What is the primary problem Equity Endeavor aims to solve?

According to Slide 5, small business owners struggle to find capital for four specific areas: upgrading equipment, renovating storefronts, enhancing service quality, and improving the consumer experience. The deck argues that traditional crowdfunding platforms like Kickstarter are too focused on creative projects to serve these local brick-and-mortar needs effectively.

How does the company generate revenue?

Revenue is based on a two-tier fee structure detailed on Slide 29. They charge a 1% front-end fee on the average $10,000 raise ($100) and a 6% success fee. When adjusted for a projected 50% campaign success rate, the average revenue per project is calculated at $400.

What was the initial geographic focus for the platform?

The timeline on Slide 25 indicates a hyper-local strategy. The pilot study and initial awareness campaigns were launched in Austin, Texas, and New Orleans (NOLA). The plan was to enroll 4 SMBs per city initially, expanding to 10 additional businesses per city by early 2014.

Who are the two main user groups on the platform?

Slide 17 defines the marketplace participants as 'Business Owners' and 'Community Builders.' Business owners create campaigns and offer rewards, while community builders search for local campaigns, pledge funds, and eventually 'reap the benefits' of the local business improvements.

What are the projected unit economics for a single project?

Slide 29 breaks down the 'Economics of a project' with specific figures: $400 in Revenue, $180 in Acquisition Cost, and $220 in Gross Profit. This results in a 55% Gross Margin. The deck notes that the $180 CAC is an estimate based on limited early data.

Equity Endeavor, Inc. Pitch Deck (2013): 31-Slide Seed Deck

See all 31 slides of the Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck — a 2013 deck — with a slide-by-slide teardown of what the deck does well and where it falls short.

Equity Endeavor is a crowdfunding platform targeting the 'missing middle' of small business finance. Unlike Kickstarter or Indiegogo, which focus on creative projects or global products, Equity Endeavor centers on local storefronts needing capital for renovations or equipment. The deck, dating back to a 2013-2014 timeline, outlines a dual-sided marketplace connecting 'Business Owners' with 'Community Builders.' The presentation is notable for its granular unit economics, projecting a $400 revenue per project against a $180 acquisition cost, yielding a 55% gross margin. However, the model reli…

Key takeaways

Small businesses represent 99% of U.S. firms and 64% of new private sector jobs, yet struggle to find capital for basic storefront needs (Slide 9).
The platform differentiates itself from Kickstarter and Indiegogo by focusing on localized small business needs rather than creative or non-localized projects (Slide 13).
The crowdfunding process involves a five-step flow for both owners (Realization to Raise) and community members (Search to Enjoy) (Slide 17).
A case study for RedBird Pilates & Fitness targets a $10,000 campaign goal for a business owner with 20 years of experience (Slide 21).
The company planned a phased rollout starting in Austin and New Orleans (NOLA) between June 2013 and April 2014 (Slide 25).
Revenue is generated through a 1% front-end fee and a 6% success fee, totaling an average of $400 per project (Slide 29).
The estimated Customer Acquisition Cost (CAC) is $180, though the deck admits this is based on a 'small amount of data' (Slide 29).
At the time of the deck, the company was not yet charging fees, despite discussing the structure with customers (Slide 29).

Equity Endeavor: Localizing the Crowdfunding Model

Equity Endeavor presents a platform that attempts to bridge the gap between local community support and small business capital requirements. While the name suggests 'equity' crowdfunding, the mechanics described in the deck lean heavily toward a rewards-based model similar to Kickstarter, but with a strictly local, brick-and-mortar focus. The deck is structured to highlight a massive market opportunity—the millions of U.S. small businesses—and then narrow down to a specific, pilot-tested execution plan in two American cities.

Slide 1: Title and Branding

The cover slide features a high-quality photograph of a small business owner in a spice or specialty food shop. This immediately anchors the presentation in the 'local business' theme. The company name, Equity Endeavor, Inc., is prominent, though the URL provided is the primary call to action. The aesthetic is professional, using a clean blue and black color palette that persists throughout the deck.

Slide 5: The Problem Statement

Slide 5 identifies 'Trend #1,' which is the difficulty small business owners face when seeking capital for operational improvements. The deck lists four specific use cases for the funds: upgrade or replace equipment , renovate or expand storefronts , enhance quality of service , and create a better consumer experience . By listing these, the company is positioning itself as a utility for growth rather than a last-resort lender for distressed businesses.

Slide 9: Market Macro-Dynamics

To justify the 'big deal' nature of the business, Slide 9 uses U.S. economic data. It cites that small businesses account for 64% of new private sector jobs , represent 77 million American jobs , and make up 99% of U.S. firms . This slide is intended to show investors that while the individual loans or raises might be small ($10,000 averages), the total addressable market is the backbone of the entire economy.

Slide 13: Competitive Landscape and Differentiation

Slide 13 directly addresses competitors. It claims Kickstarter focuses on 'individual creative projects' and leaves out local small businesses. It suggests Indiegogo is 'not localized,' leading to 'suboptimal situations.' Interestingly, it mentions the American Jobs Act , stating that equity crowdfunding is not a viable option for the majority of small businesses. This is a crucial distinction; Equity Endeavor seems to be positioning itself as a simpler, rewards-based alternative to the complexities of actual equity issuance under the JOBS Act, despite its name.

Slide 17: The Process Flow

This slide provides a side-by-side comparison of the user journey for 'Business Owners' and 'Community Builders.' For owners, the steps are: Project Realization , Campaign Creation , Campaign Review , Launch Campaign , and Raise Funds . For the funders (Community Builders), the steps are: Search , Choose , Pledge , Receive , and Enjoy . The 'Enjoy' phase is emphasized as reaping the benefits of local improvements, suggesting a social or community-pride incentive for the funders.

Slide 21: Case Study - RedBird Pilates & Fitness

The deck uses a real-world example to ground the concept. RedBird Pilates & Fitness, owned by Lee Vallely, is presented with a $10,000 campaign goal . The slide highlights the owner's 20 years of experience, which serves to de-risk the investment in the eyes of the community. This slide demonstrates the typical 'persona' of an Equity Endeavor client: an established local expert looking for a modest capital injection.

Slide 25: The Execution Timeline

The timeline spans from June 2013 to 'April 2014 +'. It shows a phased rollout strategy:

June - Aug 2013: Define MVP and begin pilot studies in Austin and NOLA (New Orleans), enrolling 4 SMBs per city. · Sept - Mar 2014: Complete the pilot, adapt the offering based on feedback, and enroll ~10 additional businesses per city. · Apr 2014 +: Expand presence within Austin and NOLA, add features like a 'talent exchange,' and expand to additional cities.

This geographic focus suggests the company understood the importance of 'density' in a localized marketplace model.

Slide 29: Unit Economics

Slide 29 is the most data-dense slide in the set. It breaks down the 'Economics of a project' based on a $10,000 average raise and a 50% success rate :

Revenue Per Project: $400 (derived from a 1% front-end fee and a 6% success fee). · Acquisition Cost (CAC): $180 (estimated). · Gross Profit: $220. · Gross Margin: 55%.

The slide includes a candid disclaimer: 'We are not currently charging a fee, though we have discussed the fee structure with all customers, and have undoubtedly seen a willingness to pay.' This indicates the company was in a pre-revenue, validation stage at the time of the pitch.

What Equity Endeavor Does Well

The deck excels at defining a very specific niche. By distancing itself from the 'creative' focus of Kickstarter, it carves out a territory in the 'boring but essential' world of small business renovations. The use of a specific case study (RedBird Pilates) makes the abstract concept of 'community building' tangible. Furthermore, the inclusion of Slide 29 shows a level of financial discipline often missing in early-stage decks; they have a clear theory on how they will make money, even if they haven't turned the switch on yet.

Omissions and Weaknesses

The most glaring omission in the provided slides is the Team Slide . Without knowing who is building this, it is impossible to judge the operational capability to manage local pilots in two different states (Texas and Louisiana). Additionally, there is no Ask Slide in the provided selection, leaving the reader unclear on how much capital is being raised or what the valuation expectations are. The 50% success rate assumption on Slide 29 is also quite high for crowdfunding, where many platforms see lower success rates for first-time campaigners. Finally, the name 'Equity Endeavor' is confusing given that the process slide (Slide 17) describes a rewards-based system ('receive rewards') rather than an equity-based investment system.

Founder's Lessons

Founders should look at Slide 29 as a model for how to present unit economics. Even if your data is limited, showing the math behind your revenue—including how success rates and fees interact—demonstrates a professional grasp of the business model. The hyper-local rollout strategy (Slide 25) is also a wise approach for marketplace startups; trying to be everywhere at once often leads to 'empty' platforms. By focusing on Austin and NOLA, Equity Endeavor attempted to build the necessary density to make the 'Community Builder' side of the marketplace viable.

Frequently asked questions

What is the primary problem Equity Endeavor aims to solve?: According to Slide 5, small business owners struggle to find capital for four specific areas: upgrading equipment, renovating storefronts, enhancing service quality, and improving the consumer experience. The deck argues that traditional crowdfunding platforms like Kickstarter are too focused on creative projects to serve these local brick-and-mortar needs effectively.
How does the company generate revenue?: Revenue is based on a two-tier fee structure detailed on Slide 29. They charge a 1% front-end fee on the average $10,000 raise ($100) and a 6% success fee. When adjusted for a projected 50% campaign success rate, the average revenue per project is calculated at $400.
What was the initial geographic focus for the platform?: The timeline on Slide 25 indicates a hyper-local strategy. The pilot study and initial awareness campaigns were launched in Austin, Texas, and New Orleans (NOLA). The plan was to enroll 4 SMBs per city initially, expanding to 10 additional businesses per city by early 2014.
Who are the two main user groups on the platform?: Slide 17 defines the marketplace participants as 'Business Owners' and 'Community Builders.' Business owners create campaigns and offer rewards, while community builders search for local campaigns, pledge funds, and eventually 'reap the benefits' of the local business improvements.
What are the projected unit economics for a single project?: Slide 29 breaks down the 'Economics of a project' with specific figures: $400 in Revenue, $180 in Acquisition Cost, and $220 in Gross Profit. This results in a 55% Gross Margin. The deck notes that the $180 CAC is an estimate based on limited early data.

Cover slide of the Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck — Seed / Pilot 2013 — Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck, slide 1 (2013)

Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck: the facts

Company: Equity Endeavor, Inc.
Year: 2013
Stage: Seed / Pilot
Slides: 31
Sector: Fintech / Crowdfunding
Deck type: Investor Presentation
Headquarters: USA (Austin/NOLA focus)

Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck PDF

The full Equity Endeavor, Inc. deck is embedded on this page and can be read slide by slide in the browser — no download or account required. Each slide is covered in the breakdown above.

What the Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck was used for

This is Equity Endeavor, Inc.’s 31‑slide investor pitch deck from around 2013, prepared for a **seed / pilot** raise. The company positions itself as a localized, rewards-based crowdfunding platform focused on existing small businesses within defined geographic footprints, rather than startups or one-off creative projects. The deck outlines two macro trends—small businesses’ difficulty accessing growth capital and the rise of crowdfunding—as the basis for the product and describes early pilots in cities such as Austin and New Orleans. It appears designed to support a first institutional or angel seed round to complete product development and scale a partnership-led distribution strategy.

Business model: Rewards-based crowdfunding platform focused on helping existing, locally owned small businesses raise relatively small amounts of capital for tangible projects like equipment purchases and renovations.

Round: Seed / Pilot
Year: 2013
Founders: Eric Sonnier, Broderick McClinton
Industry: Fintech / Crowdfunding for local small businesses.

Raising: Approximately $500,000 seed capital sought to complete product development and implement a partnership-based distribution strategy, as described in an executive summary associated with the deck.

Use of funds as presented: Complete building the crowdfunding product, strengthen operations, and execute a partnership-driven distribution strategy to position Equity Endeavor (later Local Lift) as a leading platform for crowdfunding local small-business projects.

What the Equity Endeavor, Inc. deck got right

Clear niche focus on existing local small businesses. The deck and associated executive summary present a **narrow, clearly defined target segment**: existing local small businesses seeking modest capital for tangible improvements, rather than tech startups or individual creative projects. This sharp focus makes the value proposition easy for investors to understand and aligns with an underserved market.
Demonstrated pilot traction in early markets. Materials linked to the deck highlight **beta pilots** in Austin and New Orleans, including close to $90,000 raised for small businesses within targeted campaign ranges (roughly $3,000–$30,000). These early results provide concrete traction evidence at the seed stage.
Compelling rewards-based model that avoids equity and debt complexity. The platform’s **rewards-based** model lets small-business owners access funds without equity dilution or loan obligations, while offering contributors non-financial rewards with real economic and intrinsic value. This structure can be attractive to both sides of the marketplace and avoids securities regulations associated with equity crowdfunding.
Partnership-led go-to-market strategy. The deck and related content frame a **partnership-driven distribution strategy**, referencing collaboration with organizations serving small businesses (such as insurers and local institutions). This approach, if executed well, can reduce customer acquisition costs and leverage existing trust networks in local markets.
Mission continuity and brand evolution to Local Lift. Later coverage indicating a rebrand to Local Lift, co-founded by Eric Sonnier and Broderick McClinton, suggests continuity of the mission to help small businesses access community capital and may be interpreted by investors as validation that the core thesis remained compelling beyond the initial Equity Endeavor branding.

What could have been stronger

Limited visibility into scalable unit economics beyond pilots. The deck positions a clear geographic focus (e.g., Austin and New Orleans) but, based on the available text, provides limited quantifiable data on long-term unit economics, cohort performance, or customer acquisition cost beyond early pilot raise totals around $90,000. For investors, this leaves a gap in understanding whether the economics of local, low-ticket campaigns can scale profitably beyond the pilot markets.
Incomplete articulation of competitive moat versus generalist platforms. Equity Endeavor’s positioning as a rewards-based platform for existing small businesses differentiates it from mainstream crowdfunding sites, but the materials available around the deck do not fully address competitive dynamics—e.g., how the company will defend against large horizontal platforms that might add similar local small-business verticals. This may leave investors with unanswered questions regarding moat and defensibility.
Limited founder and team credentialing in the deck content. While sources linked to the deck mention beta launches and successful campaigns, there is relatively sparse detail on team backgrounds, prior fintech or small-business experience, and execution track record in the materials directly associated with the deck. For a seed-stage fintech platform, investors may view this as a gap in demonstrating founder-market fit and operational capabilities.
Scarce data on user retention and network effects. The deck claims that Equity Endeavor is tailored to small businesses’ capital needs and that pilots have raised meaningful sums, but it does not clearly show longer-term engagement or repeat-use metrics for either business owners or contributors based on the text available. That lack of retention data could make it harder for investors to assess lifetime value and network effects.

How an investor would read this deck

What draws attention

Evidence of pilot traction in Austin and New Orleans, including nearly $90,000 raised for local small businesses and defined target raise sizes (roughly $3,000–$30,000 per campaign).
Clear focus on **existing local small businesses** rather than tech startups, which differentiates the platform within the broader crowdfunding landscape and aligns with underserved segments.
Rewards-based structure that avoids securities and traditional lending, potentially reducing regulatory complexity and appealing to small businesses reluctant to take on debt.
Early branding and later evolution into Local Lift, indicating continued commitment to community-based capital and potential validation of the core thesis beyond the initial pilot.

Risks that stand out

The platform’s focus on relatively small campaign sizes for local businesses (often under $30,000) may limit revenue per campaign and require significant scale and low acquisition costs to achieve meaningful platform economics.
Rewards-based crowdfunding depends heavily on small-business owners’ ability to deliver promised products or experiences; fulfillment failures could damage brand trust and create reputational risk without the governance mechanisms typical of equity or debt financing.
Competition from large, horizontal rewards-based platforms that may introduce similar small-business offerings could erode Equity Endeavor’s differentiation if local partnerships and brand positioning are not sufficiently strong.
Regulatory changes or evolving interpretations around crowdfunding, consumer protection, and marketing rules for small-business finance—despite the non-securities nature of the platform—could introduce compliance burdens over time.

Questions this deck invites

What are the detailed unit economics of a typical campaign (marketing spend, platform fees, fulfillment costs, repeat usage) in the pilot markets, and how do those extrapolate to additional cities beyond Austin and New Orleans?
How large is the addressable market of existing local small businesses that both need $3,000–$30,000 for tangible projects and are willing to run crowdfunding campaigns, and how was that TAM estimated in the deck?
What partnerships (e.g., with insurers like LCI, chambers, small business development organizations) had been formally secured at the time of the raise, and what measurable distribution impact did those partners provide or commit to?
How does Equity Endeavor’s fee structure and rewards fulfillment model compare economically to larger platforms, and what safeguards exist to ensure reward delivery and maintain contributor trust?
What milestones—product, geographic expansion, revenue, campaign volume—did the team set for deployment of the targeted $500,000 seed raise, and which were later achieved or missed?

What founders can take from the Equity Endeavor, Inc. deck

Focusing a crowdfunding platform on a clearly defined niche—existing local small businesses seeking modest capital for tangible projects—can create a strong, differentiated value proposition compared to broad, undifferentiated platforms.
Designing the model as rewards-based rather than equity or debt can lower regulatory complexity and appeal to small-business owners who are reluctant to dilute ownership or add loan obligations.
Early pilots concentrated in a few cities (e.g., Austin and New Orleans) can generate proof points such as total capital raised and campaign ranges that strengthen a seed-stage narrative, but investors will still demand a path to scalable unit economics beyond initial markets.
Partnership-driven distribution—working with organizations that already serve small businesses, like insurers or local institutions—can be a compelling go-to-market strategy for niche fintech platforms if the deck clearly articulates how such partners translate into cost-effective user acquisition.
Clear messaging around who the platform is *not* for (e.g., tech startups or individual creative projects) can tighten positioning and reduce noise, but it must be balanced with robust market size and competitive analysis to reassure investors about growth potential.
Rebranding and evolution (from Equity Endeavor to Local Lift) show how an early-stage company may refine its identity while maintaining its core mission, and highlight the importance of building a flexible, mission-centric brand rather than tying identity too tightly to a single early product formul

Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck: common questions

What is Equity Endeavor, Inc. and who is it for?

Equity Endeavor, Inc. is a **rewards-based crowdfunding platform** designed specifically for existing, locally owned small businesses seeking relatively small amounts of capital (roughly in the low tens of thousands of dollars) to fund tangible projects such as equipment purchases or renovations. It explicitly does not focus on tech startups or purely individual/creative projects.

What traction or pilot results did Equity Endeavor have at the time of this deck?

The platform was launched in **beta** in Austin and New Orleans, where it facilitated close to **$90,000** in successful raises for local small businesses seeking between **$3,000–$30,000** (or similar ranges cited across materials) to fund concrete improvement projects. Business owners offer non-financial rewards—such as products, services, rentals, and experiences—with real economic value in exchange for contributions.

Is Equity Endeavor an equity crowdfunding platform or rewards-based?

Equity Endeavor is described as a **rewards-based** crowdfunding platform, not an equity or debt platform; business owners raise funds without giving up ownership or taking on principal and interest payments. Contributors, called "Community Builders" in some materials, receive non-financial rewards such as products, services, and experiences that have both economic and intrinsic value.

How much was Equity Endeavor trying to raise with this pitch deck and for what purpose?

According to an executive summary linked to the deck, the company was seeking approximately **$500,000** in seed funding to finish building the product and execute a partnership-driven distribution strategy focused on local ecosystems such as insurers, chambers, and other small-business networks. The deck itself is framed as a **seed / pilot** investor presentation for that raise.

What happened to Equity Endeavor after this deck—did the company change names or strategy?

Later sources indicate that Equity Endeavor rebranded to **Local Lift**, co-founded and led by Eric Sonnier and Broderick McClinton, while maintaining a mission of helping small businesses access community capital for growth and improvement projects. The pitch deck, though, reflects the earlier Equity Endeavor brand and positioning around local, rewards-based crowdfunding for small businesses.

Sources

Funding and outcome facts on this page were researched on 2026-08-22 from the pages below.

Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck slides

Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck slide 1 of 31 — Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck — slide 1 of 31

Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck slide 2 of 31 — Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck — slide 2 of 31

Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck slide 3 of 31 — Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck — slide 3 of 31

Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck slide 4 of 31 — Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck — slide 4 of 31

Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck slide 5 of 31 — Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck — slide 5 of 31

Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck slide 6 of 31 — Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck — slide 6 of 31

What each slide of the Equity Endeavor, Inc. pitch deck says

Slide 1

Equity Endeavor, Inc. Investor Presentation www.equityendeavor.com

Slide 2

ee B00 uttjtt088——IL"I"I—I————————————., - - Len 4 \ o : Y | x =F (PS - I 2 | » Broderick Eric McClinton Sonnier = Born and raised in Baton Rouge, LA = Born and raised in Houston, TX = Born and raised in Houston, TX = Finance/Political Science Degree = Marketing Degree from The University = Computer Science Degree from The from Tulane University of Texas at Austin University of Texas at Austin = Associate, BlackRock = Strategy & Operations Consultant, = Spent past 8 years programming = Economic Development, Greater New Deloitte various trading strategies into Orleans Inc. = Account Executive, MdotM, Inc. automated platforms = Harvard Business School, 2014 = Harvard Business School, 2014 © E…

Slide 3

We focus on helping traditional small We are a rewards-based platform, which businesses that operate within a limited means that our business owners geographic footprint. We do not exchange non-financial (e.g., products, support startups or individual projects. and services) items for contributions. B8 coumvenpEAvOR Strictly Confidential

Slide 4

Two Major Trends 4 \ - Two major trends have led to the creation of the Equity Endeavor platform. fj EQUITYENDEAVOR Strictly Confidential a

Slide 5

ETT ———.. p Trend #1 9 Small business owners are having a difficult time finding capital to: Upgrade or replace equipment Renovate or expand storefronts Enhance quality of service Create a better consumer experience

Slide 6

EE ———————————————, In fact, data shows a large need for capital to grow Estimated % of Business Owners (<$5MM in revenue) needing loans for growth or expansion 5% — 45% 25% FE 2Q2013 3Q2013 4Q 2013 SSouicesheppeidine Frvate Capliolicces index £070 HSCS |) EQUITYENDEAVOR Strictly Confidential a

Slide text above is read directly from the Equity Endeavor, Inc. deck PDF embedded on this page.