Where’s Wally - Standing Out in a Sea of Pitch Decks (and saving yourself time)

Where’s Wally premiered in the UK in 1987 with the simplest premise - finding Wally. Although Wally always wore his distinctive red/white striped shirt and hat, the scenes were always different (and harder in every progressive book). 

While Wally had several names in other countries (Charlie in France, Waldo in the US/Canada, etc), kids consistently loved hunting for him. From 1987-2007, parents bought 73 million books in 30+ countries. I still remember looking for Waldo - and the excitement of finding him on each page. 

Although I have fond memories of Wally, I don’t enjoy the same exercise with finding key information on pitch decks. Pitch decks are not exactly kids books, though in many ways, I feel like the concepts are not all different. 

The best kids books are simple, straightforward, and tell a good (concise) story. Keeping kids engaged and focused is a huge challenge - but it’s the same with many Fund GPs, including myself.

My days are all a bit different, but the one constant is seeing a ton of pitch decks - in my case, across several industries. Even though the use cases and industries can be wildly different, the flow and format always seems to be the same. There is a summary slide (without most of the pertinent info), a market/TAM slide, a problem slide, solution slide, and then a bunch of other slides on the product and traction. Although not all pitch decks are created equal, most of them have the exact same problems.

After you’ve looked through pitch decks all day, and all week, they really do blend together. And, it becomes a bit of Where’s Waldo - especially when they’re usually missing the most important information. Each fund is going to care more about certain things - some are more interested in the market size and dynamics, others care most about the team, and others care most about traction/terms. I tend to focus on capital efficiency, founder attitudes, and traction/terms. 

A founder does not need to have 20 versions of a pitch deck, or  try to guess what version is best. However, there is critical info that should always be included:

• Raise history - past raise amounts (and terms)

• Traction - ACVs, sales cycle metrics, retention, etc

• Growth - ideally month by month ARR growth

• Late-stage pipeline info - I don’t need specific names, but blinded details (i.e. what is in procurement or legal and potentially likely to close in a few months)

• Margins - i.e. is this a 50% gross margin business, or 70%+ margin business (and what’s included in COGS)

• Burn rate (current and over the last few quarters) and runway - having an investor discover you’re down to 2-3 months on runway in a data room is a great way to waste a ton of your energy as a founder

• Client references/quotes (impact from the product and how much they actually like it)

• Current raise info - how much are you raising, and the expected terms (if not already set)

• Cap table dynamics - i.e. how much is owned by the founders, and investors

I almost always ask for the info (above) after seeing a deck - mainly because these are all critical tangible factors in my own decision making process. While putting this level of detail in a pitch deck (being circulated) is not always a great idea - having an appendix is smart. You can include this along with the deck to certain investors, and be more cautious with others. 

Since there are countless articles on how to best structure a pitch deck, I’ll keep this newsletter brief - and touch on one more key topic: clearly illustrating the what, how, and why.

Very few pitch decks clearly state what a company actually does (in simple terms), the core differentiation, and why the team is best situated to build a company. Many decks zoom around at 30,000 feet, then to 100 feet, and back to 30,000 feet. Even if I have direct expertise within the space, I’m often wondering how the company is different than other entrants - and why they think they’ll succeed. Having a bunch of logos at the bottom of a team slide is usually worthless window dressing (for me at least) - without direct connections to how the experience provides differentiation. Having a super generalized market slide gives me no usable information (without detail) - and the four quadrant competitor slide is also a waste of space (without context). The product slides can be useful from seeing the UI/UX, but are also either super broad or way too specific. 

Pitch decks are not necessarily the best communication tool (though they’re better than Word documents) - but they are a sifting tool for GPs. Most GPs will open a deck - and a very clear deck with good flow does really help keep us engaged (and focused). In my own fund updates to investors, I shifted from long form email to a PDF’ed word document (with very clear sections). In my latest update, I switched to slide updates (PDF’ed) with Figma. Most investors want something easily digestible and scannable - with all the relevant information. Although I live in pitch decks every day, it even took me time to adjust my own communication with investors - and my own Fund 2 pitch documents. 

While kids books are often cartoonish, they’re also very effective. Pitch decks don’t have to be complex, or bogged down with unnecessary details - it’s all about building a story (with the right info). Although great decks do take time, it ends up saving you time in the long run - you narrow down the number of VC conversations, have to answer less back and forth questions after a pitch, and can re-use the exact same format/slides in the future. Every VC is different, but having the right details is critical - especially when every deck tends to look the same. If you’re the founder with a concise, deliberate deck, you’re more likely to find the right investors - and do it more efficiently.