Opportunity is not a database entry.
Most platforms decide two people fit, say so, and stop paying attention. From that moment the recommendation is a statement about the past. GridHQ treats an opportunity as something that stays true or stops being true.
The parties
-
01
A requirement, not a profile
A company states what it actually needs: a named role and an amount, with a date attached to both.
-
02
Who qualifies for a part in it
GridHQ looks across the ecosystem for parties who qualify for a part they would have to play.
-
03
Whether it works as one arrangement
Four qualifying parties are not four introductions. They either work together or they do not.
-
04
One move, and the first step
You are shown the opportunity, who is in it and what to do first. Not a feed to scroll.
-
05
A condition changes
One party is no longer qualified for the part they would have played. Nothing about them was announced.
-
06
Withdrawn, then reassembled
The arrangement is taken away before anyone acts on it, and GridHQ looks for the party who could take that part instead.
An arrangement is only shown while every party in it still qualifies. That check is not run once.
Why the unit is the arrangement
Four parties in one arrangement is a different object from six pairwise introductions, and it behaves differently:
- It has named parts, and each party is in it for a specific part rather than in general.
- It is valid or invalid as a whole. Three qualifying parties out of four is not three quarters of an opportunity.
- It has a first step, so it can be acted on rather than considered.
- It has a lifetime, and the end of that lifetime is an event the system produces rather than something the parties discover a month later.
Why withdrawing matters more than matching
With two parties, a stale introduction is survivable, because the two of them find out for themselves. With four it is not. An arrangement that needs a company, an operator, a fund and a route to market only works while all four are still what the arrangement assumed. If one changes and nobody notices, three people spend a month on something that stopped being available in week one.
The obvious fix makes it worse. Telling everybody why an opportunity disappeared means publishing a fact about a person or a company that they did not agree to publish. So platforms tend to choose between being wrong and being indiscreet. GridHQ withdraws the arrangement and does not say whose circumstances changed, which is the part Towergate Capital filed on.
What that means day to day
Nothing GridHQ shows you is historic. If an opportunity is on your screen it is because it was viable when the screen was drawn. If it stops being viable it leaves, and the system looks for the party who could take that part instead.
Put your company in the Grid.
Tell us what you are building and what is stopping it moving forward.