Back

Back

Back

Scenario planing

B2G fundraising process and common questions

→ "What's your sales cycle?" — Have the real data, not the optimistic version → "How do you handle payment delays?" — Show your working capital strategy → "What's your renewal rate?" — Explain why it's different from monthly churn → "Show me the downside scenario" — Have it modeled and ready → "When do you hit cash flow positive?" — Know the date and what drives it

There's a moment in every B2G fundraising process where the conversation shifts from your product vision to the mechanics of your business. The investor has seen enough pitch decks to know that government technology can be a great market, but they've also been burned by companies that didn't understand the operational complexity. What follows is a series of questions designed to separate founders who really understand their business from those who are still learning.

The first question is almost always about sales cycle. "How long does it take to close a deal?" If you say "three months" for government contracts, the investor knows you haven't actually closed many. Six to eighteen months is the realistic range, and being honest about it — while showing that you've planned for the cash requirements — builds credibility. Trying to minimize the number destroys it.

Then comes the working capital question. "How do you handle payment delays?" This is where the investor learns whether you've just modeled revenue or whether you actually understand cash flow. The right answer involves specific numbers: your average AR days, your working capital reserves, your strategy for bridging the gap between delivery and payment. The wrong answer is some variation of "it's usually thirty days" because that's what your contract says.

Renewal rates get asked differently in B2G. "What's your churn?" isn't quite the right framing when customers sign multi-year contracts. The investor wants to know your contract renewal rate at renewal points, which is a different calculation than monthly SaaS churn. If you're presenting monthly churn numbers for an annual contract business, you've lost credibility.

The scenario question reveals how deeply you've thought about risk. "Show me the downside case." If you don't have one prepared, you're signaling that you haven't seriously engaged with what could go wrong. Investors don't expect you to predict the future perfectly, but they expect you to have thought about ranges and contingencies.

Finally, the cash milestone question: "When do you hit cash flow positive?" Not breakeven, which is an accounting concept, but cash flow positive, which is when you stop needing external capital to operate. These are different dates, sometimes by years, and confusing them suggests you don't understand your own model.

The Verter Studio framework prepares you for all five of these questions with outputs designed for investor conversations.

→ "What's your sales cycle?" — Have the real data, not the optimistic version
→ "How do you handle payment delays?" — Show your working capital strategy
→ "What's your renewal rate?" — Explain why it's different from monthly churn
→ "Show me the downside scenario" — Have it modeled and ready
→ "When do you hit cash flow positive?" — Know the date and what drives it

What's the hardest investor question you've faced?

hashtag#InvestorRelations hashtag#B2G hashtag#Fundraising hashtag#StartupAdvice

View more articles

Learn actionable strategies, proven workflows, and tips from experts to help your product thrive.

Cash is a king

VENTURE CAPITAL, ACCELERATORS, AND B2G STARTUPS - The Infrastructure Gap in Financial Planning for Business-to-Government Companies

$183.5 billion. That's how much the US federal government awarded to small businesses in FY 2024 — an all-time record. The GovTech market is projected to hit $2.9 trillion by 2033. Funding is surging. Accelerators are multiplying. Government innovation offices are actively seeking startup partners. And yet, B2G startups keep dying. Not because their products fail. Not because the market isn't there. Because the financial tools they rely on — the same MRR-based templates, SaaS churn models, and linear growth projections that work beautifully for consumer software — are structurally incapable of modeling how government contracts actually work. Net-90 payment terms. Milestone-based invoicing. Multi-year commitments. S-curve adoption with 12–24 months of "Death Valley" before revenue accelerates. Working capital gaps that can exceed $500,000 before a single dollar arrives. Standard financial models hide all of this. The result: founders make spending decisions based on phantom revenue. Investors misprice risk using metrics designed for a different business model entirely. Accelerators evaluate companies with scorecards that don't match the operating reality those companies will face. We analyzed 50+ financial planning tools across four market segments. The finding: zero specifically address B2G revenue recognition, contract-based churn, or government payment cycle modeling. Not at the $150K enterprise tier. Not at the $300 template tier. Nowhere. We also examined regulatory requirements from the US GAO, UK Cabinet Office, and OECD — all of which mandate vendor financial viability assessment but offer no standardized framework for early-stage companies. The full report, "Venture Capital, Accelerators, and B2G Startups: The Infrastructure Gap in Financial Planning for Business-to-Government Companies," is a 20-page analytical deep-dive covering the VC blind spot, the accelerator paradox, the regulatory dimension, and what contract-aware financial infrastructure should actually look like.

Cash is a king

VENTURE CAPITAL, ACCELERATORS, AND B2G STARTUPS - The Infrastructure Gap in Financial Planning for Business-to-Government Companies

$183.5 billion. That's how much the US federal government awarded to small businesses in FY 2024 — an all-time record. The GovTech market is projected to hit $2.9 trillion by 2033. Funding is surging. Accelerators are multiplying. Government innovation offices are actively seeking startup partners. And yet, B2G startups keep dying. Not because their products fail. Not because the market isn't there. Because the financial tools they rely on — the same MRR-based templates, SaaS churn models, and linear growth projections that work beautifully for consumer software — are structurally incapable of modeling how government contracts actually work. Net-90 payment terms. Milestone-based invoicing. Multi-year commitments. S-curve adoption with 12–24 months of "Death Valley" before revenue accelerates. Working capital gaps that can exceed $500,000 before a single dollar arrives. Standard financial models hide all of this. The result: founders make spending decisions based on phantom revenue. Investors misprice risk using metrics designed for a different business model entirely. Accelerators evaluate companies with scorecards that don't match the operating reality those companies will face. We analyzed 50+ financial planning tools across four market segments. The finding: zero specifically address B2G revenue recognition, contract-based churn, or government payment cycle modeling. Not at the $150K enterprise tier. Not at the $300 template tier. Nowhere. We also examined regulatory requirements from the US GAO, UK Cabinet Office, and OECD — all of which mandate vendor financial viability assessment but offer no standardized framework for early-stage companies. The full report, "Venture Capital, Accelerators, and B2G Startups: The Infrastructure Gap in Financial Planning for Business-to-Government Companies," is a 20-page analytical deep-dive covering the VC blind spot, the accelerator paradox, the regulatory dimension, and what contract-aware financial infrastructure should actually look like.

Cash is a king

VENTURE CAPITAL, ACCELERATORS, AND B2G STARTUPS - The Infrastructure Gap in Financial Planning for Business-to-Government Companies

$183.5 billion. That's how much the US federal government awarded to small businesses in FY 2024 — an all-time record. The GovTech market is projected to hit $2.9 trillion by 2033. Funding is surging. Accelerators are multiplying. Government innovation offices are actively seeking startup partners. And yet, B2G startups keep dying. Not because their products fail. Not because the market isn't there. Because the financial tools they rely on — the same MRR-based templates, SaaS churn models, and linear growth projections that work beautifully for consumer software — are structurally incapable of modeling how government contracts actually work. Net-90 payment terms. Milestone-based invoicing. Multi-year commitments. S-curve adoption with 12–24 months of "Death Valley" before revenue accelerates. Working capital gaps that can exceed $500,000 before a single dollar arrives. Standard financial models hide all of this. The result: founders make spending decisions based on phantom revenue. Investors misprice risk using metrics designed for a different business model entirely. Accelerators evaluate companies with scorecards that don't match the operating reality those companies will face. We analyzed 50+ financial planning tools across four market segments. The finding: zero specifically address B2G revenue recognition, contract-based churn, or government payment cycle modeling. Not at the $150K enterprise tier. Not at the $300 template tier. Nowhere. We also examined regulatory requirements from the US GAO, UK Cabinet Office, and OECD — all of which mandate vendor financial viability assessment but offer no standardized framework for early-stage companies. The full report, "Venture Capital, Accelerators, and B2G Startups: The Infrastructure Gap in Financial Planning for Business-to-Government Companies," is a 20-page analytical deep-dive covering the VC blind spot, the accelerator paradox, the regulatory dimension, and what contract-aware financial infrastructure should actually look like.