B2B Positioning Statement TemplateCompetitive Alternatives Register
What the picklist said, and what the notes said
| Loss reason as recorded | Deals | What actually happened | Deals |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 171 | Status quo, nothing bought | 174 |
| Missing feature | 88 | Direct alternative, a named competitor | 86 |
| No decision | 61 | Adjacent alternative, a tool they owned | 81 |
| Timing | 44 | Genuine price loss | 31 |
| Competitor | 30 | Build | 22 |
| Total | 394 | Total | 394 |
Where the 171 price rows went
Ninety-six bought nothing from anyone. Thirty-one were real price losses with the buyer saying so in the record. Twenty-six went to a tool they already paid for, and eighteen to a named competitor.
Two findings a picklist cannot produce
The unlike clause was aimed at 86 losses. It read “unlike legacy field service tools.” The 174 deals that bought nothing had no clause anywhere: not in the statement, not on the homepage, not on any of the three comparison pages.
The second largest competitor was an accounting package. Eighty-one losses went to the job module of something the buyer already licensed, and nobody in the building classed it as a competitor.
Buckets come from the call notes and the final thread with the buyer, never from the recorded reason.