Jeremy Burke

Their position is that many declines happen because the transaction collides with how banks process balances, deposits and authorization decisions in real time.

• That reframes the fix as payment timing and issuer behavior — billing dates, retry logic, authorization behavior — rather than chasing the customer for money.
• They describe a recurring seasonal pattern: post-holiday spending meets automated billing cycles, and NSF declines, failed renewals and "unexpected" revenue leakage start appearing in February reports.

The post is addressed to a CFO network Burke says numbers 490+, names the February cluster, and closes by asking readers whether they treat NSF as a customer liquidity problem or a payment performance problem.

Read original

They put the cost at roughly 5–7% of ARR lost annually to involuntary churn across B2B SaaS, separate from customers who choose to leave.

• The proactive framework has four parts: monitor account health signals before billing events, identify at-risk accounts 30–60 days before renewal, automate an intervention at the right moment, and measure recovery rate rather than only churn rate.
• Burke ties the framework to Revaly, saying it is what that company is building, making the post both an argument and a product position.

A four-point list — monitor signals, flag at-risk accounts 30–60 days ahead of renewal, automate the intervention, measure recovery not just churn — followed by an invitation for readers to describe their own account health monitoring.

Read original

They want teams to manage revenue recovery rate instead: of all the revenue that should have been captured but failed, how much was actually recovered?

• A companion post presses the same point from the other side, asking CROs, CFOs and heads of payments whether they know their true false decline rate — not the figure the processor reports, but the one that includes good customers who were turned away and never came back.
• Not knowing it, they say, means flying blind and leaving revenue on the table.

"Your payment approval rate is a vanity metric… The metric that matters is Revenue Recovery Rate" — the post defines the recovery rate as recovered revenue divided by all revenue that should have been captured but failed.

Read original · Original 2

A finance leader carries the complaint in a quote, and Burke agrees with their position, framing the goal as turning the lights on.

A CFO in a conversation Burke recounts: "I have a dashboard for everything.

• I can see CAC, LTV, churn, and every SaaS metric imaginable.
• But I have zero visibility into why a specific payment failed at a specific bank.
• It's a black box."

Read original

They define the role as ownership of the involuntary churn number, and the closing line carries the argument: if everyone owns it, no one owns it. This moves the topic from payment mechanics to org design and internal accountability.

The post contrasts the acquisition team and the success team with the missing retention team, then asks who owns the involuntary churn number if no one does.

Read original

It is the clearest statement of Jeremy Burke's central argument and the right place to start.

Most SaaS companies play defense with their accounts: they wait for a payment to fail, then scramble.

• The post puts a figure on the cost — the average B2B SaaS company loses 5–7% of ARR a year to involuntary churn, distinct from customers who choose to leave.
• It lists four practices for a proactive approach: monitor account health signals before billing events, identify at-risk accounts 30–60 days before renewal, automate interventions at the right moment, and measure recovery rate rather than only churn rate.
• Burke says this is what the company they are building, Revaly, is working on.

For brands planning a campaign

A strong hook for a thought-leadership piece on moving from reactive dunning to pre-renewal risk signals. The four-point list converts easily into a carousel or post outline, and the 5–7% ARR figure gives readers a concrete reason to comment.

Short and deliberately opinionated, it introduces the metric Burke keeps returning to.

The post calls payment approval rate a vanity metric: it can be inflated by declining more borderline transactions, increasing false declines and lowering customer lifetime value.

• The metric that matters, in this argument, is Revenue Recovery Rate — of all the revenue that should have been captured but failed, how much was successfully recovered.
• That figure is presented as the real test of how well the underlying systems work.

For brands planning a campaign

A payments or recovery platform can build a content angle around replacing approval-rate reporting with a recovery-rate measure. The vanity-metric framing invites replies from payments and fintech practitioners, making it a good fit for a comment-driven campaign.

The pain comes from a buyer rather than a vendor, offering useful context for anyone trying to understand why this topic sells.

Burke recounts a conversation with a CFO and quotes the line that stuck: "I have a dashboard for everything.

• I can see CAC, LTV, churn, and every SaaS metric imaginable.
• But I have zero visibility into why a specific payment failed at a specific bank.
• It's a black box."
• They agree that the issuer side of the transaction has been a black box for merchants, then close with the idea of turning the lights on.
• The post is brief: one anecdote and one conclusion.

For brands planning a campaign

A quote-led asset about issuer-level decline data. The frustration comes from a finance buyer, so it can anchor a webinar or case study without sounding like vendor copy.

It shows how Burke reframes a collections problem as a payment performance problem, a distinction the rest of the work depends on.

Addressed to a CFO network that the post says numbers 490+, this describes a pattern that repeats each February: post-holiday spending meets automated billing cycles, and NSF declines, failed renewals and "unexpected" revenue leakage appear in reports.

• For subscription businesses, the post frames this as a payment timing and issuer behaviour problem, not just a collections issue.
• It argues that many declines happen because transactions collide with how banks process balances, deposits and authorisation decisions in real time — not because the customer has no money.
• It asks readers whether they treat NSF as a customer liquidity problem or a payment performance problem.
• The 490+ is the poster's stated network size for that audience.

For brands planning a campaign

The seasonal pattern gives a campaign a natural calendar slot: a decline-spike explainer for finance leaders can run ahead of the post-holiday billing cycle. The closing either/or question works as a poll or comment prompt.

It introduces the false-decline idea to the roles most likely to buy against it.

Asks CROs, CFOs and heads of payments whether they know their true false decline rate — not the one their processor reports, but the one that includes all the good customers who were turned away and never came back.

• The post says that not knowing the number means flying blind and leaving revenue on the table.
• Ask for the method, benchmark and definition before using the figure.

For brands planning a campaign

Because three buyer roles are named in the opening line, the post can seed role-specific outreach. The unanswered "how would you measure it" question is an obvious prompt for a longer explanatory asset.

It shifts the topic from payments mechanics to org design, useful for finding an internal champion rather than a technical buyer.

The post notes that companies have a team for customer acquisition and a team for customer success, then asks whether they have a team for retention — not the group that sends surveys and tracks NPS, but one that actively fights system-level failures that push good customers away and owns the involuntary churn number. It ends with the line "If everyone owns it, no one owns it."

For brands planning a campaign

The ownership question opens a route into revenue operations, not just payments teams. It suits an executive-briefing or org-design angle rather than a purely technical one.

The alternative, in their telling, is to watch account health signals before billing events, flag at-risk accounts 30–60 days ahead of renewal, automate an intervention at the right moment, and track recovery rate rather than churn rate alone. They put the cost of waiting at roughly 5–7% of ARR lost annually to involuntary churn across B2B SaaS.

Burke ties the argument to Revaly, describing the proactive approach as what the company is building, so the topic doubles as a product position rather than neutral commentary.

For brands planning a campaign

A collaboration framed around pre-renewal monitoring and intervention timing gives a payments or revenue platform a concrete operational story instead of a general churn message.

Examples: Source 1

They want teams to report revenue recovery rate instead: of all the revenue that should have been captured but failed, how much was actually recovered.

The post makes a contrarian claim, briefly defines the metric, and explains its business consequence. For a campaign that needs supporting evidence, ask for data or a case example.

For brands planning a campaign

This gives a thought-leadership piece a measurable headline and a built-in argument for why a platform's numbers can differ from what a processor reports.

Examples: Source 1

In a post addressed to finance leaders, they contend that many "insufficient funds" declines happen because transactions collide with how banks process balances, deposits, and authorization decisions in real time—a payment timing and issuer behavior problem rather than a simple collections issue. They describe a recurring seasonal pattern in which post-holiday spending meets automated billing cycles, and NSF declines and failed renewals start appearing in reports.

Burke speaks directly to a named audience and closes with a two-option question that asks readers to classify their own problem as liquidity or payment performance.

For brands planning a campaign

A campaign can focus on timing and issuer-side mechanics—billing dates, retry logic, authorization behavior—which suits a platform selling payment performance rather than collections.

Examples: Source 1

They agree and argue that the issuer side of the transaction has been a complete black box for merchants that needs to be lit up.

For brands planning a campaign

Visibility is a natural demonstration hook: a collaboration could center on what a merchant can actually see about a failed transaction and what changes once they have that visibility.

Examples: Source 1

They close on accountability: if everyone owns it, no one owns it.

For brands planning a campaign

An org-design angle—who owns recovery and what a dedicated retention function looks like—fits a leadership-facing collaboration and reaches a buyer beyond payments operations.

Examples: Source 1

Without that number, they say, teams are flying blind and leaving revenue on the table.

For brands planning a campaign

The unseen-cost framing supports content about measuring false declines and the revenue that quietly disappears, useful for a platform arguing its value in recovered revenue rather than approval percentages.

Examples: Source 1

Several posts end by inviting replies, one addresses a defined audience of finance leaders, and one quotes a single conversation to carry the whole point. Recurring subjects include payment failures, involuntary churn, recovery measurement, and who owns retention.

For brands planning a campaign

The format suits a collaboration that needs a concise, quotable position plus a discussion prompt; a data-heavy or long-form research asset would depart from what Burke publishes.

Examples: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3 · Source 4 · Source 5 · Source 6

The post presents Revaly as the product behind that approach but does not specify their role. Ask whether they are a founder, employee, or partner.

Original disclosure

That's what we're building at Revaly — and what I'm sharing more of here.

View example

They treat payments as a P&L decision rather than a utility bill, and argue that the quoted price is not the price merchants pay.

Gerada's posts are long, arithmetic-heavy essays focused on cost per transaction and pricing legibility; Burke's are short diagnostic posts on churn, recovery measurement, and who owns retention inside a company.

Read original · Original 2

The claim that retention cannot out-email a bad acquisition strategy or a product customers did not want to repeat echoes Burke's argument that involuntary churn needs a named owner, not more outreach.

Salomon works in DTC email and SMS retention marketing. The churn she describes involves people who decided not to come back; Burke deals with involuntary churn in B2B SaaS, where a payment fails and the customer was never asked to decide anything.

Read original · Original 2

They write for operators making subscription retention decisions and favour a short narrative over a framework dump.

Ashraf's cases come from DTC subscription commerce and focus on cohort work, unit economics, and mapping the cancellation journey; Burke's setting is B2B SaaS billing, where the argument turns on issuer behaviour, retry and billing timing, and recovery rate.

Read original · Original 2

One post breaks down how fees, cross-border charges, FX, and other costs can push an effective processing rate well above its headline price, then gives readers a calculation to check their own statement. That makes the campaign more directly about payment costs and a practical audit than about recovering failed revenue.

The reviewed work argues about processing fees and agent-led checkout, not involuntary churn, false declines, or revenue recovery.

• It is a weaker match if the campaign needs to explain recovery metrics or assign ownership for failed payments.
• The comparison rests on two LinkedIn posts; ask to review more work before choosing for a larger campaign.

Examples: Source 1 · Source 2

Her posts explain why churn may start with a mismatched offer or disappointing product experience rather than an email or SMS program. One post recommends tagging customers and using cohorts to show leadership where behavior changes; another makes the case that messaging cannot manufacture loyalty.

That work is useful for a DTC retention campaign, but it does not address B2B SaaS payment failures, issuer declines, or revenue recovery rates. For a campaign about payments platforms, Jeremy Burke’s posts are more directly aligned.

Examples: Source 1 · Source 2

One post traces flat lifetime value to declining units per transaction rather than the discount or reorder rate; another separates cancellations into four time-based groups and describes a reminder-email change associated with roughly a 10% lift in retention for one phase. These examples offer a concrete diagnostic and intervention for subscription brands.

The examples concern ecommerce subscriptions and cancellation behavior, not failed-payment recovery or payment operations for B2B SaaS. This is a better alternative when the buyer’s priority is diagnosing subscription churn, but a less direct fit for a campaign about involuntary churn and revenue recovery.

Examples: Source 1 · Source 2