Every early decision in a business carries more weight than it should.
Not because the stakes are necessarily higher, but because at the beginning, you are still discovering who you are — your instincts, your blind spots, and the gap between theory and execution.
Our first two trades were no different. They were not just transactions; they were tests of our assumptions.
What we got right
We started with a simple belief: that disciplined execution matters more than perfect timing.
In both trades, we focused less on chasing the absolute best entry point and more on structuring deals that could withstand volatility. That meant prioritising margin, understanding supply chains, and staying conservative in our projections.
That discipline paid off.
We also got one thing particularly right — we stayed within our circle of understanding. Rather than stretching into unfamiliar territory, we chose trades where we could build conviction from first principles. That clarity made decision-making faster and, importantly, calmer.
What we underestimated
Where we were less precise was in execution friction.
Logistics took longer than expected. Counterparty coordination required more follow-up than anticipated. Small inefficiencies compounded quickly.
At the start, it is easy to model a business as if it runs on clean timelines and rational actors. In reality, especially in emerging markets, delays are not exceptions — they are part of the system.
We also underestimated how much working capital discipline matters in practice. Cash flow timing, not just profitability, quickly became the constraint that shaped our decisions.
How the model is holding up
Despite these early frictions, the core model has held.
The assumptions we began with — that there is value in structured, patient trades and that disciplined execution creates an edge — remain intact.
If anything, the early experience has reinforced them.
What has changed is not the model itself, but how we operate within it. We have become more conservative in timelines, more deliberate in partner selection, and more focused on operational detail.
What this means going forward
The lesson from the first two trades is not that we need a new strategy.
It is that we need sharper execution.
In the long run, the businesses that endure are not the ones that avoid friction entirely, but the ones that learn how to price it in, manage it, and move forward regardless.
We are still early.
But the signal from the noise is becoming clearer.