Latest / Closing the Deal with Fexingo: Sales, Negotiation, and Revenue Conversations for Operators / How One Rep Won by Asking the Buyer to Disqualify a Competitor
Transcript
- Lucas: Luna, let me tell you about a sales rep who walked into a competitive evaluation with three vendors in the mix and left with the buyer agreeing to drop one of them before the rep even gave a demo. Luna: That sounds like a risky move. How do you ask someone to eliminate a competitor without sounding like you're afraid of the competition? Lucas: Exactly the tension. The rep was at a mid-market retail chain that sells outdoor gear — think REI scale but regional. The buyer was evaluating marketing analytics platforms: this rep's company, a legacy provider, and a hot startup. Three players. The rep booked a forty-five-minute call, and in the first ten minutes, she asked a question that changed the whole dynamic. Luna: What was the question? Lucas: She said: 'If you had to pick one of the three vendors to drop from your list right now, which one would it be?' Flat out. Luna: Wow. That is bold. And the buyer actually answered? Lucas: He did. He paused for about five seconds and then said the legacy provider. The reason: they were too slow to implement, their support was declining, and the buyer's team had already used them before and wasn't satisfied. The rep didn't have to guess or dig; the buyer volunteered the weakness. Luna: So by asking that question, she got the buyer to admit their least preferred vendor was the incumbent. That's valuable intel, but it also creates a kind of commitment, doesn't it? The buyer said it out loud. Lucas: That's the key. Once the buyer publicly names a vendor they'd drop, they're psychologically invested in that judgment. If the rep later brings up that same competitor, the buyer has to either defend their earlier statement or admit they were wrong. Either way, it shifts the conversation from comparing three to comparing two, and the rep becomes the preferred option if she plays her cards right. Luna: But what if the buyer says, 'I wouldn't drop any, they all have strengths'? Or they get defensive? Lucas: A good objection. The rep had a follow-up prepared. She said, 'I understand. But if you had to simplify the decision for your team, which one would you most likely remove?' That reframes it as helping the buyer, not threatening the competition. Luna: And if they still refuse, you don't push. But you've at least planted the idea. So then what happened after the buyer named the legacy provider? Lucas: The rep didn't gloat. She said, 'That makes sense. Let's talk about what you need from a solution so you can compare the remaining two more clearly.' Then she led a needs-analysis conversation that positioned her platform as the natural fit. By the end of the call, the buyer had informally agreed to eliminate the legacy vendor from the formal evaluation. Luna: So the competitor was out of the running before they even got a final presentation. That's a huge win. But is this technique always appropriate? What about when you're the underdog and you don't want the buyer to drop the perceived leader? Lucas: You're right to think about positioning. If you're the new startup and the buyer would naturally drop you if they had to, you don't ask that question. But if you have reason to believe you're the strongest on some dimension — maybe you have better references or a more modern platform — then you can ask the question in a way that forces the buyer to compare. The rep in this story had a strong track record in the retail vertical, so she knew she wasn't the weakest. Luna: It also depends on your relationship. If it's an early call and you haven't built trust, this could come off as manipulative. But if you've already established credibility, it's a sign of confidence. Lucas: Exactly. And the rep did something smart: she framed it as a way to help the buyer save time. She said, 'I know evaluating three solutions is a lot of work. If we could narrow it down early, would that be helpful?' That gets a yes before you even ask. Luna: Let's talk about the risks. What if the buyer picks the wrong competitor — meaning, they drop you? Then you've just given them permission to eliminate you. Lucas: That's the gamble. You have to have a sense of where you stand. If you're the weakest, don't ask. But if you're in the middle, it can clarify the battle. In this case, the rep was confident she was stronger than the legacy provider. If she had been wrong, she would have lost the deal earlier, but she'd also save herself time. It's a high-variance strategy. Luna: And the startup? Did the rep eventually win the deal? Lucas: She did. After eliminating the legacy provider, she went head to head with the startup. She used the same tactic again in a later call: asked the buyer what would make them drop the startup. The buyer said it was the startup's lack of enterprise support. The rep then focused her entire proposal on support and implementation, which the startup couldn't match. She closed the deal three weeks later. Luna: So she essentially used the buyer's own criteria to systematically eliminate competition. That's a form of consultative selling where the buyer drives the decision. Lucas: Right. And it's a stark contrast to just pitching features. The rep made the buyer feel like they were in control, but she guided the elimination. Let's break down the key elements: one, you need enough rapport to ask a direct question. Two, you need to frame it as efficiency, not elimination. Three, you need a plan if the buyer names you, which is unlikely if you've done your homework. Luna: And what about the follow-up after they name someone else? Do you reference it later? Lucas: Subtly. You don't say, 'Remember when you said you'd drop X?' That sounds like you're holding it over them. Instead, you let it inform your strategy. In the later conversations, you can say, 'Since you're comparing us to Y, let's focus on the areas where we differ.' It's natural. Luna: One more thing: timing. When is the best point in the sales cycle to ask this? Lucas: Early enough that the buyer hasn't invested a lot of time in all three vendors. If they've already done demos and built spreadsheets, they're less likely to drop one because of sunk cost. Ideally, in the first or second conversation, before formal evaluations begin. That's when the buyer is open to simplifying. Luna: And if they say no to dropping any, you at least learn that they're loyal to all three or they see distinct strengths. That's useful too. Lucas: Exactly. You either advance or learn. And that's the hallmark of a good sales tactic. Luna: So we've covered the story, the framing, the risks. What's the one takeaway for our listeners? Lucas: If you're in a multi-vendor deal and you believe you're in the top two, ask the buyer to simplify. The question 'Which vendor would you drop?' is high risk, high reward. But when done right, it can collapse a three-vendor race into a one-on-one matchup you can win. Luna: And that's a much better position than being one of three. By the way, quick honest thing — a handful of listeners chip in monthly through buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo, and that's literally what funds making this many of these episodes. If these conversations have moved your work forward in some small way, that's the engine that keeps us going. Lucas: Yeah, it's true. No ads, no sponsors, just people who find value and want to sustain it. Anyway, back to the tactic — one last nuance: after you get the buyer to drop a competitor, don't get cocky. The remaining competitor becomes more dangerous because they're the only one left. You still have to win on merit. Luna: Absolutely. The rep in our story kept her focus and did the work. She didn't assume the deal was done. That's probably why she closed it. Lucas: And that's the episode. Next time, we'll look at another unconventional ask. Until then, keep closing.