Willy Braun’s Post

📈 The best techs startups make markets, they don't find them. TLDR: Static TAM circles are theatre. Dynamic sizing ties a concrete [ Entry Market ] you can sell to today to [ Expansion Mixes ] you unlock through execution tomorrow. Numbers meet narrative. Clarity beats faux precision. AWS created elastic computing, not a server TAM. Uber expanded mobility budgets, not taxis. ElevenLabs is creating voice synthesis demand, Perplexity is shifting search from links to answers, Suno is turning demos into production workflows. Here is the framework I love: 1/ Entry Market, SAM0. Define the job to be done, name the sales qualified ICP, count real buyers you can reach now. Use the quick math: ICP count × users per account × realistic AOV × achievable penetration. 2/ Expansion Mixes, SAM1, SAM2. Growth is non linear. New mixes unlock when conditions align, product maturity, reference logos, regulatory clearance, complementary infrastructure. Treat each mix as a new configuration, not just a bigger circle. 3/ Bridge narrative and numbers. Bottoms up ICP math, reconciled with top down budget pools. Simple under uncertainty, as Gigerenzer showed, wins early. Bottom line: the best founders do not show the biggest TAM in their deck, they show the clearest path. 👉👉 Full article: http://bit.ly/3KCxaWl With thanks to Martin Mignot for inspiration, and to Mathieu Daix and Stanislas Lot for sharp observations and feedback.