.
Microsoft knows this.

Instead of fixing it, the error was preserved to maintain compatibility with Lotus 1-2-3, the spreadsheet that dominated in the 1980s.

A flawed assumption, intentionally carried forward for convenience.

Every modern spreadsheet still inherits that decision.
Investors do the same thing.

We inherit assumptions from other people’s models:
“Safe” debt ratios.
“Normal” growth rates.
“Standard” exit caps.

They get repeated so often they start to feel true.
But compatibility isn’t accuracy.
And repetition isn’t validation.

The smartest investors I know don’t just question returns.
They question the formulas underneath them.

Question: What assumption are you still carrying from someone else’s model without rechecking it?

Everyone says they’re chasing “financial freedom.”


But when you really press people, they mean very different things.

For some, it’s net worth.
For others, it’s time.
For a few, it’s peace of mind.

If you had to choose just one, which matters most to you?

Freedom isn’t always about money.
Most of the time, it’s about control.
Which one feels most true for you?

taplio

The Battle

😎 Kris Curran 😎

Alina Trigub

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreAlina Trigub's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

😎 Kris Curran 😎

Alina Trigub

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Alina Trigub's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreAlina Trigub's LinkedIn Performance