Dundee Growth Partners: Scaling Business Growth Beyond Brick-and-Mortar

I built a company that attracts thousands of brands a month at AMZ Prep® And I send most of them to my competitors.... Most companies hoard every lead like it's their last. We do the opposite (and people call me crazy) Every week, 250-450 qualified brands / sellers reach our pipeline that aren't the right fit for us. That's thousands every month. I LOVE every single one of them. These are real founders building real businesses. (7 years of 18 hour days built a brand that attracts hundreds of them every week) and that means everything to me. But loving a brand and being the right partner for that brand are two different things. Instead of forcing them into our system, we send them to 3PL partners who can actually serve them better. For free. Here's why: 1. Not every brand is YOUR brand. - We serve $5M to $50M+ omnichannel brands that need Amazon, DTC, and retail under one roof - A brand doing $800K on Shopify only doesn't need what we built - The best thing I can do for that founder is point them somewhere they'll thrive - This cost me millions learning this one lesson alone 2. The math on "losing" a lead is backwards. - A bad-fit client costs you more than an empty warehouse bay tbh - Wrong clients crush your SLA, drain your ops team, and churn in 90 days or faster - The real cost isn't the revenue you didn't earn, I promise you 3. It's the capacity you burned on someone who was never going to stay - We refer leads to 3PLs who are a better fit for that brand right now - Those 3PLs start shipping thousands of parcels a month - A lot of them end up piggybacking on our carrier rates to save ~10% to 20% on shipping - This way, we still grow our carrier spend which = better rates which is the ultimatum - I really try and build win / wins for everyone (We're building something in stealth mode around this exact model....more on that soon...) Saying no builds trust faster than any pitch deck When a founder hears "honestly, you'd be better off with this partner right now," something shifts They tell other founders They come back 18 months later when they've scaled into our ICP That trust compounds in ways a cold email never will It forces you to know exactly who you serve. If you can't say no, you don't actually have an ICP You have a PRAYER Knowing who you DON'T serve makes everything sharper and one of the hardest learnings I've had in business Your sales process, your ops, your marketing, your hiring... Last week alone we got 340+ inbound opportunities. We accepted maybe ~27% of them The rest went to partners who could serve them better than we could. And then those warehouses just used our shipping technology we built and use our carriers (we also have all the regionals which they get access too) Most companies would panic at that number. So the question is are you saying no enough in your business? How do you balance growth vs taking on the RIGHT customers?

Your brand is teaching customers to wait.. I saw this recently with a store that had a strange pattern. Sales would spike then disappear. Spike again then disappear. At first it looked like the ads were inconsistent. But the ads weren't the issue. The pattern was predictable. Every time a discount dropped revenue jumped. After that everything slowed down. Customers weren't buying. They were waiting.   Waiting for the next offer. Waiting for the next sale. Waiting for the next excuse to not pay full price. The brand didn't realize it but they had trained their own customers. So we pulled back. Not on ads but on incentives. We reduced the discount frequency. We strengthened the product positioning. We built value before price. Sales didn't spike anymore. They stabilized. Fewer big days but more consistent revenue. And over time higher margins. Most brands think discounts drive growth. They don't. They just shift the timing. If your customers only buy when you push them you don't have demand. You have dependency. #Ecommerce #Pricing #Branding #Shopify #BusinessStrategy #Marketing #Startup #Growth #Sales #DirectToConsumer #DTC #Retail #BusinessOwner 

Most store owners think selling comes down to size. In reality, buyers look at how the business holds up over time. Consistent profit matters more than big revenue. Stability beats unpredictable growth and simple, well run operations are far easier to take over and scale. This is where a lot of founders get it wrong. They build for attention instead of building something that can actually be transferred. Understanding this early changes how you operate and position your store long term. At Ecomvest, these are some of the fundamentals we consider when reviewing ecommerce brands. #ecommerce #businessgrowth #digitalbusines

Pivoting a business to seize unexpected opportunities takes: -discipline -resourcefulness, adaptability -and emotional detachment. I’m learning from Isaac Sultan, Judah Bergman and the Jool Baby story: Adapting to market shifts is what separates the innovators from the survivors.

One of the most common mistakes I see in ecommerce—particularly among beginners—is the approach to brand outreach. Many aspiring sellers attempt to partner with large, globally recognised brands such as Nike and Adidas when starting their journey on Amazon and Walmart. While ambitious, this approach is often misaligned with how these ecosystems operate. Large brands typically prioritise: High-volume sellers Established distribution networks Proven sales history at scale As a result, new or smaller sellers face extremely low approval rates when approaching such companies. A more effective strategy is to target emerging or mid-sized brands. Specifically: Brands generating under approximately $3 million in monthly revenue Brands with an existing presence on marketplaces (indicated by 3–10 active sellers) Brands with proven demand but still open to expanding their distribution channels This positioning creates a significantly higher probability of partnership for several reasons: Accessibility: Smaller brands are actively seeking additional sales channels and partners. Lower Competition Barrier: They are more open to onboarding new sellers compared to enterprise-level brands. Existing Demand: The presence of multiple sellers indicates that the product is already validated in the market. Reduced Marketing Burden: These brands are often already investing in marketing, allowing sellers to leverage existing awareness. From a practical standpoint, outreach becomes a numbers game: Contacting 10–20 qualified brands within this category Positioning yourself as a distribution partner rather than just a reseller Demonstrating understanding of marketplace dynamics In many cases, a meaningful percentage of these brands will be open to collaboration. Key Insight: Success in ecommerce is less about targeting the biggest names and more about identifying the right opportunities within accessible market segments. You do not need to partner with dozens of brands to build a profitable business. A few well-aligned partnerships, supported by consistent demand, can generate significant results. For those looking to build a scalable Amazon and Walmart business model, refining your brand outreach strategy is a critical first step. 🔗 Learn how to identify and approach the right brands via the link provided. https://lnkd.in/gt5Vtd4e #EcommerceStrategy #AmazonFBA #WalmartMarketplace #BrandPartnerships #DigitalCommerce #Entrepreneurship #OnlineBusiness #BusinessGrowth #SupplyChain

Most CPG founders build the brand before they build the model. That's backwards. A logo doesn't tell you if your margins work. A Shopify store doesn't tell you if you're profitable on each unit you sell. I've seen founders spend $15K on branding, $5K on packaging, and months on social content — before ever modeling their COGS. By the time they run the numbers, the product doesn't work. The margin is too thin. The DTC shipping cost eats the profit. The wholesale price leaves nothing after fees. And now they have a beautiful brand built on a broken model. The financial model isn't the last step. It's the first filter. It tells you: what does it actually cost to make and deliver one unit? What do you keep after that? At what volume does this business work? Those answers determine everything else — your price point, your channels, your go-to-market, your raise. Build the model first. Then build the brand around what's viable. Know your numbers before you need them. #CPGfounder #financialmodel #foundersfinance

Has "Q-Commerce First" Become a Vanity Metric? Every founder I meet wants to launch on Blinkit, Zepto, and Instamart first. "We'll build brand awareness through quick commerce, then scale to retail", they say. I've been analysing this closely over the past 18 months. And the pattern is concerning.   Here's What I'm Seeing: Founders launching ₹50-60 products. Single SKUs. Not even bundling. Inadequate understanding of channel economics. They want to be on Q-commerce because probably it gives them quick multi-city distribution without investing in manpower & taking the pain of appointing & managing DB partners. The Uncomfortable Questions: → Have you calculated your actual net realization after all costs? → Do you know what it costs to maintain visibility on these platforms? → What's your break-even order volume per city? → How long can you sustain negative contribution margin? Most founders I've spoken with haven't done this math.   The Reality Check: Nothing against Q-comm, but General Trade and Modern Trade are—and will remain—significantly larger than Q-commerce for the next 5 years. Yet everyone's racing to Q-commerce first. Why? Because it's easier to spend money to get a "Yes" from Q-com platform than to build multiple distributor and retailer relationships. Because CAC, ROAS, LTV, and BOF sound sophisticated—even when it’s not getting tracked meticulously.   The Shift I'm Proposing: We obsess over Product-Market Fit (PMF). But maybe it's time we start thinking about Product-Channel-Market Fit (PCMF). → Does your product's price point work in this channel's economics? → Does your target consumer repeatedly shop this category via Q-commerce? → Can you afford the 3–5-year cash burn required to make this profitable? If the answer to all three isn't "yes," Q-commerce first is a vanity play—not a business strategy.   I'm Genuinely Curious: Am I missing something here? Are there founders who've cracked Q-commerce profitably with low-AOV products? Or is it capital getting burnt chasing visibility instead of building viable businesses? Drop your honest take below. Building in this space? I'd genuinely love to hear your channel strategy. #QuickCommerce #D2CStrategy #StartupIndia #FoodBusiness #ChannelStrategy #ProductMarketFit #RetailStrategy #FMCGIndia #Entrepreneurship #StartupLessons

This is a bit of a Hail Mary, but I’d rather ask the network than keep guessing. I need to find the right person and I don’t think “digital consultant” is the right word. I’m building an apparel business that uses art in the design, and I am looking trying to grow a digital revenue stream, but I’ll be honest: I don’t fully understand the landscape (platforms, audience building, conversion systems, etc.), and right now I’m spinning my wheels. What I need is not advice - I need an operator. Someone who has: Built and run an e-commerce / DTC business Made real decisions on Shopify vs Etsy vs direct channels Actually built an audience and converted it into sales Worked at the stage where things are still messy and resource-constrained I’m at the point where I’m investing in new product lines and need to: Build an audience from scratch Create consistent sales throughput Turn this into a growing P&L What I’m trying to avoid: Endless consulting loops that cost money but don’t move the business forward. What I’m looking for: A hands-on e-commerce operator or fractional lead Someone willing to get into the work, not just advise from the sidelines Practical, grounded thinking over theory If you know someone who has actually built something, not just talked about it, I’d appreciate an introduction.

You can have great ROAS and still run out of cash. Inventory turnover is the metric that explains why — and most founders never look at it. Here's what's actually happening inside most scaling e-commerce brands: Ads are working. Conversions are solid. Revenue is climbing. But cash is always tight. Margins feel thinner than they should. Growth feels harder than it looks. The culprit is almost always the same — capital trapped in slow-moving inventory. First, the definition : Inventory Turnover = Cost of Goods Sold ÷ Average Inventory Value It tells you how many times you sell through your entire inventory in a given period. A high turnover means your capital keeps moving — buy, sell, reinvest, repeat. A low turnover means your cash is sitting on a shelf. Literally. Why it's a profit multiplier, not just an ops metric: Imagine two brands. Both do ₹5Cr in revenue. Brand A turns inventory 6x a year. Brand B turns inventory 2x a year. Brand A needs 3x less working capital to generate the same revenue. That's not a small difference. That's the difference between funding your next growth phase and calling your bank. Three levers that move the number: 1. Buying discipline — Stop over-ordering your winners. Demand forecasting beats gut feel every time. 2. SKU rationalisation — 20% of your SKUs are likely eating 60% of your tied-up capital. Cut the slow movers. 3. Pricing as a tool — Strategic discounting on aging stock isn't a loss. It's capital recovery. Treat it that way. The revenue equation from earlier in this series: Revenue = Traffic × Conversions × AOV But revenue without cash efficiency is a treadmill. Inventory turnover is what turns revenue into a compounding asset. The best e-commerce operators don't just grow the top line. They engineer how fast every rupee moves through the business. That's the difference between a brand that scales and one that stalls at ₹5Cr wondering where the money went.

If you’re scaling an e-commerce brand, there’s one risk most people don’t talk about enough: supplier and logistics failure. On paper, everything looks smooth — sourcing, production, shipping. But in reality, things go wrong more often than people expect: Suppliers delay or disappear Factories fail quality checks Freight gets lost or stuck in customs Even “confirmed” inventory can suddenly fall through And when that happens, most brands take the hit. That’s where the model behind Honest FulPhilment is different. We don’t just process orders — we take responsibility for the entire supply chain transaction. Every payment made through us is insured and guaranteed, meaning you don’t carry supplier-side risk. You never pay suppliers directly. You pay us, and we handle sourcing, fulfillment, and logistics. If something goes wrong, you are protected — either through replacement or refund. This isn’t just a promise — it’s been tested in real situations. For example, during a major peak season (Black Friday period), a large six-figure shipment for one of our biggest clients was lost due to issues on the freight forwarding side in the US. The case involved legal disputes with the logistics provider and long recovery timelines. But the client never carried that burden. We immediately reimbursed them in full and handled the recovery process ourselves. That’s the difference between a typical fulfillment setup and a risk-managed infrastructure built for scaling brands. The goal is simple: You focus on marketing, branding, and growth — we absorb operational and supplier risk. If you’re building a serious e-commerce brand, this kind of structure isn’t just helpful — it’s essential for scaling safely.