“𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐟𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐬 𝐚 𝐓𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐧𝐨-𝐄𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐜 𝐀𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐲𝐬𝐢𝐬 (𝐓𝐄𝐀) 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲, 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐢𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲’𝐥𝐥 𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐛𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐝 𝐢𝐭.”

I hear this a lot from founders:

 👉 “Our plan is to use CMOs.”

 👉 “We’ll license the tech anyway, so why bother with a facility TEA?”

Here’s the thing: A facility TEA doesn’t mean you’re committing to build a factory. It’s simply 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐩𝐞𝐫 𝐤𝐠 𝐨𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭. This is the baseline economics you need to:

 ✔ Negotiate with CMOs

 ✔ Pitch to investors

 ✔ License your tech with confidence

💡 Why it matters:

1️⃣ 𝐁𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐡𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐤 – A facility-based TEA is the gold standard for any commercial product. It reveals your true unit economics (labor, utilities, raw materials, depreciation) so you know where you stand against competitors.

2️⃣ 𝐍𝐞𝐠𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐏𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐫 – CMO quotes are black boxes. If you know what it should cost to produce, you can push back on inflated fees just because the CMO knows your product is expensive, or walk away and find another CMO. 

3️⃣ 𝐒𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐑𝐨𝐚𝐝𝐦𝐚𝐩 – TEA tells you the tipping point where it’s smarter to transition from outsourcing to owning (or guiding your licensee to).

4️⃣ 𝐈𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫 & 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐧𝐞𝐫 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐟𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 – VCs, corporates, and potential licensees want proof that your tech is economically viable at scale, not just “what the CMO charges.” TEA gives them that proof.

5️⃣ 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐫 𝐋𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐏𝐢𝐭𝐜𝐡 – You’re not just selling IP; you’re selling a proven, de-risked, economically sound business case.

🔑 Even if you never plan to build a factory, a “facility TEA” gives you the data to:

 ✔ Negotiate smartly

 ✔ License convincingly

 ✔ Plan strategically

𝐌𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐜𝐬, 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐢𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐛𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐝 𝐢𝐭.

What do you think, should startups always run a facility-based TEA, even if CMO or licensing is the plan? 🤔