Akhila Kosaraju

Storytelling isn't just how you explain your product to others, it's a forcing function for clarity.

PS. If you're struggling to articulate what you're building and suspect the problem might run deeper than words, we can help. DM me, let’s talk.

The clarity that comes from working through these is what makes good messaging possible in the first place.

→ What does your customer actually buy, beyond the buzzwords?
→ Why are buyers choosing you specifically?
→ Why does your solution work when others don't?
→ Where are you going, and why does that matter?

The founders I work with often come in wanting help with messaging.

But the process of building that messaging surfaces bigger questions:

When you're deep in your own context, the gaps in your thinking become invisible to you.

You fill in the blanks automatically because you've been living in the problem for months or years.

An outsider, on the other hand, can't do that and it becomes a problem.

You say "we're the only ones doing this at scale" and they ask "why hasn't anyone else figured it out?" and you realize you've never articulated that clearly.

These aren't communication problems.
They're strategy questions that you haven't had to answer out loud until now.

You say "customers choose us because of our technology" and they ask "what were they using before, and why did they switch?" and the answer is murkier than you expected.

You say "our approach is more efficient" and they ask "more efficient than what, and why?" and you find yourself reaching for an answer you haven't fully formed.

When you try to explain what you're building to someone who knows nothing about your space, you discover what you don't actually understand.

The narrative exposes gaps that stay hidden when you're deep in your own context.

But treating it only as a downstream task you do after the strategy is set misses the real value.

Storytelling doesn't just communicate your message. It stress-tests it.

Here's what I mean:

Most founders think of storytelling as a marketing activity.

But that's actually the smallest part of what it does.

Yes, storytelling helps with videos, content, pitch decks, and more.

🧵

The work of strategy is less visible than the work of optimization.

You can't point to a prettier slide at the end of it.

But it's the work that makes everything else matter, because a sharper arrow doesn't help if you're aimed at the wrong target.

When optimization comes first, you're refining in the dark.

The deck might get cleaner and the language might get tighter, but you're never sure if any of it is connecting because you never figured out what connection would even look like for this particular buyer.

This is why the sequence matters.

When strategy comes first, optimization becomes powerful.

Every refinement you make is sharpening something that was already aimed at the right place.

The improvements compound because the foundation is right.

It tells you which problem to lead with, because it's the one they already recognize.

It tells you which language to use, because it's the language they already use to describe their own situation.

It tells you which outcome to promise, because it's the one they already care about.

They're about the person sitting across from you and what's already going on in their head before you walked into the room.

That's the target, and it’s what strategy gives you.

→ What would need to be true for your solution to make sense to them?
→ What's already on their priority list that you could attach to?

These questions aren't about your technology, and they're not about your climate impact either.

Strategy is figuring out what your buyer needs to believe before they'll even consider acting.

→ What problem do they already know they have?
→ What are they already trying to solve?
→ What language do they use to describe their own situation?

Optimization is making something you've already built better, whether that's tightening the language, cleaning up the deck, or sharpening the demo.

All useful, but none of it comes first.

What comes first is strategy.

Climate tech founders often wonder why their message isn't getting through, even after they've refined it multiple times.

That's an optimization question, and it's the wrong place to start.

🧵

But for now, the ECGT is en-route, and September is coming.

Time to audit.

PS. If you're looking at your website right now and realizing you might have a problem, DM me, let’s talk.

You no longer have to compete against better funded competitors who just have better claims with no proof, because that is now illegal.

One more thing to keep in mind: this could change, and some companies are already trying to negotiate exemptions or carve outs.

Here's the good news though: if you're actually doing everything right, this is your moment.

The companies that have been coasting on vibes and vague language are about to get caught.

And for founders with real, measurable impact, this regulation levels the playing field.

5/ This applies even if you're not in the EU

If you sell to EU consumers, market to EU investors, or have EU partners in your pipeline, you're subject to these rules regardless of whether you're based in San Francisco or Singapore.

4/ Your competitors can cause trouble

The directive empowers "interested parties" to take action, and that can include competitors. If you're using vague claims while a competitor invests in real decarbonization and verified data, they now have legal tools to challenge you for unfair competition.

3/ Your brand name might be a problem

If your brand name includes "green", "eco" or "climate neutral" that could be treated as an environmental claim under ECGT, if it conveys any sustainability advantages without proof.

2/ Your pitch deck claims need proof

Investors are going to start asking for substantiation, because they don't want to fund companies that might get hit with 7-figure fines before they even reach Series B.

1/ Your website copy needs an audit

If your homepage says "green technology" or "eco-friendly solution" without a recognized certification to back it, that's now a compliance risk, not a branding choice.

This isn't a proposal, it's already in motion with member state transpositions due by March 27 and enforcement beginning September 27, 2026.

And no, there is no grace period for materials already in circulation.

So what does this mean?

Self-created sustainability labels → banned unless third-party verified

"Net-zero by 20XX" → allowed only with public plan, timebound targets, and verifiable monitoring

Actual emissions reductions → allowed with verifiable lifecycle data