Reply from Contrarian ThinkingAug 18, 2026
Muriel,
You're entitled to feel the programs didn't produce the outcome you wanted, and I'm sorry it ended that way. But since this is a public review making specific claims, I want to add context.
You describe being left to work substantially alone with essentially no support. That doesn't match the record.
You joined the Academy in September 2025, attended 49 events, and made 23 posts, 85 replies, 71 reactions. You worked through valuation, EBITDA/SDE, SBA financing, LOIs, diligence, and deal structure, reaching an accepted LOI with a bank underwriting it before walking away after diligence surfaced risks you weren't comfortable with. That's not a failure of the process, it's what good diligence should do.
You later decided buying a business wasn't the right direction and asked to move into Growth Boardroom yourself. We made that change and kept working with you. Your own refund correspondence acknowledged you'd used the community, studied the materials, and attended calls and coaching sessions.
You say the Boardroom cadence was inadequate and advisors just repeated things back to you. The record shows five working sessions with your reassigned advisor between June 19 and July 29, covering 10+ prospect interviews and 5-6 second-stage calls. Your advisor reviewed the interviews, refined your ICP and positioning, went line-by-line through your webinar, reviewed your sales materials and offer structure, evaluated your pipeline, and advised against a commission arrangement that wasn't economically attractive, plus follow-up on founder dependency, pricing, lead generation, and outreach. That didn't guarantee a customer. As of the last session, you hadn't signed a client.
You also say we took credit for your webinar and book. We've never claimed that, those were your accomplishments. But you did use the Academy community while developing and launching The Valuation Gap, promoting it to members from late May through July. The book covers valuation, financing, and structural risk, the same subjects you spent months learning in Academy deal reviews. You're entitled to write a book from what you learned. It's fair for readers to know it was developed and promoted while you were an active member of that community.
On the idea we only responded because you asked for a refund: your first request came in June, after months of participation. Support escalated it beyond standard policy, and your advisor was reassigned. On May 28, before any refund request, you asked us to turn off auto-renewal. We did so immediately and you replied, "That's great, thank you very much." When you later requested a full refund for both memberships, we reviewed it against the membership terms and declined. Declining doesn't mean we ignored your concerns.
I don't want to minimize your disappointment. You invested real money and expected a different result. Those are real facts.
But there's a difference between "I didn't get the outcome I wanted" and "there was no support, no engagement, no work done." The record shows 49 events, extensive engagement, multiple deal reviews, an LOI at bank underwriting, a member-requested move to Boardroom, additional advisory support, and hands-on webinar help.
We can always improve, and we should. But we won't accept a public characterization that leaves out that history.
I wish you success with the business and the book. I mean that. But for anyone reading this review, the complete record matters.
Codie Sanchez
CEO, Contrarian Thinking LLC
