The Burrito in the Room: Why Naming Risks Builds Trust in Your Pitch
Every pitch has two versions: the one you think you’re delivering, and the one the room actually hears. The gap between the two is where trust gets compromised.
That’s exactly what just played out with Guzman y Gomez.
On the scoreboard, GYG had a year most companies would envy:
Network sales passed the A$1 billion mark.
Net profit more than doubled to ~A$14.5m.
Their first dividend was declared.
By any traditional measure, that’s a clean win.
But the market didn’t buy it. Shares slid more than 20% in the days after results—a signal that investors didn’t fully believe the story being pitched.
Here’s the nuance, and it's important: GYG didn’t ignore the risk. They did mention the U.S. losses. But they didn’t lead with it. The headline was all profit and growth. By the time the market got to the risk, conviction had already cracked.
The elephant in the room wasn’t invisible. It just looked more like a burrito—their expansion plan, sitting heavy in plain sight but left wrapped up.
From Elephant to Burrito
GYG's US expansion plan cost A$13.2m in losses this year and is expected to widen as they invest further into the US. Add to that the release of ~45% of shares from escrow, creating heavy selling pressure, and you’ve got a risk sitting in plain sight.
Investors could see it. They could smell it. But because it wasn’t unpacked upfront in the pitch, belief fractured.
That’s the burrito in the room: the thing that’s obvious to everyone but avoided by the pitcher.
The No-Sell Sales Pitch Way
The hard-sell approach tries to bury the burrito. Smother it in toppings. Distract with sizzle. Hope no one notices the mess inside.
The No-Sell Sales Pitch approach does the opposite. It unwraps it.
It says:
“Yes, expansion is costly. Yes, it creates risk. Here’s what it means, here’s how we’re tackling it, and here’s why the story still holds.”
The room doesn’t lose faith because you named the risk. They gain trust—because you showed you’ve thought through both the upside and the cost.
Missionary vs. Mercenary
Mercenary pitching avoids the burrito. It tries to look flawless, chasing applause in the moment.
Missionary pitching prioritises building belief and alignment. It does the harder thing: naming the risk, framing the challenge, and showing why the story/deal/product still stands (and deserves to do so).
Because a flawless story is suspicious. A real one—with spills, bite marks, and fingerprints is more believable and authentic.
The Lesson for GYG
GYG’s results were strong. But the market wanted to see the burrito in the room unwrapped. When it wasn’t, confidence slipped.
Your next pitch may not involve investors or expansion, but the principle is exactly the same:
The room already sees the burrito.
They’re waiting to see if you do. Address it up front.
Calling it out doesn’t weaken your pitch. It builds belief and alignment.
Ask Yourself
Before your next high-stakes conversation, ask yourself:
What’s the burrito in this room—the risk everyone sees but no one’s naming—and how do I unwrap it before someone else does?
Because at the end of the day, you're aiming for alignment. And clarity is what gets you there.
TL;DR
Profit isn’t the pitch. Creating alignment, trust and belief is.
Every pitch has a burrito in the room. If you don’t name it, the room will.
Authority comes from owning the risk. Naming the messy part shows clarity and transparency, not weakness.
Missionary > Mercenary. Build trust by being human, not flawless.
Articles for greater context: