I look at a lot of pitch decks. Today I’m break down a real pitch deck to tell you what’s working and what’s not.
To do this, I went on SlideShare and found a publicly available pitch deck for a $1M seed round. It’s a little dated, but the principles still apply.
My aim for this exercise is to help both founders and fellow angel investors.
For founders, this should help you improve your pitch decks and therefore your response rates.
For investors, I hope this helps you improve your pattern recognition so you can spot good opportunities. I also want to hear what you look for in pitch decks. Let’s trade notes.
I picked this pitch because it has both good elements and bad ones, making it great for this conversation. I’ll rate each slide with the following:
✅ = Good, what I want to see
☑️ = Ok, needs work
❌ = Missing the mark
Let’s get into it.
The Pitch: Scalestack’s $1M Seed Deck (July 2023)
The company: Scalestack, an AI-powered Sales Ops Platform for GTM.
Cover Slide ☑️
Cover slide: Simple but effective
I would like to know a little more about the company’s vision, but this does the job.
Don’t be afraid to share the big picture up front.
Slide 2: Founders ✅✅✅
Founders slide up front - good!
For an early stage company, I always look for Exceptional Founders First (EFF). I love seeing the founders slide at the very beginning. These two founders do a pretty good job sharing their credentials. I am curious if Elio and Alex have worked together previously.
Slide 3: Traction ☑️
Their traction is intriguing but not telling me enough
If you have traction at the early stage, it’s good to share that up front like Scalestack does here. Momentum and traction will hopefully keep the audience engaged. But this slide is missing a few things:
Revenue graph: They share point-in-time revenue metrics, but I’m more interested in revenue momentum. A simple revenue graph would have worked well.
Quantify their “strong” pipeline: What does this mean?
This slide makes me interested in the company but could be stronger.
Slide 4: Problem (1 of 4) ❌
Problem Slide 1: Too busy
My first question when seeing this slide is, “What is the market, market size, and growth?” I want to know the market before knowing the problem you’re trying to solve.
Now onto this this Problem Slide. It is very busy. It took me a couple minutes to understand what they are trying to convey.
It would have been better remove the logos, make the Problem statement larger, and maybe include a simplified graphic of the 4 sales stages.
Also, there are 4 problem slides. I’ll review each one for this exercise, but I’d much prefer a single problem slide of the most important information.
Slide 5: Problem (2 of 4) ❌
Problem slide 2: Too vague
The next slide expands on the problem Scalestack is trying to solve. But again they are again lacking concrete data to convince me.
Saying “sales teams spend most of their time manually researching… GTM data” could mean anything from 51% to 99% of a sales person’s time. That’s a big difference. Also, what is the cost impact of this inefficiency.
Vague problem statements open the door for investor skepticism. It suggests the founders didn’t do their research. Don’t leave room for doubt… share concrete numbers!
Slide 6: Problem (3 of 4) ☑️
Problem slide 3: Not impactful enough.
This is the 3rd slide dedicated to the problem. Despite sharing a concrete number (92% of surveyed reps), I still don’t know the magnitude of the problem.
How much is inaccurate data costing sales teams in terms of time and money? Telling me the opinion of sales reps, without hard costs, doesn’t mean much to me.
Slide 7: Problem (4 of 4) ❌
Problem slide 4: Too vague
The final slide of the Problem section again comes across as too vague. How much money and time is being wasted here?
Overall, I’d give the Problem section of this slide deck a D because they failed to quantify the size of the problem. Vague statements without concrete numbers make me skeptical that the problem is worth solving.
Slide 8: The Solution (1 of 2) ☑️
Solution slide: Just ok
Similar to the long Problem section, the Solution slides should be shared in one slide.
A visual representation of the solution would have been helpful. This slide is a little wordy and requires my full attention to grasp.
Slide 9: The Solution (2 of 2) ❌
Solution slide #2: Too vague again
The impact of the solution is too vague. They share the number of reps using their platform, but they needed to quantity “more productive” to really make me interested.
What frustrates me about this slide deck so far is that Sales is one of the most quantifiable professions in business. Everything a salesperson does it tracked and reported. The founders could have easily measured how much time is being saved using Scalestack, which translates directly into dollars.
The second statement on this slide, “closing millions of $ more worth of business,” might work if the founders actually put a dollar amount in that line. Maybe they did in the original deck.
Still… we know how to quantify salesperson productivity. I want to see those numbers.
I do like the customer logos at the bottom of this slide.
Slide 10: Customer Case Study (1 of 2) ✅
Customer case study: good!
These next two slides might have saved this company had I been reviewing their deck during their raise.
These founders landed a major early customer and seem to have done a good job. They highlight the customer story well with a before and after.
This customer story would have been even better if they (you guessed it) quantified the size of MongoDB’s offshore team that Scalestack replaced. This would tell investors just how valuable the platform is.
Replacing 1 offshore employee is ok, but a team of 10 is real impact. As importantly, is the accuracy better with automation? How much better?
Slide 11: Customer Case Study (2 of 2) ✅
Customer case study: More!
I love to see customer quotes, especially for early stage companies. It shows me you aren’t waiting for fundraising to start the work. Almost every company can build and acquire customers before funding, especially with today’s tools. This slide shows good initiative and gives me confidence in the company.
My only complaint here is that there aren’t MORE customer quotes. One is good but 2-3 would have been excellent.
Your investor deck should tell a story and customer validation helps make the story convincing.
Slide 11: Product (1 of 2) ❌
Product Slide #1: Hard to read
Here’s where the pitch deck starts to lose me again. Far too busy and difficult to read. The screenshots are literally covering each other up, so they are useless.
Instead of overlapping screenshots, use just 1 screenshot and a simple list of the 3-Step Process or embed a video walking through the product.
Slide 12: Product (2 of 2) ❌
Product slide #2: Oh, there’s AI?
First, this slide is again very difficult to read. Just list the features alongside the screenshot.
Second, AI feels like an afterthought. This deck was from 2023, so maybe the use of AI was novel. If I saw this slide deck today, I would be concerned that the founders hadn’t thought through their AI strategy enough.
Slide 14: Market Size ✅
Market size: Move up
This slide on the Total Market Opportunity is clear and easy to read. My only complaint is that it’s too low in the slide deck. I would put this slide right before the Problem Slide.
The purpose of this slide is to convince investors that the problem is in a big enough market to be worth solving, so move it up to where you’re discussing the problem.
Slide 15: Competitors/Market Makeup ❌
Competitors: No long paragraphs
I will be honest, I still have not read this entire slide. 3 paragraphs of text is just too long when the average investor spends on average (according to docsend) 2 minutes reviewing decks. The goal of a deck is not to close an investor… it is to get a live meeting (in person or video)).
Whether you love or hate competitor graphs or 2×2 matrices, they are popular for a reason: They quickly visualize how your product compares in the marketplace. Replace these paragraphs with an easy-to-read visual.
Last thing: The competitor slide does not need to be in the main presentation. You can save it for the appendix. It’s important but not crucial to securing the next meeting.
Slide 16: AI Positioning ❌
AI Positioning: Too little, too late
Including this slide on AI at the very end of the deck screams “afterthought” to me. This should have been included in the Solution section.
The bullets could also be re-written for clarity.
Slide 17: Why Now ❌
Why now… so what?
I like the idea of a “Why Now” slide in theory, but if your deck does it’s job on the Problem, Solution, and Market Size sections, it’s mostly unnecessary.
Slide 18: Closing ☑️
Closing: Include contact info
This closing slide is ok. I will assume the founders included their contact information in the original deck.
What’s Missing: GTM and Use of Financials
There are two slides missing from this deck that I want to see: Go To Market strategy and Finances.
For the GTM slide: How are you acquiring customers (sales or marketing)? Are you leveraging AI for customer acquisition or customer support?
For Finances: The slide should include financial projections and use of funds. What % are you investing in product vs. GTM? (Note that the founders may have removed this slide for SlideShare, but it’s important for the original slide to include this.)
In Summary: The Do’s and Don’ts of Early Stack Pitch Decks
Scalestack’s pitch deck is intriguing but has a lot of room for improvement. Here’s a summary of my suggestions:
The Do’s:
DO share your company’s grand vision
DO include your founder/team slide upfront
DO include early traction numbers but include velocity data too
DO add customer stories and quotes if you have them
DO move the Market Size slide up near the top perhaps before problem/solution
DO keep slides clean and easy to read
DO tell a story
The Don’ts:
DON’T use vague problem and solution statements — Quantify!
DON’T tack on your AI strategy as an after thought
DON’T use paragraphs of text
DON’T use overlapping images that can’t be read
Founders, let me know what questions you have about building your deck. Note that this breakdown is for a Pre-Seed and Seed Deck… later rounds require different presentations.
Angels and Investors: What do you look for in Pre-Seed and Seed decks? How would you grade this pitch? Everyone has their preferences.
Finally, let me know if this case study was helpful and if you’d like to see more.
As a final disclosure: I found this slide deck on Slideshare and reviewed it after never seeing it before. Because the deck was made public by the founders, I assume they are open to feedback. I don’t have any financial stake in this business, nor do I know the founders.