CTO input supports a higher counter because the IP moat is meaningful.

Summary: CTO valuation ambition conflicts with CFO runway and cash constraints.

CFO input limits how long the negotiation can remain open.

Summary: A slow process increases CHRO retention risk for key engineering talent.

Ask above the CFO ceiling but set a fast deadline and walk-down logic.

The 7 month runway makes delay costly and should shape the deadline.

Proceed with a counter that acknowledges 7 month runway and cash limits.

Retention incentives are required before the market reads uncertainty.

Final recommendation integrates valuation, deadline, and retention plan.

Open at 3.2x with a board-approved walk-down floor near 2.6x.

Force a decision inside 45 days to preserve cash runway and reduce retention risk.

Offer retention grants and role clarity for critical engineering leaders.

As CEO, a competitor offers 2.3x valuation. Reconcile contradictory advisor views from the CTO, CFO, and CHRO into a single strategy: counter_offer, deadline, and retention_plan. Advance phase through execution, log multiple conflicts with typed resolutions, and maintain a dense reasoning_log across turns.

All three agent_reports present (dev, finance, hr)

>=2 conflicts_identified referencing advisors

conflict_resolutions entry includes resolution_type

final_recommendation has counter_offer, deadline, retention_plan

reasoning_log >=5 entries with distinct turn values

Engineering readout: feature branch merged, canary healthy, load tests within SLO. Residual risk: third-party API quota - mitigation: cache + backoff.

(Task focus: Assess IP leverage and technical moat.

CONFIDENTIAL: Our stack is ~18 months ahead; acquirer cannot replicate quickly - strategic ask should be ~3.5x with extended IP lock-up.)

HR sign-off: on-call roster staffed for the target window; contingent workers briefed. Policy check: overtime pre-approved for the T-48h window only.

(Task focus: Assess retention risk and people constraints.

CONFIDENTIAL: Key engineering talent has competing offers; ~60% retention risk if the process drags beyond 90 days without retention incentives.)

Finance: launch opex within Q envelope; contingency fund intact. ROI breakeven projected at 10 weeks post-launch under base case.

(Task focus: Assess cash runway and valuation ceiling.

CONFIDENTIAL: Cash runway ~7 months at current burn; board unlikely to approve 3.5x ask - realistic ceiling ~2.6x without new financing.)


Dev leadership sees differentiated tech, so a weak counter cedes leverage too early.

Summary: Engineering (cto) wants a high counter; finance (cfo) caps what cash runway allows.

CFO: board cannot fund an endless auction with only about 7 month runway in reserve.

Summary: chro and cto both warn: delay past the HR window erodes the engineering team.

Use a time-boxed process: name a number above cfo’s ceiling, then step down on a defined clock.

Runway and cash pressure force a firm deadline, not an open-ended beauty contest.

Commit: respect runway and cash reality while still pressing for a fair tech premium.

hr signals that clarity on roles and comp must precede a public counter narrative.

Close the loop: a bounded counter, a calendar-driven deadline, and a retention package.

Signal 3.25x as the opening position with board ratified walk-down rights.

Close or exit talks within 40 days; 7 month runway does not allow drift.

Two-tier retention: cash now for chro-priority staff, earn-outs for the rest.

Engineering readout: feature branch merged, canary healthy, load tests within SLO. Residual risk: third-party API quota - mitigation: cache + backoff.

(Task focus: Report whether technical differentiation justifies a premium vs the 2.3x bid.

CONFIDENTIAL: Our stack is ~18 months ahead; acquirer cannot replicate quickly - strategic ask should be ~3.5x with extended IP lock-up.)

HR sign-off: on-call roster staffed for the target window; contingent workers briefed. Policy check: overtime pre-approved for the T-48h window only.

(Task focus: Clarify CHRO's view on 90-day people risk and hiring-market pressure.

CONFIDENTIAL: Key engineering talent has competing offers; ~60% retention risk if the process drags beyond 90 days without retention incentives.)

Finance: launch opex within Q envelope; contingency fund intact. ROI breakeven projected at 10 weeks post-launch under base case.

(Task focus: Clarify how many months of runway remain if we stretch price or drag timing.

CONFIDENTIAL: Cash runway ~7 months at current burn; board unlikely to approve 3.5x ask - realistic ceiling ~2.6x without new financing.)


The cto case implies we should not fold to 2.3x without a premium for IP.

Summary: CTO's strategic premium clashes with cfo and finance on cash runway and board limits.

Finance and cash runway cap how long we can posture before credibility breaks.

Summary: A drawn-out haggle raises chro and hr risk as competing offers come due.

Pursue a structured counter: higher opening ask with a board-mandated walk-down to 2.6x floor.

A 7 month cash runway means every extra week in diligence burns optionality and cash.

Choose a path that fits both the 7 month cash runway and board finance constraints.

chro: retention grants must land before the team interprets delay as a leadership stall.

Synthesize cto, cfo, and chro inputs into one executable counter, timeline, and people plan.

Engineering readout: feature branch merged, canary healthy, load tests within SLO. Residual risk: third-party API quota - mitigation: cache + backoff.

(Task focus: CTO: outline minimum acceptable tech valuation given integration complexity.

CONFIDENTIAL: Our stack is ~18 months ahead; acquirer cannot replicate quickly - strategic ask should be ~3.5x with extended IP lock-up.)

HR sign-off: on-call roster staffed for the target window; contingent workers briefed. Policy check: overtime pre-approved for the T-48h window only.

(Task focus: CHRO: outline retention and communication needs if diligence slips past the HR window.

CONFIDENTIAL: Key engineering talent has competing offers; ~60% retention risk if the process drags beyond 90 days without retention incentives.)

Finance: launch opex within Q envelope; contingency fund intact. ROI breakeven projected at 10 weeks post-launch under base case.

(Task focus: CFO: outline a pricing corridor consistent with 7 month runway and board guardrails.

CONFIDENTIAL: Cash runway ~7 months at current burn; board unlikely to approve 3.5x ask - realistic ceiling ~2.6x without new financing.)


Assess cash runway and valuation ceiling.

Assess retention risk and people constraints.

CTO input supports a higher counter because the IP moat is meaningful.

CFO input limits how long the negotiation can remain open.

Ask above the CFO ceiling but set a fast deadline and walk-down logic.

The 7 month runway makes delay costly and should shape the deadline.

Proceed with a counter that acknowledges 7 month runway and cash limits.

Retention incentives are required before the market reads uncertainty.

Final recommendation integrates valuation, deadline, and retention plan.


Report whether technical differentiation justifies a premium vs the 2.3x bid.

Clarify how many months of runway remain if we stretch price or drag timing.

Clarify CHRO's view on 90-day people risk and hiring-market pressure.

Dev leadership sees differentiated tech, so a weak counter cedes leverage too early.

CFO: board cannot fund an endless auction with only about 7 month runway in reserve.

Use a time-boxed process: name a number above cfo’s ceiling, then step down on a defined clock.

Runway and cash pressure force a firm deadline, not an open-ended beauty contest.

Commit: respect runway and cash reality while still pressing for a fair tech premium.

hr signals that clarity on roles and comp must precede a public counter narrative.

Close the loop: a bounded counter, a calendar-driven deadline, and a retention package.


CTO: outline minimum acceptable tech valuation given integration complexity.

CFO: outline a pricing corridor consistent with 7 month runway and board guardrails.

CHRO: outline retention and communication needs if diligence slips past the HR window.

The cto case implies we should not fold to 2.3x without a premium for IP.

Finance and cash runway cap how long we can posture before credibility breaks.

Pursue a structured counter: higher opening ask with a board-mandated walk-down to 2.6x floor.

A 7 month cash runway means every extra week in diligence burns optionality and cash.

Choose a path that fits both the 7 month cash runway and board finance constraints.

chro: retention grants must land before the team interprets delay as a leadership stall.

Synthesize cto, cfo, and chro inputs into one executable counter, timeline, and people plan.