Treasury blog
Written from the files, not from a survey.
Every piece here starts with one question a finance team is actually asked, argues it from what a bank file carries and what a ledger posts, and ends at the part of the product where the problem is worked.
What is here
Pick the question you came with.
Each row carries the date, the piece and the question it answers. The question is the point — read the one you arrived with rather than the one with the best title.
- Treasury operationsA cash position you cannot explain is a report, not a control.Why a team can see the cash and still not say what moved it.
- ImplementationTreasury projects rarely fail on the software. They fail on decisions nobody made.What the first weeks of a rollout contain, and who owns which decision.
- AI in financeAn answer that cannot show its evidence is not an answer.How to tell an assistant that explains from records from one that composes.
- ReconciliationBank and ledger disagree because they were never describing the same event.What the gap between a bank balance and a ledger balance is made of.
- IntercompanyThe group position looks coherent at the center and comes apart one level down.Why the group total holds and the entity breakdown does not.
- Buying treasury softwareTreasury buyers are not slow. They are the ones who sign for the number.What a buyer is checking, and the demo questions that separate systems.
How these are written
What a piece has to do before it goes up.
Four rules. The fourth one costs us traffic, and we keep it, because the alternative is printing a number no reader could ever check.
- It answers one question
- Not a topic — a question somebody types, answered in the first two sentences. The depth goes underneath the answer rather than in front of it.
- It argues from mechanism
- What the bank file carries, what the ledger posted, what the second entity did with the same movement. A claim you can check beats a claim you have to accept.
- It ends somewhere
- Every piece names the screen where the problem is worked and links to it, so the argument lands on something you can open instead of on an invitation.
- It prints no number we cannot source
- No survey percentages, no analyst counts, no “most treasurers say”. Where a claim would need a figure we do not have, the claim is made from the mechanism instead.
None of that makes a piece correct. It makes it checkable, which is the only thing writing about other people’s money can honestly offer.
Where these point
The problems above are worked in four places.
Reconciliation, the cash position, intercompany and the ledger feed are where these arguments land. The two overviews are for a reader who would rather start from the product than from a question.
The modules these argue about
Bring the question you could not answer last month.
A working session on your own entities, your own banks and your own ledger. You ask the question; we show you where the answer comes from and which record it rests on.
One hour, in English or Spanish. Nothing has to be connected to your banks to run it.