3 ms·

I don't buy the whole premise about storytelling being the big thing. In particular I think doing the thing is much much much much much more important than tel

I don't buy the whole premise about storytelling being the big thing. In particular I think doing the thing is much much much much much more important than telling the story. If you do the thing then the story tells itself. I was 1 of a team of 2 or 3 on every pitch in 2 or 3 separate processes to raise over 1bn dollars and make the company I worked for (OakNorth) the most valuable fintech in Europe at the time. We did about 30 investor meetings covering everyone in the PE world, some of the big tech investors, some key VCs, some family offices etc. We ended up massively oversubscribed so and picked the investors we thought were the best fit. In every single pitch the most important things were: 1. your company should actually do something important/valuable. Solve an important problem etc. 2. you should have a plan for a future where the unit economics work, and you should know the plan inside and out 3. you should have thought through something about how what your company does intersects with *this particular investor's* interests, and be able to articulate that clearly 4. You should have clear asks - not just money for valuation but what else you're looking to get from them (strategic advice, intros, synergies with other companies in their portfolio etc). The deck, pitch itself etc are much less important than doing something important and actually knowing what you're talking about. In particular, avoid the thought that you can hack the process with a slick pitch and a cool-looking deck. It may take you to a first meeting, but it's not going to get you to close with anyone of substance.

jacquesm 5y ago
A good pitchdeck condenses a complicated subject to its essence, just enough text to convince and short enough to avoid wasting time. It informs rather than overwhelms, and stays clear of hyperbole. It's the equivalent of a telegram, it conveys information, and every word has a cost. A bad pitchdeck is one that focuses on form over function, wastes the readers time with unnecessary detail and extrapolates into an unknowable future with too much conviction that things will really play out that way (they won't).
jollybean 5y ago
Those are good points, which would usually not be communicated outside the context of a specific VC pitch after which the 'story' has already been told as an introduction. The 'narrative' is something that you tell to partners, customers, on the speakers panel at the tech show, in articles. In a nutshell, the 'story/narrative' is the foundation of the pitch, which can be expanded from 10 seconds, to 2 minutes, to 5 minutes to 1 hour, with varying levels of detail. The CEO, or 'someone' at the company will be telling this story over, over and over, and this is how the company is communicated. The 'VC Pitch' is just one small part of telling the story.
gist 5y ago
> 1. your company should actually do something important/valuable. Solve an important problem etc. There are for sure examples of companies who are not 'solving an important problem' (at the time of the company being formed). It would be interesting for someone to compare funded companies that met this criteria that were successful (that would have to be defined as well) vs. not and 'pie in the sky maybe maybe if it works will hit it big'. But right off the top Airbnb as envisioned and as it started was not solving any important problem or really doing anything valuable. At the start I mean (when pitched to investors note Fred Wilson famously passed on this after Paul Graham even pushed him to invest) not what airbnb became (which is what many investors go on). The Automobile when it started to be popularized didn't solve an important problem that problem was already solved by horses and the early automobiles had to develop over many many years into a state where they became valuable. At the start they were not and investing on that basis would not have been wise (other than 'maybe they will end up allowing people to do this and that vs. using a horse'). Uber ditto (but less so) than Airbnb that problem was solved by cabs in most places. (Will agree this is a weaker point than Airbnb). That said with respect to the above points 1 to 4 probably a fifth is needed. That would be being able to explain to an investor why your solutions works for a problem they don't even agree is a problem or understand. Once again using airbnb many investors (including Fred Wilson and for that matter myself) couldn't understand why in the world someone would let a stranger use their house makes no sense you have person items and what not just didn't seem to fly. However people of a different age group think differently so how do you explain to the investor (who is not the same peer) why the idea makes sense?
Tipi_Koivisto 5y ago
Some say team, some say product. I would also leave the stories for Pixar and other story tellers.

jacquesm 5y ago

A good pitchdeck condenses a complicated subject to its essence, just enough text to convince and short enough to avoid wasting time. It informs rather than overwhelms, and stays clear of hyperbole. It's the equivalent of a telegram, it conveys information, and every word has a cost. A bad pitchdeck is one that focuses on form over function, wastes the readers time with unnecessary detail and extrapolates into an unknowable future with too much conviction that things will really play out that way (they won't).

jollybean 5y ago

Those are good points, which would usually not be communicated outside the context of a specific VC pitch after which the 'story' has already been told as an introduction. The 'narrative' is something that you tell to partners, customers, on the speakers panel at the tech show, in articles. In a nutshell, the 'story/narrative' is the foundation of the pitch, which can be expanded from 10 seconds, to 2 minutes, to 5 minutes to 1 hour, with varying levels of detail. The CEO, or 'someone' at the company will be telling this story over, over and over, and this is how the company is communicated. The 'VC Pitch' is just one small part of telling the story.

gist 5y ago

> 1. your company should actually do something important/valuable. Solve an important problem etc. There are for sure examples of companies who are not 'solving an important problem' (at the time of the company being formed). It would be interesting for someone to compare funded companies that met this criteria that were successful (that would have to be defined as well) vs. not and 'pie in the sky maybe maybe if it works will hit it big'. But right off the top Airbnb as envisioned and as it started was not solving any important problem or really doing anything valuable. At the start I mean (when pitched to investors note Fred Wilson famously passed on this after Paul Graham even pushed him to invest) not what airbnb became (which is what many investors go on). The Automobile when it started to be popularized didn't solve an important problem that problem was already solved by horses and the early automobiles had to develop over many many years into a state where they became valuable. At the start they were not and investing on that basis would not have been wise (other than 'maybe they will end up allowing people to do this and that vs. using a horse'). Uber ditto (but less so) than Airbnb that problem was solved by cabs in most places. (Will agree this is a weaker point than Airbnb). That said with respect to the above points 1 to 4 probably a fifth is needed. That would be being able to explain to an investor why your solutions works for a problem they don't even agree is a problem or understand. Once again using airbnb many investors (including Fred Wilson and for that matter myself) couldn't understand why in the world someone would let a stranger use their house makes no sense you have person items and what not just didn't seem to fly. However people of a different age group think differently so how do you explain to the investor (who is not the same peer) why the idea makes sense?

Tipi_Koivisto 5y ago

Some say team, some say product. I would also leave the stories for Pixar and other story tellers.