One number, traced to the source
One figure you do not trust: margin on a line, the inventory value, a month-end gap that keeps coming back. I trace it to the transactions underneath and tell you what the wrong version has been costing.
Start with the free 30 minutes
Every engagement starts there. Bring one number, leave with one insight about it.
Who this is for
What it is not
It is one number, named before we start. A second number is a second piece of work, and I will say so rather than drift.
Before you decide
One page you can hand upward: the reported number, the restated number, the gap, where it broke, and what to do in order. Filled in with sample figures so nothing has to be imagined.
And what happens after
Once the number is true, the question becomes whether it stays true next month. That is a short monthly check rather than another engagement, and it is arranged when the work is done, not sold beforehand.
What I need from you
Nobody has ever sent me clean data. Manual fixes, a system nobody fully trusts, two versions of the same report: that is the normal starting point and it is the reason this work exists.
Screenshots are fine. If something is missing we work with what you have, and I will tell you what the gap does to the answer.
By item, at a month end you have already closed. From Cin7, your ERP, or the spreadsheet you actually use.
Purchases, receipts, sales and adjustments. Raw export, no tidying.
Profit and loss and balance sheet for the same months, so the two can be tested against each other.
Used only for your work, never shared, never used as an example, and deleted when you ask.
Client names stay private. The numbers are theirs.
Unexplained inventory adjustments, every month, for two years. The books balanced. Margin looked stable.
What was underneath. Purchase orders, supplier invoices and warehouse receipts were dated on three different logics. Cost was landing in the wrong period.
$20,000 of unexplained adjustments eliminated, before the next capital commitment was approved.
We had reconciled those numbers every month for two years. Nobody had ever mapped the timing across all three.
A celebrated bestseller: 35% of revenue, treated as the growth engine.
What was underneath. It turned 1.5 times a year. Revenue contribution and capital consumption had never been looked at together.
12% cut in storage cost, and capital that had been stuck for years started moving.
The metric looked like a strength. It was the single biggest drag on our working capital and we had been doubling down on it.
Cash always felt tight, though the business was performing. Materials were bought before the money arrived.
What was underneath. Inflows had never been mapped by project across a forward timeline. It was a sequencing problem, not a shortage.
$300,000 loan retired ahead of schedule, with clear visibility on when cash lands.
We thought we had a cash problem. We had a sequencing problem. Nobody had ever drawn the map.
How the findings arrive
The report comes to you, not to your board and not to your accountant. We talk it through before you decide what to do with it.
It is written so you can hand it upward: what the number is, what the true number is, what the difference is worth, and what to do first. If a finding is uncomfortable, it arrives with the framing that makes it useful. Found now, it is a fix. Found by someone else, it is a discount.
Could your team do this?
Someone has three uninterrupted weeks. They know how cost timing distorts margin, and where a system quietly overwrites its own history. And they are willing to be the person who surfaces it.
In most finance teams the first is the one that fails. The work gets started, month end arrives, and it waits. Six months later the same products have been reordered and the same cash is still sitting on the shelf. That delay usually costs more than the engagement.
Bring the number or the decision. Thirty minutes, and you will know whether this is worth doing.
