Writing for Finantrix
Selectively, and from named practitioners writing about work they have done. Not from agencies, not in exchange for a link, and not for a fee in either direction.
The short version
We publish a few contributed articles from senior practitioners writing about something they've done. Most we commission. We read pitches that clear the bar below, and answer the ones that do.
We don't publish agency-written articles, ghostwritten thought leadership, vendor marketing in article form, or anything whose purpose is to carry a link.
Who we publish
People with direct responsibility for what they're writing about: heads of architecture, operations, risk, data, technology and strategy — and their opposite numbers at vendors, writing about the problem rather than the product.
Seniority is a proxy. The test is whether you've sat in the room where the decision was argued.
What makes a piece work
An argument, not a topic. "The state of core banking" is a topic. "Most core migrations fail at data reconciliation, not cutover" is an argument.
Detail you had to earn. The constraint that made the obvious approach fail. The number that changed the decision.
Nothing to sell. Name your company where the story needs it. If the piece collapses without the product in it, it's a case study.
Claims that hold up. Every empirical claim traces to a real source or is stated qualitatively. We take out invented figures. It's the most common reason a promising draft comes back.
What you get, and what we ask
What a contributor gets
- Your byline, your title, and a two-line biography
- One link in the bio — your company or your profile, your choice
- Editing for clarity and house style, with the final text back to you first
- Promotion through our newsletter and social channels
- The right to republish elsewhere afterwards, pointing back here
What doesn't work here
- Unsolicited finished drafts, and agency placements for a client
- A byline where the named executive didn't write it
- Pieces conditional on a link to a product, client or campaign
- Anything already published elsewhere, or syndicated across several sites
- AI-generated drafts sent as original work
- A vendor pitch in thought-leadership clothing. If the conclusion is the product, it's advertising
Pitch an article
- Who it's for
- Senior practitioners with something specific to say
- Cost
- Free — we don't pay for bylines and we don't charge for them
- Time
- 15 minutes to pitch
Worth having to hand
- Your role and organization, and what you were accountable for.
- The argument, in one sentence — the thing a reader could disagree with.
- Why you, specifically. This decides most pitches.
- Three or four things the piece would establish.
- Anything you've published on the same argument elsewhere.
- A note of any commercial interest. Rarely disqualifying, better disclosed early.
How it goes
- Send the pitch, not the pieceA few paragraphs is enough for us to tell whether it fits, and saves you writing 1,500 words on spec.
- We read it against what's already in flightFit is partly the argument and partly timing.
- If it's a yes, we agree an angle and a dateYou write. We edit, and you see the final text before it runs.
- It publishes under your bylineYour name, title, a two-line bio with one link, and promotion through our newsletter and social channels.
What tends to send one back
- A finished draft attached to a cold email
- A piece that concludes with the author's product
- Anything already published or syndicated elsewhere
- Drafts generated by AI and sent as original work
- A mass-sent pitch with no named author
The whole thing, or just the half that applies to you. No email required, and every section carries the address of the page it came from.