Hey Reader,

Implicitly or explicitly, the most common word a founder ever hears is no.

And just to be clear. There’s a difference in no.

There’s “no” as a boundary. The kind that protects, that ends the conversation.

And there’s “no” as a negotiation. The kind that starts it.

I have a six-year-old.
“No, you can’t have your iPad” is a negotiation.
“No, you can’t climb inside the fireplace and up the chimney” is a boundary.

What we’re talking about here is the negotiation kind. The no that shows up in sales, fundraising, hiring, pitching, and basically every step from nothing to something. The no that shows up when I say no to his ipad and he gets to ask WHY with the potential that something changes.

The no that doesn’t mean violation but rather the one that means friction. And friction is a massive win for startup founders, because its information [SCARF] and the question is... what kind of information?

Every startup that ever lived was built on a mountain of nos. The difference between the ones that make it and the ones that don’t is quite simply the ones who learned to turn rejection into signal. We like to call this resilience?

Stopping at a “no” means you’re breaking the Kill Chain - you’ve done half the job. Ending the conversation at no isn't a closed loop, it's an unfinished one.

The follow up, the reframe, the next touch, the intelligent funnel... that’s the completion of the chain.

The Meaning of No

Nos from investors, prospects, and employees are the obvious ones and awful, because you hear it directly or via ghosting.

But no where near as awful as the invisible ones. The no reply to your email, the no click on your ad, the no open on your newsletter, the no conversion on your CTA. Those are the nos that could mean a million different things - and founders LOVE to jump to conclusions…

What is actually so f*cked is that founder rejection is a not-so-secret secret. As in you have to carry the rejections alone, because admitting the volume of nos you’re getting would feel like career suicide. Proof of incompetence, proof of an inability to execute. How can the leader that is supposed to project conviction, the plan, the control, admit to basically living at a 98% no rate.

So instead we say the defaults... I’m trying a few strategies right now, we’re testing some new channels, we’re exploring what works. Which is just founder code for I’m getting a lot of nos.

So like all of us, you smile while you carry the mountain of nos that you can’t talk about it until you’re on the other side, when it becomes wise reflections.

Metabolizing No

The only way to think about this connects back to Amor Fati - the no isn’t rejection, it’s a stage. If I’m asking you to love what you can’t control, this is about learning to leverage it. To be hyper-specific, you can’t control someone else’s choice to say no. But the moment you treat that no as signal and make an adjustment, it becomes partially controllable.

Don’t adjust, and it stays entirely out of your control.

More than that, it is so easy to forget that no is the default human setting. It’s easier to say no than to take on the risk of yes. It’s easier not to put your email in a form than to risk the funnel that follows. It’s easier to not say yes to some unproven tech. It’s the shitty adage, you don’t get fired for hiring IBM.

If you’ve read Daniel Kahneman Thinking, Fast and Slow - you should, you’ll recognize his point on loss aversion - which took me a minute to really understand.

This instinct to avoid loss twice as strongly as we chase gain. More explicitly, when you pitch, demo, or sell, the other person’s brain isn’t weighing logic as much as protecting itself from risk at a 2:1 ratio. Where no really means... I don’t yet understand enough to feel safe saying yes.

Chris Voss Never Split the Difference - read this also... said the same thing in negotiation: no isn’t the end, it’s the start of the real conversation.

So if we agree that no, could mean not yet, you are obligated to take the no, ask questions, and quietly spend every day moving closer to a yes. Play the long game. What would it take. You can’t avoid the no, but you can choose not to take it as shame and instead treat it like the signal it is.

Metabolizing no is what ultimately drives the next decision for you and your startup. Where are we wrong, right, missing data, do we pivot, persist, or quit? The data inside those nos tells you where the leverage lives and where the dead ends are, if you just choose to listen. Because the fastest team to learn wins. Always.

Look at your offering, your site, your team, your product, your results, your testimonials, your bank balance, your support options, your SLA, your security posture, your sleep schedule, your experience. Are we really surprised that no is the baseline response?

Of course not. So take every no as feedback on timing, framing, positioning, clarity, pricing. Anything within your control. And if you’re going to treat the barrage of nos as failure which you are welcome to do. At least give yourself the benefit of seeing it as momentary failure, specific to that instance or that ask vs a total, permanent verdict on you.

Shame

Metabolizing “no” requires a system (FounderOS). So when you get a clear rejection you must drive the debrief. This is even more applicable to a churn (a yes to a no). At the core, you care about two issues:

1. Framing: What was the single point of confusion or lack of clarity that I created? (Your fault!!)
2. Timing / Market: What external signal, be it timing, market, maturity, competition did their “no” confirm about the world I am trying to compete in?

Whatever loop you run post-no, based on how much the counter party is willing to give you, the goal is to move from that moment of shame into a strategic movement roughly in the right direction and be able to produce a clear statement of ish fact.

This no was about timing, not my competence.

This no was about our maturity, not their lack of excitement about the solution.

This no was about…

There’s a fine line between delusion and reality, but that’s the work.

If you broadly agree that (a) the only way to beat no is to outlast it (b) Every yes you’ve ever had was just a no that aged into a yes (c) Every yes is built on a pile of nos.... then the only thing that changes is who’s still standing.

So keep going. Keep listening. Keep signal hunting. Because the founder who can metabolize rejection will always outlive the one who avoids it. And maybe outlive is a good definition of resilience...

If I can be of service, feel free to grab time.

LFG.

-- James

​

Not A Subscriber? Join 150k+ StartUp Founders reading my weekly newsletter offering tactical insights to start, scale, and fund their startup. Real advice from a 3x exited founder. ​ Join Now

---

​

‪8424 Santa Monica Blvd, Suite A523, Los Angeles, CA 90069
​Unsubscribe · Preferences