Two Great Moments in Pitches
You decide, after reading, which of these was a really good moment and which was really bad.
Moment one: the annoying interruption
It struck me at the time as an annoying interruption, ill timed, and off point. It was just a few minutes into the pitch. She, the CEO of a fledgling pharmaceutical company with a lot of intellectual property, research, management experience, was confident, rolling through slides, and building momentum. She was interrupted when she clicked to the financial summary, a bar chart showing three years of annual sales, gross margin, and net income.
“Those numbers are different from what you show in your plan,” he said. He caught her in mid sentence.
“Of course not,” she answered, without missing a beat. She responded as quickly and naturally as if the interruption had been part of a script. “That version of the plan was submitted to your deadline, three weeks ago. We’re not static ever. Things change. This chart is from our latest projections.”
And on she went.
Moment two: we didn’t do it
Honestly, I was really liking the people, the market, the secret sauce, and just about all of that pitch until they got to the financials. As they summarized their numbers, they were projecting enormous growth in sales with relatively tiny marketing expenses and huge profits, like 50 percent of sales before taxes.
There were multiple objections. Nobody was buying those numbers. The three founders, who had been excellent to that point, looked at each other, and the floor, for just a few seconds, obviously at a loss, until the leader took the initiative.
“We don’t like those numbers either,” he said, “they were done for us by an outside financial consultant. We’re looking for somebody to come in and revise them.”
You be the judge
Which of these two answers do you like? It is a matter of opinion, of course. There are no right or wrong answers, no set formula. As a point of fact, both of these companies got financed, although not both by the group that saw the pitch I saw; and neither of them is far enough along to say they have or haven’t made it.
I will say that most of the investors in the first room really liked that first answer, the response to the interruption. That presenter made an extremely good impression, and an important point about business planning too. She had no problem defending the difference between the plan that had been submitted and the summary in the slide.
Most of the investors in the other room really didn’t like the buck passing in the second answer. Nobody wants to see a presenter distance him or herself from the numbers. Let them be wrong, if you have to, but don’t just make dumb excuses blaming somebody else. You are presenting the numbers to investors, so you better own them.
The irony is most investors I deal with would agree that unrealistic numbers are the easiest thing to fix. Given a good team and a good market, differentiation and defensibility, and growth potential, unrealistic numbers are not fatal.
But disowning your own presentation doesn’t fly. You need a team. If you have to throw somebody under a bus, do it before you finalize the slides and deliver the pitch.
All opinions expressed are those of the author, and do not necessarily represent those of Gust.
Written by Tim Berry
You might also be interested in
What this investor is seeking is called “permanent, full-ratchet, anti-dilution protection”, and that is neither (a) in line with the market, nor (b) practical. Even if you were willing to give it to him, it is highly, highly unlikely to stand up beyond the next financing round, because there’s no way your next investor is going to take a dilution
First, it’s important to understand that the four platforms you list fall into two very distinct groups.
Kickstarter and IndieGoGo are project-based crowdfunding platforms through which anyone can contribute money, either as a donation or with the promise that they will receive a tangible ‘reward’ of some kind if the project is successful.
Gust and AngelList are equity-based platforms, used by Accredited Investors to facilitate the investment of money for an ownership interest in a company.
There are many wonderful ideas, and they are not necessarily easy to come up with. So congratulations on having thought of one!
“Having value” and “Being fundable” are two completely different things. What the more experienced responders here are saying is completely accurate: while a good idea is usually a necessary ingredient for the formation of a good company, it is not sufficient by itself
The question is based on a misunderstanding of how venture capital investment works.
First of all, VC funds do not invest in ideas. What VCs invest in are operating companies that are ready (or almost ready) to scale. There are many wonderful ideas, all of which are not fundable. Only companies get funded.
Next, VCs don’t have an unlimited amount of money that is
There are a [very] few companies, mostly on the West Coast, that have done convertible rounds with differing caps, but it’s unusual, hard to do, and not something that will endear you to the less-fortunate investors.