Part of choosing a buyer is choosing who you are not building toward. Saying no to a cheque still feels wrong. Saying no to a conversation feels like leaving money on the table. But a buyer who does not fit the pattern costs you something real. They cost you clarity. They cost you speed. They cost you the ability to use past work as proof. They cost you the ability to use your language with confidence. Every buyer outside the pattern is more explanation, more adaptation, more work to land. That friction adds up across the year and makes the practice harder.

Good disqualifiers are specific. Not just size, but the kind of size. Not just stage, but the kind of problem that stage creates. Not just industry, but the kind of decision-making that industry requires. A founder in hypergrowth differs from a founder in sustainable mode. The problem they need to solve is structurally different. A CFO trying to go public differs from a CFO trying to stay private. The risk picture is not the same. A board member overseeing a turnaround differs from a board member overseeing a scaling company. The authority and timeline are not the same. The disqualifiers are not moral. They are structural. They are the buyers where your experience does not transfer cleanly, where the language has to change too much, where the proof does not travel as well. They are the categories you should politely decline so the practice stays coherent and focused.