Category: Go-to-Market

  • The Village Bakery Problem,Part 3: Your Village Isn´t Your Market

    Table with coffee cups, croissants, and flowers at outdoor café

    You’ve baked the best sourdough in the village. Regulars. Word of mouth. A queue on Saturday mornings.

    Then someone asks: “What’s your TAM?”

    “About 400 people. It’s a small village.”

    That’s the wrong answer, and it’s costing you more than you think.


    TAM isn’t about where you bake. It’s about who eats bread.

    Three miles away: four coffee shops, a deli, a hotel doing breakfast for 80 guests a day, a farm shop full of tourists buying anything with the word “local” on it. None of them are baking their own bread. All of them need yours.

    You haven’t moved the oven. Your market just tripled.


    Here’s where most B2B companies flinch.

    Partner channels feel like giving something away. Shared margin. Less control. Someone else is in the room with your customer. I’ve heard every version of this objection, and I’ve made some of them myself.

    But the math is hard to argue with.

    Selling direct to villagers: €3.50 a loaf, one at a time. Supplying the coffee shop down the road: 20 loaves before 8am, recurring, predictable. Lower margin per unit, but you’re not in the unit business anymore. Multiply by four coffee shops, and you’re a wholesale supplier with a distribution network. Your competitor, obsessing over walk-in footfall, doesn’t even know this game exists.

    A partner who already has the relationship, the trust, the daily touchpoint with your buyer, isn’t a threat to your margin. They’re a shortcut to scale that took them years to build.

    The question isn’t whether this model works. It’s whether your current channel strategy is leaving that kind of volume on the table.


    If you’re a B2B company that suspects your TAM conversation is overdue, or your partner channel is underperforming what it should be, this is exactly what we work through in an initial call. No deck. No pitch. Just the numbers and what’s actually blocking growth.

    Book 30 minutes here →

  • The Village Bakery Problem, Part 2: Not All Villages are Equal

    Image courtesy of Gokce Erem via Pexels.com

    You did the research. Population: 2,000. One bakery, a retired owner, no marketing. No obvious competition. You signed the lease.

    Then you found the bread makers. Not one or two. Dozens. A village proud of its “self-sufficiency.” A WhatsApp group sharing sourdough starters. A farmers’ market every other Sunday, where three locals sell their own loaves.

    The TAM analysis said 2,000 potential customers. The reality was a village that had already decided it didn’t need you.

    This is the breadmaker problem.

    It’s not about a competitor you can see. Not another bakery, a supermarket, a brand bidding on your keywords. It’s about existing behavior that has already filled the gap you thought was empty. Behavior that nobody put into the competitive landscape. Workarounds, habits, good-enough solutions that your prospects built, bought, or settled on long before you showed up. This is why the pipeline stalled. Not because of competition. Because the market had already moved on. 

    Raw market size never tells you how much of that market has already moved on without you.


    The coffee shop signal

    Here’s what you should have looked for before signing the lease.

    How many independent coffee shops are in the village?

    Not chains. Not the pub that does a panini. Independent coffee shops, the ones that care about their flat white, source their beans, and put a handwritten card on the counter explaining where the milk comes from.

    These places are a leading indicator. They tell you the village has a segment willing to pay more for quality. An audience that has already opted out of “cheap and convenient” in favor of “considered and good.” When you walk in with a sourdough loaf and a story about your flour, someone will lean in rather than shrug.

    You’re not just looking for a distribution partner. You’re reading the room.

    A village with three independent coffee shops has already told you something about its appetite. A village with a Greggs and a Shell garage forecourt has told you something, too.

    Neither is wrong. They’re just different markets. The mistake is treating them as equivalent because the population number is the same.


    TAM isn’t a headcount. It’s a behavioral audit.

    The number of people who could buy from you is almost always bigger than the number who would.

    The gap between those two things is where most go-to-market plans quietly fall apart.

    Start with what your market is already doing. Not your named competitors, the workarounds. The spreadsheet from two years ago that’s technically terrible but free. The agency hired because buying software felt like a commitment. If you can’t name those, you don’t yet understand the market.

    Then ask whether that behavior has roots or whether people are quietly frustrated with it. Friction is your opening. Embedded behavior, the kind where someone has invested time, money, or identity in the workaround, is the breadmaker problem. It’s harder to shift than any named competitor, and it won’t show up in a competitive landscape slide.

    Somewhere in that market, someone is already paying more for better. Already opted out of the cheap default. Already leaning forward when something new walks in. Find that person before you build your strategy around the wrong customer. They’re your signal that appetite exists.

    The coffee shop is one of those signals. The bread maker is one of those warnings.

    Learn to read both before you commit to the village.

    If you´re investing in marketing and not sure why it´s not pulling through, it´s worth a conversation.  Let´s talk


    Next: once you’ve found the right village, the one with real appetite and the right signals, the question becomes whether the coffee shop is your customer, your channel, or both.

  • The Village Bakery Problem, Part 1: Demand versus Lead Gen

    The Village Bakery Problem, Part 1: Demand versus Lead Gen

    You are one of two bakers in a small village. Everyone knows you. Your bread is decent. Every morning, people choose between you and the baker down the road.

    There is no new demand to generate. There is just an existing appetite to capture.

    This is lead generation at its purest. And if you look honestly at how most B2B marketing budgets are built, this is exactly the logic underneath them: find the people already looking, rank higher than the competition, convert better at the bottom of the funnel. Fight for the same five percent of buyers who raised their hands this quarter.

    It works, up to a point. But it assumes the village never grows. It assumes every potential customer already knows they want bread.

    What about the person who skipped breakfast for years because nobody ever made it feel worth the detour? What about the company that has been living with a broken process so long they stopped noticing the cost? Nobody is searching for a solution to a problem they have not yet named.

    That is where demand generation begins. Not at the moment of comparison, but much earlier. At the moment of recognition. When someone first thinks, “Actually, this could be different.”

    Here is the thing that gets lost when people debate these two disciplines: technology businesses are still run by people. People who get tired, cut corners, inherit broken systems, and feel the same low-grade frustration your village baker’s customer feels when the bread is stale again, but they cannot quite be bothered to walk further. Emotion and habit drive B2B decisions more than most marketing strategies account for.

    The buyer who already trusts you before your sales team calls is not just a warm lead. They are a different conversation entirely. Shorter cycle. Less price sensitivity. More honest about their real problem.

    Demand generation is the work of becoming familiar before you are needed. It is education, perspective, and the kind of content that makes someone think, “these people actually understand what I am dealing with.” That is not soft marketing. That is pipeline development with a longer fuse.

    Most companies underfund it because the timeline does not fit neatly into a quarter. The result is a marketing function permanently stuck fighting over the same small slice of in-market buyers, wondering why growth feels harder than it should.

    The village can grow. The question is whether your marketing is built to grow it, or just to win the morning rush.

    If this tension already sounds familiar, it is probably worth a conversation. We work with mid-sized B2B companies to build marketing that develops pipeline rather than just chasing it. Book a 30-minute call here, and we can talk through where you are.