Exato.ai, Unpaid Invoices, and the Cost of Silence in the ERP Industry
In the ERP industry, reputation is built on more than product features or implementation capability. It is built on reliability, integrity, and the way companies treat their partners - particularly smaller firms that support growth behind the scenes.
Against that backdrop, the unresolved dispute between Converted Media Ltd, publishers of ERP Focus, and Exato.ai Inc raises uncomfortable questions about engagement, accountability, and standards of conduct within the ERP ecosystem.
Exato.ai is not a small or obscure player. It is a public company listed on India’s BSE SME platform, operating in a sector where governance, transparency, and responsible corporate behaviour are rightly expected to be higher than average. That makes the lack of resolution in this case all the more concerning.
This article sets out, in narrative form and based on documented correspondence, how a straightforward commercial relationship deteriorated into prolonged silence, and why that matters.
A Standard Agreement, a Routine Engagement
In 2025, Converted Media entered into a standard Lead Supply Agreement with Exato.ai Inc. The agreement was typical of those used across the ERP industry:
- Leads delivered as they became available
Clear targeting criteria agreed in advance
A defined 10-day window to return any lead not meeting requirements
Monthly invoicing for services delivered
The agreement was signed by an Exato.ai employee using company details and included an explicit confirmation that the signatory was authorised to contract on the company’s behalf.
Following execution, Converted Media delivered ERP sales leads in line with the agreed parameters. Communication took place throughout the delivery period with Exato.ai’s representative, and the contract’s mechanisms were actively used.
Payments Made, Returns Process Used
During the course of the engagement:
- Two payments were made in response to Converted Media invoices.
- Five leads were formally returned under the agreement’s return clause and were refunded in full.
- No further lead disputes were raised within the contractual return window.
In other words, the agreement was not dormant or theoretical - it was operated in practice, with both sides engaging in the processes set out in the contract.
At the end of the delivery period, however, an outstanding balance of USD 22,062.63 remained unpaid.
A Sudden Change in Position
When Converted Media sought to resolve the outstanding balance, Exato.ai responded by asserting that:
- the employee who signed the agreement was not authorised internally,
- the contract had not been approved through internal systems, and
- Exato.ai did not consider itself liable for the agreement.
Converted Media replied in detail, setting out its position under the contract and under English law (the governing law of the agreement), and invited Exato.ai to resolve the matter amicably.
From that point onward, according to Converted Media, engagement largely ceased.
Several follow-up emails were sent. Converted Media’s legal and commercial position was restated. Opportunities to discuss settlement or alternative resolution were offered. No substantive response was received.
Why Silence Matters More Than Disagreement
Commercial disputes happen. In a complex, fast-moving industry like ERP, disagreements over outcomes or expectations are not unusual.
What stands out in this case is not that a dispute arose - but that communication stopped altogether.
For a small supplier, prolonged silence has real consequences:
- time and cost spent chasing responses,
- management attention diverted from serving clients,
- uncertainty over cash flow,
- and limited practical leverage in cross-border disputes.
For a publicly listed ERP vendor like Exato.ai, silence sends a different signal - one that sits uneasily with expectations of transparency, governance, and accountability.
Higher Standards for Public Companies
Public companies benefit from trust: from investors, customers, partners, and markets. In return, they are expected to hold themselves to higher standards of conduct, particularly when disputes arise.
That does not mean always agreeing - but it does mean engaging, responding, and resolving matters professionally.
When a listed company declines to engage with a documented dispute involving a small supplier, it raises reasonable questions:
- How seriously does it take contractual commitments?
- How does it approach governance when issues are inconvenient rather than strategic?
- What does this mean for other small partners in its ecosystem?
These are not academic concerns. The ERP industry relies on a network of specialised firms - marketing partners, consultants, advisors - who cannot absorb prolonged non-payment in the way larger organisations can.
A Wider Industry Issue
Converted Media works with more than 80 ERP vendors globally. In the vast majority of cases, when problems arise, they are resolved through discussion and mutual respect.
Situations where communication stops entirely are rare - and that is precisely why they merit attention.
Trust in the ERP market is not built only in boardrooms or implementation projects. It is built in everyday interactions: invoices paid, emails answered, disputes addressed.
Right of Reply
Exato.ai Inc was invited to respond to the matters outlined in this article prior to publication. At the time of publication, no response had been received.
ERP Focus remains open to publishing any response, clarification, or correction Exato.ai wishes to provide.
Conclusion: Reputation Is Built in the Small Moments
ERP vendors ask customers to trust them with mission-critical systems. That trust is reinforced - or undermined - by how they behave in smaller, less visible situations.
Converted Media maintains that this dispute could still be resolved through a straightforward conversation. To date, that conversation has not happened.
In the absence of engagement, the silence itself becomes part of the story.
And in an industry built on trust, silence is rarely neutral.
