A sales pitch that works in Lagos can fail in Berlin because buyers attach risk, value and credibility to different parts of the same product. Before ending the expansion, change the promise you lead with and test whether the Berlin buyer will pay for that narrower promise.
In 2012, Ron Johnson was watching a proven retail idea fail inside J.C. Penney. He had helped build Apple’s retail operation, where clear pricing, controlled presentation and fewer promotions supported products customers already wanted. At J.C. Penney, he removed much of the coupon-driven pricing customers knew and replaced it with what the company called “fair and square” prices.
The stores remained. The products remained. The logic sounded cleaner.
Sales fell 25 percent that year.
A successful pitch carries hidden assumptions
Johnson had brought more than a pricing policy from Apple. He had brought assumptions about how customers judged value.
An Apple customer could compare a device, its specifications and its listed price. J.C. Penney customers had been trained to look for coupons and promotional events. Removing those signals changed what a purchase felt like, even when the final price appeared reasonable.
The New York Times documented the experiment and Johnson’s departure in 2013. J.C. Penney brought promotions back. The idea had survived in one setting because the customer, product and buying ritual supported it. In another setting, the same idea removed a signal customers used to decide.
That is the useful parallel for a founder moving from Lagos to Berlin. The demo may be identical, but the buyer is interpreting a different set of signals.
In Lagos, a founder might win by showing how quickly an AI workflow turns a manual process into a usable result. The prospect sees speed, access and a team willing to adapt around operational reality.
A Berlin prospect may watch the same sequence and focus elsewhere. Where did the model’s data come from? Who can inspect an incorrect output? What happens when a staff member leaves? Can the workflow fit the company’s current systems without creating another unsupported tool?
Those questions do not prove that Berlin buyers care about quality while Lagos buyers do not. They reveal different buying conditions. One audience may need proof that the product can work this month. Another may need proof that adopting it will not create a problem six months later.
The product promise has to absorb the market
The dangerous response is to polish the same demo.
The founder adds slides, tightens the script and moves the strongest animation earlier. Nothing changes because the disagreement sits beneath the presentation. Lagos and Berlin are hearing different promises.
“Automate this process in days” may sound valuable in one room. In another, it may sound like a new system arriving faster than the company can assess it.
The founder now has a real choice. End the expansion, or rewrite the promise around the risk the Berlin buyer is trying to remove.
That does not necessarily require rebuilding the product. It may require leading with auditability instead of speed, controlled deployment instead of broad automation, or one bounded workflow instead of an ambitious platform claim. The next demo should show the decision trail, the human override and the limit of what the system is allowed to do.
This is also why customer discovery should happen before a founder commits more runway to localization, hiring or travel. A paid pilot can expose whether the issue is presentation, product scope or weak demand. Kweku’s paid pilot changed his product roadmap because payment forced the customer’s priorities into the open.
Test the new promise before rebuilding
I would give the expansion one more controlled test.
Choose one Berlin use case with a clear owner and an existing budget. Rewrite the opening around the buyer’s stated risk. Show one workflow from input to approval, including what happens when the AI produces an uncertain answer. Then ask for a paid pilot with a defined boundary.
Do not count praise as evidence. Do not count another meeting as evidence. The useful signals are access to the real process, involvement from the person responsible for the outcome, and willingness to pay for the trial.
If prospects keep asking for capabilities far outside the current product, the market may require a different company. If they accept the narrower promise and move toward a paid pilot, the expansion may still be viable.
The same discipline applies when data handling becomes the objection. A legal team asking where demo data went is giving the founder product information, not delaying the sale.
Ron Johnson’s pricing change eventually met the only verdict that mattered: customer behaviour. A founder facing silence in Berlin needs the same clarity. Change one promise, attach it to one paid decision, and set a stopping condition before booking the next trip.
Comments
No comments yet.