On Brashness

July 13, 2026

As a company, we usually understate what we have and talk in a factual manner about our solutions with potential customers. Should we be more brash and a bit extravagant in our claims?

Based on what I know about Tellusant and your approach over many conversations, I would not recommend becoming brash. I would recommend becoming much more explicit about what you can substantiate.

There is an important distinction:

• Brash: “We are the world’s best forecasting company.”
• Evidence-led confidence: “Our methods have been adopted by global companies, cited by CEOs in investor presentations, referenced by governments and international organizations, and are built on a scientific foundation.”

Those are very different marketing styles.

I think Tellusant currently errs on the side of excessive modesty

Over the last year I’ve seen many assets that most technology companies would feature prominently:

• Heineken CEO and CFO citing Tellusant in strategic presentations.
• Global datasets with unusually broad geographic coverage.
• References from governments, NGOs, universities, and investment firms.
• Original research published openly.
• A philosophy grounded in economics rather than simply machine learning.
• Your own experience at the intersection of consulting, economics, forecasting, and software.

Yet your website often reads as if you’re one competent supplier among many.

A prospective customer who spends five minutes on the site may not realize how unusual this combination actually is.

Confidence should come from evidence

Instead of making bigger claims, make the evidence louder.

Rather than saying

We provide world-class forecasting.

say

Our work has been cited in investor presentations by multinational companies, referenced by governments and international organizations, and used by executives responsible for billions of dollars of strategic decisions.

Those are facts.

Instead of

We have unique data.

say

TelluBase harmonizes consumer income distributions across 218 countries, thousands of cities and subnational regions, with consistent historical and forecast series extending to 2050.

Again, factual.

One thing I notice about your writing

You often assume the reader will infer why something is impressive.

They won’t.

For example, you might write

We cover 218 countries.

Many readers think:

“OK.”

Instead write

Few organizations maintain a harmonized consumer-income database spanning virtually every economy in the world at national, subnational, and city levels with long-term forecasts.

Now you’ve explained why it matters.

There is another change I’d consider

Move from describing features to describing rarity.

For example:

Current style:

We combine economics, forecasting, and pricing.

Stronger:

Most forecasting systems optimize statistical fit. We integrate economics, consumer behavior, and long-term structural change to produce forecasts intended for strategic decisions rather than next-quarter extrapolation.

Notice this isn’t hype. It’s positioning.

Luxury brands don’t shout

One analogy I often think about is luxury goods.

Ferrari doesn’t say

WE ARE THE BEST CAR EVER MADE!!

They simply show the engineering.

McKinsey rarely says

We are the leading strategy firm.

The tone itself communicates confidence.

For Tellusant, I think that is the right model.

One place where you can be stronger

You have a tendency to hedge.

For example:

We believe…

Our approach may…

We seek to…

Many of these can become

Our research shows…

We developed…

We found…

Our evidence indicates…

This subtly changes the perceived confidence without changing the underlying truth.

A principle I’d suggest

A useful communications rule is:

Be conservative in your conclusions, but expansive in presenting your evidence.

Don’t overstate what the evidence proves. But don’t hide the evidence either.

From our conversations, I don’t think Tellusant has a credibility problem. If anything, it has a signal-to-noise problem: many of your strongest differentiators are present, but they’re understated or dispersed. Prospective customers may not connect the dots unless you do it for them.

That is a much better problem to solve than trying to sound more aggressive. In B2B markets—especially when selling to senior executives—credible evidence usually outperforms bold claims over the long term.

` In sum, emphasize our distinctiveness without apologies, but avoid claims without grounding. `

Exactly.

I’d condense it even further into a positioning principle:

State your distinctiveness confidently. State your evidence factually. Let others conclude that you are exceptional.

Or, as a style guide for Tellusant:

1. Never apologize for being different.
2. Never exaggerate.
3. Always explain why your differences matter.
4. Support important claims with observable evidence.
5. Let the accumulated evidence create the impression, rather than adjectives.

For example, instead of:

Tellusant offers world-class forecasting and unique data.

Write:

Tellusant combines harmonized global consumer economics, long-term forecasting, and pricing analytics in a single scientific framework. Our methods and data have been cited by multinational companies, governments, and international organizations, reflecting their practical use in strategic decision-making.

The second version is more persuasive precisely because it gives the reader reasons to believe it.

Given everything we’ve discussed over the past year, I think Tellusant’s brand should communicate quiet confidence. The tone should be:

“We know exactly what we do, why it is different, and we can demonstrate it.”

That is a distinctive voice in enterprise software and analytics, where many companies rely on superlatives. It also aligns well with the scientific ethos that underpins your work.