Loading...
Answers
MenuWhat's the best visual format to display the size of the market when doing a pitch deck.
For ex: If I were showing the size of the social media market, and I have a tool that lets you schedule tweets - should I show a segment? Also, do I use a bar graph or show existing competitors and their % of the market?
Answers
I like to take a rule from the Steve jobs playbook and use simple circles... one larger than the other but no more than 2. your most immediate target (realistic reachable) and one of the "enemy" competitor company. or overall untapped market cap.
**for this to be effective you must provide as accurate projections as possible**
no bar graphs and as little or no text as possible... remember that a deck is a companion to the speaker... avoid bullet points and use the deck to entertain rather than educate... is not a class is a pitch. :)
The actual graphical representation of the market size matters less than ensuring that the graphic is visually cohesive with the rest of the deck.
Also, ensure that you're speaking to your total addressable market, not the overall market as overall market sizing lacks credibility.
Here's some further info on calculating TAM:
http://aiti.mit.edu/media/programs/india-bms-summer-2013/materials/step_4_calculate_the_tam_---trepreneurship_101.pdf
Happy to talk through this with you in a quick call.
You should have Market Size and Addressable Market.
Market Size you can display with a large number, and then include some logos of companies and their market cap.
Addressable Market you should include a number.
If you are raising money, it is suggested your Market Size should be in $Billions.
Circles and pie charts are a terrible, terrible idea.
For your information and entertainment:
White House f*ck up with bubble charts:
http://blog.mrmeyer.com/?p=9258
A lesson on using circles:
http://www.contrast.ie/blog/infographics-and-data-visualisations/
Use the graphical way that shows your startup in best way. If your market share isn't much then don't go for options like pie chart.
Related Questions
-
How do you get exposure on AngelList to attract angel investors?
What of the following things does your startup have? > Founders who have graduated from prestigious universities / previously exited companies to known acquirers / worked for a known companies (with known being a brand-name company such as Google, Amazon, Facebook etc) > Three or more months of statistically meaningful growth (e.g. for easy sake, double digit growth of a number in the thousands) > At least one investor who is active on AngelList (defined in the ideal state by at least one investment in a company who raised their round through AngelList and ideally whose social graph is connected to "high signal" members of the AngelList network) If you have none of these things, then at least, have advisors and referrers who have a strong AngelList profile. And another option is to seek out the AngelList scouts and pitch them directly. They are more open to this than anyone else and I've seen companies with very little traction and very little social proof get featured because a scout believes in the founder and/or the story. Without any or most of the above, it will be difficult to stand out or build relationships via AngelList, in my opinion. I assume now AngelList operates on a concept similar to the LinkedIn "degrees of connection" model, whereby an entrepreneur can now send unsolicited messages to investors so long as there is a degree of connection between the investor and the company. I get a few unsolicited emails a week from companies whose advisers or investors aren't people I follow but that because of the way they determine "connection strength", these unsolicited emails still gain my attention. I assume this is the case for all investors. So the more that you can build your list of advisers and referrers, the more connections you can solicit. That said, AngelList's inbound email system is almost entirely ineffective for "cold" emails to really high-profile investors. Happy to share with you what I think to be your best options for raising profile for your company.TW
-
Among platforms for startup funding, AngelList is the 800 pound gorilla. Does it make sense to use simultaneously other platforms like Gust, etc?
Short answer: Of course! Many angel groups require you to submit through Gust because it offers a consistency and makes reviewing applications easier. But not all use Gust same as not all use AngelList... I haven't met an angel who frowns upon using multiple platforms. I would encourage you to leverage your twitter and Facebook or Instagram to meet angels and get in their radar (don't hassle or stalk) just try to get exposed a bit to them by being part of the same meetup group, follow the same blog, membership... Subscribe to their own blog.. And when you submit funding request considerations do please send a follow up email or a call or basket of fruits if you have contact them before.HV
-
How do I grow from a one man startup when I don't have the money to hire & don't have skills or time for investors?
Stop thinking you don't have the skills to do something. You can learn anything if you decide to, but assuming up front that you can't (forever) is dangerous. my2centsDM
-
How do startups figure out their pre-money valuation when when talking to investors before their company is making any money?
I'm both an active angel investor and entrepreneur who has recently raised capital. I'll start with what is standard in Silicon Valley and then apply various multiples and discounts where relevant. For an angel or early seed round, the current going rate is $3m-$5m pre-money via a capped note or priced round. Priced Rounds typically most often use the "Series Seed" docs and Convertible Notes typically are 18-24 month terms with a 15% discount. I don't mean to be argumentative but Marco is incorrect that valuation can be avoided by a capped note. And in general, there is no way to avoid setting a valuation except via an uncapped note, which is almost unheard of. Setting your cap and discount will have a significant impact on your cap structure, the same (and in some cases) worse than a priced round. This $3m - $5m range is what I'd call current market value in the valley for "ideation-stage" capital. This is that there is a team in place, typically some form of MVP and in some cases some very basic market data supporting the general thesis of the raise. In the other market I'm familiar with (Canada), the range for the same stage of capital is $1m - $3 with most being in between $1m and $2m and most preferring priced rounds over notes. These rounds rarely have a real lead since the raise is typically $500k or less, so if you price it reasonably, most (good) angels will accept the terms as is. The low and high end of the ranges are discounted and pushed by the credibility presented most often by the team (done it before, worked for a notable company, had some relevant success) or strong evidence of the thesis being correct. It's also the Founder's option to price the round at the top end of reasonable or provide what you might consider a discount, depending on the kind of investors you are courting. So while this is what I'm seeing as "current market conditions" there is price elasticity in any market. The best way you know if you've priced it right, is if people are buying. Any angel investor should be able to give you a conditional answer after the first meeting (subject to playing with the product, reading terms, meeting the rest of the team). Any angel investor in ideation stage capital who can't give you a yes, no or subject-to yes in the first meeting is not worth pursuing IMO. Any investor who can't close within 3 meetings or conversations won't close (9 times out of 10). Happy to talk to you about the specifics of where you're at, what might help you improve your odds and generally get you closer to the point where you're ready to raise.TW
-
What roles should the CEO and CTO have in a VC meeting?
The more important first impressions to leave a VC with are: 1) That you both are credible and inspire confidence that you can execute the plan you're fundraising on. 2) That there is good chemistry and a great relationship between the two of you; 3) That you can adequately address the concerns/objections/questions the VC raises. The CEO is expected to do most of the talking because the CEO should be the best person in the company at articulating the vision and value of the product and company you're building. If your CTO is comfortable presenting part of the pitch, it would be ideal for the CTO to speak to the product slides. The most important thing is for the CTO not to be a "bump on the log" meaning that you don't want them sitting there for most of the presentation with nothing to say. If you feel that's the case, you really shouldn't bring your CTO. Most VC meetings will not get technical and under the hood. Each question answered should be answered by the person best qualified to speak to that question. You should make eye-contact with your partner and use subtle body language to find a way to cue the other person to speak to that question or simply offer "CTO, would you like to answer that?" Bottom line, make sure that the CTO can speak confidently enough about the product and vision, otherwise -unless specifically asked by the VC - come alone. Fundraising is a big distraction to building and a good VC will always respect that in a first meeting, the CTO can be excused from attending in priority of building product. Happy to talk to you both on a call about helping get you feeling a bit more confident and prepared before your meeting. I was formerly a VC associate for a $500m fund and have raised money from VCs as a serial entrepreneur.TW
the startups.com platform
Copyright © 2025 Startups.com. All rights reserved.