On models of Growth companies v Value companies...

Companies sometimes try to be what they are not. 

At the risk of being binary, either you are a growth company, or a value company.  A growth company is growing revenue, adding new logos, etc.  Value companies, on the other hand, are generally more sticky with customers, but struggle to grow.  There is nothing wrong in either state - a growth company and a value company could both provide sufficient value to investors.  But managements need to realize and accept what they are, and operate that way.  Value companies have to be more efficient with their capital.  They need to be profitable and yield cash.  If they don’t, then it’s hard to get investors to stick.  It's possible for value companies can become growth companies via inorganic opportunities and M&A.  But that's true only if they acquire something that gives them access to a material TAM.  They grow in an adjacency to leverage existing competencies, and have new conversations with customers.  If, on the contrary, value companies do m&a in their core business and are merely sustaining that business, then it’s yet a value company.  Sell side investors see through this and value such a company accordingly.