Raised $30 MM in capital for real estate through LinkedIn and Guest Podcasting | Posts about Real Estate, Writing, and Audience Building

Most fund managers treat visibility like a campaign.

Raise.
Deploy.
Go quiet.
Raise again.

And every cycle starts from zero.

That model caps scale.

I work with growth stage real estate and private equity sponsors ($50M–$150M AUM) to build durable investor visibility so capital conversations don’t start cold and raises compound over time.

This isn’t about going viral.

It’s about building signal, credibility, and allocator familiarity before you need the capital.

If you're a $50M–$150M sponsor ready to build the visibility that compounds into your next raise, apply below.

Matthew Baltzell 🌴

Most people think AI is replacing jobs.

But that’s not the real shift.


Look at this photo.

In the 1940s, a “computer” wasn’t a machine.

It was a person.

Rooms full of people doing calculations by hand.

Then machines replaced that work.

Humans started using computers.

Now something strange is happening again.

Computers are starting to use other computers.

AI tools.
Agents.
Automation.
Software running software.

Work that used to require departments can now be handled by one operator with the right systems.

And it’s creating a new divide.

Not...

People vs AI.

But...

Operators with leverage
vs
Operators doing everything manually.

In real estate and private equity this is becoming very obvious.

The sponsors raising capital the fastest aren’t necessarily the smartest.

They’re the ones building distribution systems.

Content.
Investor pipelines.
Automated outreach.
Deal narratives.
Investor updates.

Things that used to take a team of analysts and marketers can now be done by one operator with the right tools.

Which means the next generation of sponsors won’t just raise capital with relationships.

They’ll raise it with leverage.

Matthew Baltzell

$20M+ Raised | Investor Visibility for $50M–$150M Real Estate & PE Sponsors | Capital Raising Systems for Serious Sponsors

I saw this chart and immediately thought of my mom.

She never paid full price. Ever.

Coupons. Sales. Negotiating at the register.

If she got a deal — it was a good day.
If something was expensive — it was a ripoff.

She wasn’t wrong.

She was playing the game she was taught. Perfectly.

I remember her driving 25 minutes to Costco to save $4.
Arguing over a $7 coupon.
Skipping the better option because it “felt expensive.”

And sometimes that worked.

Until it didn’t.

The cheapest option saved money.

It didn’t always save reputation.

Cheap isn’t a flaw.

It’s a survival skill.

It just stops working above a certain altitude.

This chart doesn’t show good people vs bad people.

It shows different rules for different environments.

My mom mastered hers.

What rules are you still playing by?

I drove home after visiting my grandma and felt sad. She's 92. I don't see her enough.

This Christmas my wife and I went to her assisted living home for their holiday party. 

Nothing fancy. Just showing up. Sitting with her. Talking to her friends.

When we walked in, she looked at us like we were the whole world. Her friends did too.

She still gets her nails done every week. 
Still wants to look pretty. 

92 years old and young at heart in every way that matters.

What makes her eyes light up isn't much. Just family walking through the door.

And I keep thinking about how many of those moments I've let slip by. 

Too busy. 
Too distracted. 
Too much in my own head.

I don't have a big lesson here.

Just a reminder to myself...

Show up. Not just physically — but in the moment.

Jeff Bezos: $500,000,000+ in real estate
Grant Cardone: $4,000,000,000+ in real estate
Tyler Perry: $300,000,000+ in real estate
Oprah: $200,000,000+ in real estate

The wealthiest people and brands don't just own real estate.

They obsess over where they put their money.

All in on one asset class...

Spread across 5 different types.
Diversified across 15 markets.
Every allocation decision compounds (or kills you) over 20 years.

What's your allocation strategy?

P.S. What's your biggest capital allocation move in 2026?

Mine...

1. Double down on raising capital (my least natural skill, honestly).
2. Learning guitar.

What about you?

Matt Damon said Netflix has to repeat the plot 3–4 times because people are on their phones (Now apply that to investors.)



If you think...

- “I already explained the deal”

- “They saw the deck”

- “We covered this on the last call”

You’re overestimating attention.

Investors are scanning, not studying.

They’re comparing you to 5 other deals this week.

They remember patterns, not paragraphs.

That’s why the best sponsors:

- Repeat the thesis

- Reinforce the why now

- Reanchor the risk story

- Restate the downside protection

Same message.
Different format.
Every touchpoint.

Call.
 Deck.
 Email.
 Podcast.
 Follow-up.

If Netflix needs repetition to keep viewers…
...You need it to move capital.

If your deal feels “obvious” to you,

it’s probably still unclear to them.

After 25+ conversations with real estate sponsors about raising capital, one pattern kept repeating.

When it came to capital…

It was feast or famine.

There was almost no middle ground.

Sponsors fell into two groups.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗢𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝘂𝗯𝘀𝗰𝗿𝗶𝗯𝗲𝗱

Their LP pipeline was already full.

Deals oversubscribed.
Investors waiting for allocations.
Capital ready when a deal appeared.

Blah, Blah, buttttt....

They were still looking for more investors.

Because experienced sponsors understand something most people miss:

The best time to raise capital isn't when you need capital. 

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗭𝗲𝗿𝗼 𝗣𝗶𝗽𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲

Dry LP pipeline.

No consistent investor flow.
Starting from zero every raise.
Scrambling for investor conversations in hubspot at midnight. 

Every deal becomes a fire drill.

The stress.
The pressure. 
The cursor blinking at you waiting for your next email blast!

No bueno. 

The takeaway...

There were very few sponsors in the middle.

You either have:

A machine that attracts investors

or

You start from zero every time you raise and are left holding the empty bag. 

The sponsors in the oversubscribed category all had something in common.

They were building investor relationships long before they NEEDED capital.

The most common pattern I saw..

A podcast.
A strong LinkedIn presence.
A newsletter.
Consistent content documenting their deals, their thinking, and their process.

Not selling.

Just showing up.

By the time an investor discovered them, through a post, an episode, or a piece of content, they already felt like they knew the sponsor.

That's the difference between a cold ask and a warm conversation.

Raising capital isn’t something you switch on.

It’s something you build.

Alex Rodriguez made $441,000,000 playing baseball.

He parlayed it into $300M+ in real estate.

Here’s how he did it:

He LEARNED from the BEST.

• A-Rod didn’t just spend. He studied.
• Sat in rooms most athletes never see.
• Treated investing like a second career NOT a hobby.
• Learned underwriting, capital stacks, deal structure.
• Built a relationship with Barry Sternlicht (Starwood Capital).

That became the foundation.

He TOOK ACTION.

• Started investing in multifamily while still playing.
• Focused on cash-flowing assets, not headlines.
• Built A-Rod Corp as an investment platform.
• Partnered with experienced operators.

He transitioned from athlete…

To operator.

To allocator.

Most of us won’t sign a $275M contract.

But anyone can:

• Study capital allocation.
• Learn from serious operators.
• Binge watch Landman on the treadmill. 
• Build relationships above their weight class.

The shift isn’t talent.

It’s identity.

Income is temporary.

Ownership compounds.

P.S. The real question everyone wants to know?

Was the $252M Yankees contract…

Or the first apartment deal…

The better investment?

"When we had a deal."

That was their entire investor relations strategy.

They were raising $15M.

I audited 12 operators last month. This wasn't the only one.

Good deals. 
Credible sponsors. 
Empty pipelines.

The raises weren't broken. The systems were.

Here's what I saw:

→ No investor CRM (pipeline = inbox + memory)
→ No nurture engine (deal email → silence for 6 months)
→ Two had zero post close reporting cadence
→ Raising in 60 day sprints instead of building a 12 month engine

The real problem:

Raising $5M isn't about finding investors.

It's about becoming investable.

Operators at the $5M–$25M level don't struggle because deals are bad.

They struggle because LPs wire on:

→ They've seen you before
→ They trust your process
→ They respect your reporting
→ They've been hearing from you for months

Not excitement.

If you're raising $5M+ and have $25M+ AUM…

I'll audit your capital system.

Direct feedback.

DM me "AUDIT."

𝗣.𝗦. 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗽𝗶𝗽𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗵?

Started learning guitar 6 months ago. Turns out being bad at something is good for business. Here’s why…

I decided to post proof.

This video confirms I’m still not good.

And that’s the point.

No leverage.
No shortcuts.
No AI saving my rhythm.

Just reps.

Most adults won’t start something new because they don’t want to look average.

In business it’s the same.

They over plan.
Over edit.
Overthink.

All to protect their ego.

Protecting your ego is the most expensive habit in business.

You focus on fundamentals.
You get fast feedback.
You improve.

Six months in, I’m not great.

But I’m better.

Sidenote: Background audio courtesy of two tiny humans who also don’t care that I’m a beginner.

What are you learning right now that you’re not good at yet?

An 18% IRR deal fell apart in 60 seconds.

All I did was paste the OM into ChatGPT.

It rewrote the deal in plain English.

That’s when the cracks showed.

• 18% IRR… assuming exit cap compression
• Rent growth projected at 2x the submarket
• “Value-add” mostly cosmetic upgrades

Nothing dishonest.

Just optimistic.

There’s a difference.

AI doesn’t get impressed by glossy decks.

It asks one question:

“What has to go perfectly for this to work?”

Great decks sell.

Great underwriting survives.

Big difference.

Most people say they want freedom.

But very few want the discipline required to get it.

That’s why most people stay employees.

Half of your LPs might never invest with you again.

And it probably has nothing to do with your returns.

Two operators.
Same market.
Similar returns.

One has 47% LP reinvestment.
The other averages 84%.

The difference isn’t the deal.

It’s discipline.

Low reinvestment operators:

• Update LPs when they need something
• Late reports
• Silence between raises
• Investor relations = reactive

High reinvestment operators:

• Monthly updates
• Proactive communication
• Clear forward narrative
• Investor relations = compounding system

The math:

50% re-invest = rebuild half your book every raise.
85% re-invest = replace 15% and scale.

Most sponsors don’t have a deal problem.

They have a relationship infrastructure problem.

If you don’t know your LP reinvestment rate, that’s the first red flag.

I’m running a Capital Raising Infrastructure Audit for sponsors actively raising $5M+.

We look at LP retention, communication cadence, visibility, and raise velocity.

Comment “AUDIT” and I’ll send details.

Everyone’s arguing about housing.

But almost nobody is talking about the real driver..

Capital.

Young buyers want cheaper homes.

Homeowners want prices to keep rising.

Politicians promise affordability.

But the housing market isn’t driven by hopes or politics.

It’s driven by capital flows.

Demographics.
Interest rates.
Credit availability.
Institutional money.
Government incentives.

When capital is cheap, assets inflate.

When capital tightens, deals stop penciling.

And right now we’re watching the system try to do something impossible:

Make housing cheaper...

...while protecting the trillions of dollars already sitting in residential real estate.

That’s not how capital markets work.

Asset values don’t reset politely.

They reprice when capital conditions change.

So if you’re under 40 and waiting for someone to “fix housing”…

Good luck.

Because the housing market isn’t a fairness system.

It’s a capital market.

The real move?

Understand how capital flows into assets.

Build skills that compound.

Create income that scales.

And get ownership exposure as early as you can, even if it’s uncomfortable.

Because the people who win aren’t the ones complaining about the system.

They’re the ones who understand how money moves inside it.

Agree or disagree?

I spoke with a 30 year operator managing $50,000,000 in assets who realized he couldn’t scale without visibility.

Great track record.
Strong returns.
Solid local reputation.

But he hit the Friends & Family ceiling.

And here’s the uncomfortable truth:

Most $50M sponsors aren’t stuck because of performance.

They’re stuck because no one outside their zip code knows they exist.

He knew he needed RIAs and Family Offices.

That requires trust at scale.

Not another lunch meeting.

We mapped the strategy.

Then it stalled.

Why?

Infrastructure.

No real investor relations support.
No systemized follow-up.
No capital discipline.

And the quiet fear:

“If this works… can we even handle it?”

Marketing feels risky when your backend is fragile.

Fragile doesn’t scale.

Visibility compounds.

But only if the machine behind it can absorb demand.

Otherwise, you don’t have a marketing problem.

You have an operator problem.

What’s harder:

Finding investors?

Or becoming the firm that can handle them?

I reviewed a 92 unit apartment deal this week.

On paper it looked great...

Nice looking property.
Good market.
Classic value add play.

The story was simple:

Buy the property.
Renovate units.
Push rents.

On paper, it all works.

But after looking at a lot of deals lately, I keep coming back to the same three things.

3 things I always look at now:

𝟭. 𝗥𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗮𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗺𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀

• The plan here was roughly $150–$200 rent increases
• That’s where most of the investor returns come from

But the real question is simple:

Will tenants actually pay those rents?

𝟮. 𝗗𝗲𝗯𝘁

• Interest rates matter more than people want to admit
• Refinance timing can change the entire outcome of a deal

A property can perform well…

…and still struggle if the debt is wrong.

𝟯. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿

This one matters more than anything.

• Leasing strategy
• Tenant quality
• Renovation execution

A good operator can fix a mediocre deal.

A bad operator can wreck a good one.

The more deals I look at, the more I realize something:

Most deals don’t fail because of the property.

They fail because of assumptions.

TLDR, 

When you look at a real estate deal…

What's the first thing you check for?

I’ve audited 3 capital raises last week.

The pattern is consistent.

Operators who close don’t rely on better decks.

They build better infrastructure.

Here are the 3 things that separate operators who close from operators who stall:

𝟭. 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗻𝘂𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹

Sponsors who close fast started conversations 6–12 months before the deal.

Sponsors who stall?
First touchpoint is the deal email.

LPs don’t wire on excitement.
They wire on familiarity.

𝟮. 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗻𝘂𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝗹𝗱

Average check size.
Re-investment rate.
Time from first conversation to close.

If you can’t answer those in 10 seconds, you’re guessing.

Guessing doesn’t scale past $10M.

𝟯. 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀

Monthly updates.
Documented process.
CRM with real pipeline visibility.

Most operators treat IR like an afterthought until they need to raise again.

The best ones treat it like asset management.

Across every raise I’ve looked at, the pattern holds:

Infrastructure beats pitch.

𝘐𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶’𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 $5𝘔+ 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘢 𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘦𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘺𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦, 𝘐’𝘮 𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘢 𝘧𝘦𝘸 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘩.

I thought the whole world was using AI already.

Then I zoomed out.

And noticed something nuts about this chart.

Do you see it?

Almost the entire thing is grey.

That grey represents billions of people who have never used AI.

Not once. Zip. Nada.

No ChatGPT.
No image generation.
No automation.

Nothing.

Meanwhile online it feels like the opposite.

Every day you see:

• a new AI model launch
• someone automating their company
• a teenager building a startup that tracks calories from photos

It creates the illusion that everyone is already miles ahead.

They’re not.

(Sorry, Aunt Debbie.)

Most people still think AI is:

“that thing that makes weird pictures”

or

“the robot that writes comments on LinkedIn.”

They’ve never seen what it looks like when AI becomes leverage.

The tiny corner of this chart?

That’s the group experimenting with it every day.

The builders.
The operators.
The people quietly compressing 10 hours of work into one.

Just out there making it happen.

And that’s where the real shift is happening.

Not in hype.

In workflow.

AI doesn’t have a competition problem yet.

It has an awareness problem.

Most of the world hasn’t even stepped onto the field.

Which means the edge right now isn’t technical brilliance.

It’s curiosity.

Open the tools.
Use them daily.
Experiment.

You don’t need to understand neural networks.

(Trust me… I don’t.)

You just need to be slightly earlier than the crowd.

And right now, the crowd is still figuring out what AI even is.

So the real question is…

Are you experimenting with AI in your work yet…

or still watching it happen from the sidelines?

Everyone’s debating whether this coffee shop’s AI surveillance is ethical...


Anna: 20 cups.
Olga: 3 cups.
John: Where is he?

Coffee. Customers. Company.  

Everything tracked by the minute. 

3.7 million people have opinions.

Meanwhile…

LPs writing $250K–$5M checks into $50M–$150M funds still get:

• Quarterly PDFs
• Retroactive performance
• Carefully worded updates

No real time visibility...
...No capital level transparency.

We can track barista productivity down to every Oatmilk Shaken Espresso.

But not investor capital down to the dollar?

Hmmmm...

The tech exists.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗴𝗮𝗽 𝗶𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆. 𝗜𝘁’𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆.

And the sponsors who close Fund II effortlessly?

They understand that visibility compounds trust.

P.S. Would you walk into a coffee shop that hides how it operates?

If I were a $50M+ sponsor using LinkedIn DMs to connect with investors, here's how I'd approach it.

𝟭. 𝗡𝗼 𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗰𝗵 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁. 

A connection is a doorway, not a closing argument.

Most sponsors burn their first impression trying to explain the opportunity in 300 characters.

Serious operators build familiarity first.

𝟮. 𝗡𝗼 𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗰𝗵 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁 𝗺𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗮𝗴𝗲.

I'd start with positioning.

"Appreciate the connect. We're active in [strategy] and expanding relationships with investors aligned with that thesis. Are you currently allocating into opportunities like that, or mostly observing this cycle?"

That does three things:

• Establishes what you're building
• Signals growth (not need)
• Qualifies without begging

Positioning first. Question second.

Not the other way around.

𝟯. 𝗜 𝘄𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱𝗻'𝘁 𝗺𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵 𝗱𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝗱𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁.

If every DM is tied to a live raise, you're negotiating from urgency.

Serious sponsors build repeat touch points:

• Thoughtful content
• Market commentary
• Occasional investor updates

So when a deal is live, the conversation isn't cold.

𝟰. 𝗙𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄-𝘂𝗽 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗲𝘅𝘁, 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮 𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿.

Not: "Just checking in."

Instead, I'd add signal.

An update. A shift in thinking. A market observation. A closed deal. A deal we passed on.

Investors don't respond to pressure.

They respond to thoughtful operators.

Because capital doesn't move toward need.

It moves toward clarity, consistency, and conviction.

And here's the filter:

If you're uncomfortable reaching out to investors without a live deal…

You don't have a capital strategy.

You have a dependency.

The sponsors who scale capital treat outreach like a system.

Not an event.

If you're building that system and want a second set of eyes on your outreach DM me.

No pitch. Just a real conversation.

I went looking for a dive bar in Prague and ended up here...


Back in 2015 my brother got married in London.

After the wedding my family decided to extend the trip and visit Prague.

The group:

My grandma
My mom and dad
My Aunt Deb
And me, the young buck in his 20s

Day one we did the usual tourist stuff...

Charles Bridge.
Cinnamon strudel.
Cobblestone streets.

Then around 7 PM everyone went to bed.

Trip over.

I thought… there’s no way this is how Prague ends.

So like any guy in his 20s, I went searching for the coolest dive bar I could find.

After about an hour of digging through Yelp I found a place called Anonymous Bar.

The name alone hooked me.

Hidden.
Exclusive.
Mysterious.

(I’m game.)

I screenshotted the location on my iPhone 4 and headed out.

Started asking people.

Liquor store owner?
No idea.

Random locals?
Never heard of it.

Finally a hotel doorman pointed down a street and said in a thick Eastern European accent:

“Milstroff Street.”

Three minutes later I was walking down a dark alley under a massive stone arch between two dilapidated buildings.

No people.

Just a faint fluorescent streetlight on its last flicker.

At this point my gut instincts were saying…

This might be a bad idea.

But curiosity won.

Then I saw a guy wrestling wooden crates out of a rusted red hatchback.

I pointed and asked:

“Anonymous?”

He nodded.

Behind him were seven tea lights leading to a hidden door.

Inside?

A full 1920s speakeasy frozen in time.

Bartenders with waxed mustaches twisted to sharp points.
Candlelight flickering off copper fixtures.
Bossa Nova bleeding softly through the room.

The bartender handed me a DVD case.

Inside was a drink menu written entirely in code.

So, I pointed to something that looked like whiskey.

He made the drink with flames, smoke, and a full show.

Then he placed it in front of me…

Put a V for Vendetta mask on my face…
Pulled out a Polaroid camera…
And took this photo.

That photo exists because I went looking.

That’s it.
That’s the lesson.

Go looking.

P.S. What's the last thing you did just because curiosity won?

Empowering your people to bring their best by leaving their financial stress behind

Dave Won

Sales teams fold whenever money is on the line (which is all the time). I fix the limiting money beliefs costing them deals.

No alternative text description for this image

I hated coffee until my wife changed me.


To cover up the bitter taste, I used to load my coffee with tons of sugar, syrups and flavors.

I wasn’t even drinking coffee at this poin‍t. She showed me that sourcing matters. 

High quality coffee comes down to six things: 

- the bean (organic, single origin, high in antioxidants)

- the brewing method (I prefer pour over)

- grind size (extra coarse for a smoother and less bitter extraction)

- water quality (filtered, right pH, right minerals)

- water temperature (194°F for optimal extraction)

- pour speed (slow and gentle)

For the longest time, I tried to “fix” the taste of coffee by slapping a sugary band aid on it instead of getting down to the root of the problem.

Sales leaders do the same thing with their teams.

The bitter taste is their teams performance and they keep reaching for more sugar.

More playbooks. More methodologies. More tactics. More grit.

It’s not a technique or execution problem. It’s a money belief problem.

That it's scarce. That clients can't afford it. That talking about money is uncomfortable.

You can't train your way out of a money belief problem.

Getting to the source matters in coffee. It matters in sales too.


Any coffee drinkers here?

The client never asked for your discount.

It’s drilled into your head that you need to focus on value, not price.

That advice isn’t wrong. It's just completely useless until you understand why you gave the discount away in the first place.

“This is expensive for me so it must be expensive for them.”
That’s not empathy. That’s your wallet doing the talking.

“If I offer full price, they’ll reject me.”
They never said a word. You decided for them.

“They might walk at full price. I need to keep them happy.”
You’re reading your own fear and calling it strategy.

“I’m not comfortable talking big numbers. I’ll lower it so this feels less uncomfortable.”
The discount was never about the client. It was about you.

This isn't a training problem. It's not a closing problem. It's not even a confidence problem.

It's a money belief problem.

The money beliefs you formed internally don't stay internal. They run your deals without you even knowing it.

They're costing you money on every opportunity. Which is all of them.

You can't script your way out of a limiting money belief.

The first step is knowing which money beliefs are running in the background.

This guy turned down $4000 and told me to buy his $10 book instead 👇🏼

Let me take you back to May 2012.

I’ve been living in excruciating back pain for over a year at this point after herniating 2 discs in my lower back.

I recall driving around DC in so much pain I pulled over to the side of the road and gave Dr. Sarno a call.

I told him I was so desperate to come up to New York City to see him.

He told me his rates were $1000/hr for 4 hours but suggested I read his book instead since it would be just as effective, save me money and be a better use of my time (despite having openings in his calendar).

The lucrative choice would have been to take my money.

Instead, he made a decision based on my best interest, not his.

I could FEEL that he truly cared about my well-being.

Money wasn’t even remotely a motivator for him.

There wasn’t even a hint of scarcity, desperation or viewing the world through a lens of lack.

In sales, you can say all the right things and make all the right moves, but if you have a lack mindset around money, you’ll unintentionally put a wedge between you and your clients and make forming life long fans out of your clients that much more difficult.

It’s not about rejecting money or devaluing your worth.

It’s about confidently making decisions that truly serve your clients and knowing that this approach creates exponentially more value in the long run.

So even though Dr. Sarno didn’t close a $4000 opportunity with me, he turned me into a super fan and I’ve told thousands of people about him, his book and the life changing, healing impact that he made on my life.

And that right there is worth way more than $4000.

Dave Ramsey would make a terrible sales coach.


Here’s why.

His stuff is pretty logical.

Get on a budget. Spend less than you make. Know where each dollar is going. Use the difference to pay down debt. 

But he never asks the one question that actually matters:

-> Why did you get into debt in the first place?

If you don’t answer that, the plan works until it doesn’t.

Sales leaders make the same mistake.

Sales methodologies. Processes. Frameworks. Playbooks. Objection handling. Scripts.

All logic. All tactics. All rational.

None of it asks why.

Why does your rep decide what the client can afford before the conversation even happens?

Why does your rep protect the forecast instead of telling the truth?

Why does your rep over-apologize for the price?

It's not a tactics problem.

The tactics are fine.

It's that the training never reached the level where the behavior is actually coming from.

More logic won't fix what logic didn't cause.

taplio

The Battle

Matthew Baltzell 🌴

Dave Won

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreMatthew Baltzell 🌴's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreDave Won's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Matthew Baltzell 🌴

Dave Won

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);}Matthew Baltzell 🌴's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreDave Won's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreMatthew Baltzell 🌴's LinkedIn Performance