Not Boring Capital Pitch Deck (2022): 15-Slide Breakdown

Not Boring Capital’s Fund II pitch is a masterclass in 'Media-as-a-Service' venture capital. Eschewing traditional slides for a 15-page long-form memo, founder Packy McCormick argues that his 90,000-subscriber newsletter (at the time of writing) provides an unfair advantage in deal discovery and allocation. The fund targets a $25 million raise to invest across stages, with a heavy emphasis on web3 and fintech. The memo is exceptionally transparent, listing every Fund I investment, check size, and valuation range. It positions the solo GP model not as a limitation, but as a collaborative asset…

Key takeaways

• The fund targets a $25 million raise for Fund II, as stated on slide 14.
• The newsletter serves as the primary 'unfair advantage,' boasting 90,000 subscribers on slide 1 and growing to 98,000 by slide 3.
• Fund I deployed $9.9 million in just over six months, significantly faster than the original 12-month projection (slide 1).
• The investment strategy follows a 'barbell' approach: 1/3 in Pre-Seed/Seed, 1/3 in Series A, and 1/3 in Series B+ (slide 3).
• Web3 is a major focus, with the fund planning to exceed Fund I's 11% allocation in the sector (slide 3).
• The fund operates as a solo GP model that does not lead deals or take board seats, positioning itself as a 'friend to all' other VCs (slide 6).
• Transparency is high, with slides 9 and 10 providing a line-by-line spreadsheet of 79 portfolio companies including exact investment dates and sizes.
• The memo cites a 13.9x return on Braintrust within months as a key early proof of the web3 thesis (slide 11).

Frequently asked questions

What is the primary investment thesis of Not Boring Capital?

The thesis is built on 'Media-as-a-Service.' As a solo GP, Packy McCormick uses his newsletter and social reach to help companies tell their stories. This visibility helps him 'Pick the Right Investments,' 'Get Allocations' in competitive rounds where founders want his audience, and 'Help Portfolio Companies Succeed' through public deep dives and amplification.

How does the fund handle follow-on investments?

According to the memo, the fund maintains a 10% reserve for follow-ons. However, larger follow-on opportunities or allocations exceeding $250,000 are typically handled through Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) via AngelList or Syndicate, giving Fund LPs direct co-investment opportunities.

What is the stage and sector focus for Fund II?

It is a generalist, multi-stage fund. While it targets a 1/3 split between early, mid, and late stages, Fund I data shows a lean toward early stage, with 84% of dollars in Pre-Seed through Series A. Top sectors include Fintech ($1.36M invested) and Web3 ($1.01M invested).

How does Not Boring Capital differentiate itself from larger VC firms?

The memo argues that the larger and more sophisticated big funds get, the better it is for Not Boring. Because McCormick doesn't lead deals, sit on boards, or require high ownership percentages, he can 'piggyback' on the diligence and resources of lead investors while providing unique marketing value.

What are the specific terms of the $25 million fund?

The fund carries a 2% management fee for four years, 20% carried interest, and a $500,000 GP commitment. The minimum investment for LPs is $25,000, and the fund administration is handled by AngelList. Capital calls are split 50% upfront and 50% when called.

Not Boring Capital pitch deck: the facts

Company

Not Boring Capital

Year

2022

Slides

15

Sector

Venture Capital, Tech, Software, Hardware, Consumer

Not Boring Capital pitch deck PDF

The full Not Boring Capital 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 Not Boring Capital pitch deck was used for

This deck is a 15-page long-form memo used in 2022 to raise Not Boring Capital’s Fund II, a venture capital fund led by newsletter writer and investor Packy McCormick. The memo positions the firm as a multi-stage generalist fund focused on tech companies "with stories to tell," leveraging McCormick’s Not Boring newsletter (about 90,000 subscribers at the time) as a differentiated sourcing and value-add channel. The document outlines the transition from Fund I to a larger Fund II, describes portfolio construction, check sizes, and sector focus, and concludes with a terms summary. It was circulated primarily to prospective LPs from the Not Boring audience and broader venture ecosystem as the main fundraising artifact instead of a traditional slide deck.

Business model: Venture capital firm investing across web2 and web3, software and hardware, consumer and other tech sectors, often at seed to Series B with a generalist, multi-stage strategy.

Year

2022

Founders

Packy McCormick

Industry

Venture Capital

Round: Venture capital fundraise (emerging manager raising a second fund) rather than a company round.

Raising: Fund II of Not Boring Capital, a multi-stage generalist venture fund focused on tech companies across web2/web3, software/hardware, and consumer/enterprise.

Raised: Approximately $25–30 million for Not Boring Capital Fund II, with the memo itself describing a $30M target and a separate terms page and teardown summarizing a $25M fund size.

Use of funds as presented: To invest primarily in pre-seed, seed, and Series A tech companies, with some allocation to later-stage rounds, writing larger checks than in Fund I and reserving a portion of capital for follow-on investments.

What happened after the Not Boring Capital deck

Not Boring Capital successfully raised its Fund II as a roughly $25–30M vehicle and rapidly deployed capital across dozens of companies, leveraging the Not Boring newsletter’s audience and brand for deal flow and storytelling, and subsequently reported at least one early liquidity event while continuing to build out a multi-fund platform.

• Fund II was structured as a ~$25–30M fund, with a terms page summarizing a $25M vehicle, 10% reserves, 2% management fee
• Subsequent LP updates report that by Q1 2022, Fund II had invested approximately **$21.1 million in 98 companies**, incl
• A later Not Boring update notes that Fund II had its first liquidity event with one position marked up to around **$3.8
• Not Boring Capital later announced Fund III as a separate $30M fund focused on "Hard Startups," indicating continued fun

What the Not Boring Capital deck got right

• Compelling long-form narrative format tailored to LPs. The memo is structured as a detailed, narrative-rich investment document rather than a short slide deck, allowing Packy McCormick to thoroughly explain his background, the Not Boring platform, Fund I’s evolution, and Fund II’s strategy in a cohesive story. That depth can be appealing to LPs who prefer to understand a GP’s thinking and process rather than just high-level bullets.
• Clear "unfair advantage" via a large, engaged newsletter audience. Not Boring Capital’s core differentiator is the Not Boring newsletter, which had about 90,000 subscribers at the time and is framed as a powerful engine for sourcing, diligence, and post-investment storytelling. The deck argues that this audience provides unfair access to competitive rounds and an ability to amplify portfolio companies, creating a clear, credible edge.
• Unusually transparent disclosure of prior fund portfolio. External analyses note that the memo includes a spreadsheet-like disclosure of every Fund I investment, with check sizes and valuation ranges, providing unusual transparency into how capital has been deployed. This level of detail helps LPs evaluate portfolio construction, sector exposure, and GP behavior across a large number of deals.
• Consistent, scaled-up strategy from Fund I to Fund II. The deck explicitly connects the strategy of Fund II to Fund I—same generalist, multi-stage approach across web2/web3 and bits/atoms, but with larger average checks—giving LPs continuity and a clear sense of how lessons from Fund I are being scaled. That continuity can reduce perceived strategy drift between funds.
• Clear, straightforward fund terms with meaningful GP commitment. The memo outlines concrete fund terms—such as 2% management fees for four years, 20% carry, 10% reserves, a $500k GP commitment, and a $25k minimum investment—and positions them as intentionally "boring" compared to the fund’s strategy. This clarity around economics and GP commitment can build trust with LPs who need to assess alignment and cost structure.
• Concrete portfolio examples and early markups to illustrate strategy execution. The deck highlights specific examples of early markups (for instance, pre-seed checks into companies like Composer and Party Round) and later-stage investments in names such as Ramp, Sky Mavis, Modern Treasury, and Scale, illustrating both upside and breadth. Even without full performance metrics, that mix of recognizable companies and early wins makes the opportunity more tangible for LPs.

What could have been stronger

• Inconsistent fund size messaging between $25M and $30M. The memo and external breakdowns reference a target of $30M earlier in the document but a $25M fund size in the "Summary of Terms," creating ambiguity for LPs about the precise target and final fund size. This discrepancy is not clearly resolved in the deck itself, which could raise questions about whether the fund is formally structured as $25M or aiming to scale toward $30M.
• Limited explicit fund performance metrics in the visible narrative. While secondary analyses note that the memo includes a detailed spreadsheet of 79 Fund I portfolio companies with check sizes and valuation ranges, the OCR excerpts and high-level summaries do not mention concrete performance metrics such as DPI, TVPI, or realized exits beyond a small number of early markups. That leaves prospective LPs without a clear, quantitative sense of Fund I performance beyond anecdotes about markups and portfolio quality.
• Heavy dependence on a single distribution channel and persona. The deck leans heavily on the Not Boring newsletter as the core edge and explicitly notes that without it, the GP would be an "average" investor at best, which is both honest and risky positioning. This framing may prompt concerns about key-person risk, platform concentration, and what happens if newsletter engagement or growth stalls.
• Portfolio construction risk not fully contextualized for LPs. External commentary indicates that the memo lists every Fund I investment and includes a line-by-line breakdown, but there is little discussion in the excerpts about risk management, concentration limits, or how many companies are expected to drive the majority of returns. For LPs, this could make it harder to assess how disciplined the fund will be in avoiding over-dilution across a very broad portfolio.
• Limited discussion of deployment discipline under changing market conditions. The pitch emphasizes speed of deployment in Fund I and notes that capital was deployed faster than planned, partly due to market conditions, but does not clearly articulate how Fund II will adjust pace and discipline in different or less frothy environments. That leaves a potential gap for LPs worried about overdeployment or vintage risk if markets cool.

How an investor would read this deck

What draws attention

• Clarify the **exact fund size** and structure for Fund II, reconciling the $30M headline with the $25M terms page and explaining any planned scaling or hard cap.
• Evaluate the **newsletter-driven sourcing edge**, including subscriber engagement, content cadence, and evidence that newsletter coverage consistently translates into access and allocation in top-tier deals.
• Assess **Fund I’s track record** using the detailed investment list in the memo: markups, write-downs, paper IRR, and concentration of value, not just the existence of a large portfolio.
• Understand the **portfolio construction plan** for Fund II: number of companies, check sizes by stage, follow-on reserve strategy, and how much of the fund is expected to be in pre-seed/seed versus later-stage positions.
• Analyze **key-person and platform risk**, since the fund’s differentiation largely rests on Packy McCormick and the Not Boring brand.

Risks that stand out

• **Key-person and brand risk**: The memo explicitly acknowledges that without the Not Boring newsletter, the GP would be an average investor and the fund likely would not exist, making performance heavily dependent on Packy and the newsletter’s continued relevance.
• **Fund size ambiguity**: The tension between a $30M headline target and a $25M terms page may signal evolving goals or uncertainty about the final fund size, which can complicate expectations around portfolio construction and reserves.
• **High-volume portfolio strategy**: Fund I’s large number of investments and the memo’s description of widespread participation across stages suggest a high-volume approach that can dilute attention and make it harder to drive outcomes in each company.
• **Market timing and deployment risk**: Fund I was deployed faster than expected during a very hot market, and while Fund II aims to follow a similar strategy, the memo provides limited detail on how pace and risk appetite would change in a downturn or different macro environment.
• **Sector and stage dispersion**: Investing across web2, web3, bits, and atoms at multiple stages exposes the fund to diverse and uncorrelated risks, including regulatory and volatility risks in crypto/web3, which LPs must understand relative to their own portfolios.

Questions this deck invites

• What is the final, legally documented fund size for Not Boring Capital Fund II, and how did you decide between the $25M and $30M targets referenced in the memo and breakdowns?
• Can you share detailed Fund I performance metrics (TVPI, DPI, IRR, distribution of outcomes) to complement the portfolio list included in the memo, and how do these compare to peer funds from the same vintage?
• How often does newsletter coverage directly precede or accompany investments, and can you provide examples where Not Boring content materially improved a portfolio company’s fundraising or traction?
• What is the targeted number of Fund II portfolio companies and the expected ownership ranges by stage, and how do you prevent over-fragmentation across many small checks?
• What contingency plans are in place if Packy is unable to write the newsletter at the current cadence or if subscriber engagement declines, given that the deck positions "no Not Boring, no Not Boring Capital"?

What founders can take from the Not Boring Capital deck

• Anchoring a fundraise around an existing **audience and content platform** can be a powerful differentiator, especially when that platform demonstrably improves deal flow and allocation in competitive rounds.
• Transparent disclosure of **Fund I portfolio details**—including every investment, check size, and valuation range—can build trust with prospective LPs even before strong performance metrics are available.
• Using a **long-form memo instead of a traditional slide deck** allows a GP to explain nuanced strategy, portfolio construction, and personal background in greater depth, which can resonate with sophisticated LPs.
• Clearly articulating a consistent **multi-fund strategy**—Fund II following a similar approach to Fund I but with larger checks—helps LPs understand how lessons from the prior fund will be applied.
• Positioning the fund’s "unfair advantage"—here, the Not Boring newsletter and storytelling capability—up front makes it easy for LPs to grasp why the GP might win competitive deals and add value beyond capital.
• Honest acknowledgment of the GP’s strengths and limitations (for example, admitting reliance on the newsletter for edge) can enhance credibility, even though it also highlights key-person risk.

Not Boring Capital pitch deck: common questions

What is Not Boring Capital Fund II and what does this pitch deck cover?

Not Boring Capital Fund II is a venture capital fund managed by Packy McCormick that targets roughly a **$25–30 million** vehicle to invest in tech companies across web2 and web3, software and hardware, and both consumer and enterprise, often at seed through Series B. The associated memo serves as the primary pitch document to prospective LPs rather than a traditional slide deck, emphasizing the fund’s generalist, multi-stage strategy and reliance on the Not Boring newsletter as a key differentiator.

How much was Not Boring Capital Fund II aiming to raise according to the deck?

The memo states a target of **$30 million** for Not Boring Capital Fund II, although some catalog summaries list the final or formal fund size as **$25 million** and note that the terms section describes a $25 million fund. The discrepancy appears to come from the memo’s opening framing of a $30 million goal and a later "Summary of Terms" page specifying a $25 million fund size, both of which are referenced in secondary breakdowns.

What investment strategy and stage focus does the Fund II memo describe?

The fund’s stated strategy is to invest in the "best companies across verticals – web2 and web3, bits and atoms – at any stage," with a heavier concentration in earlier rounds like pre-seed, seed, and Series A. The memo explains that Fund II will generally write larger checks than Fund I, maintain a multi-stage generalist approach, and prioritize companies with compelling narratives where Not Boring can help tell their story.

How does the deck say Not Boring’s newsletter helps the fund?

The memo highlights the **Not Boring** newsletter, which had around **90,000 subscribers** at the time of writing, as the core engine for deal flow and value-add. The pitch argues that the newsletter gives Not Boring Capital differentiated access to high-quality deals, helps win allocations in competitive rounds, and provides portfolio companies with distribution and storytelling support through deep dives and essays.

What key fund terms does the Fund II memo present (fees, carry, minimums)?

External write-ups on the memo note that the "Summary of Terms" slide lists Fund II as a **$25 million** fund with **10% reserves**, a **2% management fee for four years (then 0%)**, **20% carried interest**, a **$500,000 GP commitment**, and a minimum LP ticket of **$25,000**. The fund is administered by AngelList, with capital calls split **50% upfront and 50% when called**. These terms are presented as relatively standard and intentionally "boring" compared to the differentiated strategy.

Sources

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

• VC Pitch Deck- Not Boring Capital Fund 2
• Not Boring Capital: 2 Fund, 2 Boring
• Not Boring Capital — Investment Thesis & Preferences - F4 Fund
• VC Pitch Deck- Not Boring Capital Fund 1
• Post
• Announcing Not Boring Capital Fund III
• Comments - Not Boring Capital: 2 Fund, 2 Boring
• Not Boring Capital - Fund II Memo - VC Pitch Deck Examples

Not Boring Capital pitch deck slides

What each slide of the Not Boring Capital pitch deck says

Slide 1

Fund II Memo Hi friends ¥, I'm Packy McCormick. I write a newsletter called Not Boring about tech companies and trends that currently has about 90,000 subscribers. I'm raising $30 million for Not Boring Capital Fund I1. Not Boring Capital invests in companies with stories to tell, and helps tell them. I raised Fund I in April 2021, expecting that I would raise $5-7M and that it would take 12 months to deploy the capital. I was wrong. Fund I ended up raising $9.9M and I deployed it in a little over six months. Part of the reason for the discrepancy was the market. Things moved faster than I could have even anticipated back in April. Particularly for a small multi-stage generalist fund, the o…

Slide 2

So far, steps two and three are playing out beautifully. It will take some years to understand whether we've picked the right investments, but I feel strongly that we've built a portfolio full of phenomenal companies. Fund I's portfolio should look similar to Fund I's, but with bigger checks. I've been holding back on allocations in Fund I, and want to move the range closer to $100-$500k, with the ability to flex up (or very occasionally down) for Fund I1. We will mostly focus on Seed to Series B tech companies, broadly defined, but will occasionally go earlier or later. For example, our pre-seed checks into Composer and Party Round have

Slide 3

already resulted in markups, and I would write checks into the later-stage companies we've backed like Ramp, Sky Mavis, Modern Treasury, and Scale ten times out of ten. Once again, I expect to invest roughly % of the fund into Pre-Seed and Seed, % into Series A, and % into Series B+. While I will make most investments with the expectation that they can return the fund, I am also happy making safer later-stage investments that I think have a high probability of 5-10x returns and smaller investments into earlier stage companies and protocols with big upside and the opportunity for larger follow-on checks. One new addition for Fund I1 will be follow-on checks from Fund I. I don't have an exact…

Slide 4

e Not Boring Syndicate: $4 million invested across 25 deals, 1,500 backers e Investment Memos: Public memos on companies we invest in e Sponsored Deep Dives: Companies pay Not Boring to write about them * Not Boring Founders. Podcast conversations with portfolio founders with ~3-7k listeners per episode. e Twitter and Spaces: 125k Twitter followers e Not Boring Capital. A multi-stage venture fund. Those help us do the three things we need to do to be successful: see & pick the best companies, get allocation, and help portfolio companies. Figuring out exactly what we should be doing with those assets, and how, is the secret sauce of Not Boring Capital's strategy. Strategy In our recent LP Up…

Slide 5

higher: it tracks 994 unicorns, worth a combined $3.4 trillion, 132 of which were valued over $1 billion for the first time in Q3. Whichever list you look at, the takeaway is the same: Over the past quarter, more than 1 new unicorn was born every single day. es 54 49 5 W 42 a 37 24 23 24 26 18 vi . 2 12 12 1 1] i TLL LLT 2020 Feb | Mar| Apr| May| Jun | Jul | Aug| Sept| Oct| Nov| Dec| 2021 Feb | Mar | Apr |May|Jun | Jul | Aug| Sept| crunchbase Source: Crunchbase It’s not just private market mania fueling valuations, either. Crunchbase reported that 83 unicorns went public in the first nine months of 2021 at a combined market cap of $958 billion, for an average public valuation of $11.5 billi…

Slide 6

. . Unicorn Companies Public Debuts Excludes companies previously acquired. Data as of Sept 28 2021, ® Valuation at public debut ~~ ® Number of public debuts 83 J $9588 - 39 32 38 5 2 4 10 6 6 $3948 $2968 $2828 $2288 Ew. ey 8B $3 [RAL S108 S183 pum 20m 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 YTD 2021 crunchbase Source: Crunchbase That $958 billion is higher than the past three years combined, and if the pace continues, 2021 unicorn valuations at public debut will exceed the combined value of the past six years. The second piece of the diagnosis is that the rules of the game are different for a small solo fund like Not Boring Capital. We are structurally set up to be able to invest in a…

Slide 7

threat to lead and is a friend to all, we get to piggyback on all of that work for free, which saves time and lets us meet with, invest in, and write about more companies. The third part of the diagnosis is that without the newsletter, I would be a very average venture investor at best. I probably wouldn't be doing this. I would see fewer deals, spend less time thinking deeply enough about companies and markets to put my thoughts out there, and win few allocations in more competitive deals. No Not Boring, no Not Boring Capital. Guiding Policy All of those inputs combine into a guiding policy for Not Boring Capital: set Not Boring Capital up to see and invest in as many great companies as po…

Slide text above is read directly from the Not Boring Capital deck PDF embedded on this page.

Related fundraising guides (24)

• AppNexus Pitch Deck Breakdown
• How to Design a Pitch Deck That Investors Can't Ignore
• How to Build a Financial Forecast Slide for Your Pitch Deck
• How to Pitch Your App to Investors
• Foursquare Seed Pitch Deck Breakdown
• A Founder's Guide to Demo Day: How to Get Funded
• How to Create a Pitch Deck Competition Slide Investors Actually Like
• How to End Your Pitch: A Guide to the Final Slides, Q&A, and Closing
• Monzo Pitch Deck Breakdown: Building the Bank of the Future
• How to Write an Executive Summary That Gets Investors to Reply
• The Founder's Guide to SMART Goals That Actually Get You Funded
• How to Know if Your Pitch Deck Is Actually Good
• Pendo Series B Pitch Deck Breakdown
• How to Show Your Competitor Landscape in a Pitch Deck
• Where to Put the Business Model Slide in Your Pitch Deck
• Pitch Deck Sharing: The Founder's Guide to Tools and Analytics
• N26 Pitch Deck Breakdown
• How to Create a Pitch Deck Investors Can't Ignore
• How Investors Actually Review Your Pitch Deck: The 3-Minute Scan
• A Founder's Guide to Investor Materials That Actually Raise Money
• Super.com Pitch Deck Breakdown: The $60M Series C Deck, Slide by Slide
• The 50-Page Business Plan Is Dead: What to Build Instead
• How to Present Customer Acquisition Cost (CAC) in Your Pitch Deck
• How to Write a Pitch Deck Script That Closes

This deck's categories (6)

• Fintech & Neobank Pitch Deck Examples
• SaaS & Developer Tools Pitch Deck Examples
• Healthtech & Biotech Pitch Deck Examples
• AI & Machine Learning Pitch Deck Examples
• Crypto & Web3 Pitch Deck Examples
• Hardware, Deeptech & Climate Pitch Deck Examples

Decks from the same year (1)

• 2022 pitch deck examples

Decks with a similar raise (1)

• Pitch decks that raised $10M to $50M

Browse companies alphabetically (1)

• Pitch decks from companies starting with N

Decks in the same category (12)

• TransferWise (Wise) Pitch Deck Breakdown
• Oscar Health Pitch Deck Breakdown
• Revolut Pitch Deck Breakdown
• Dwolla Pitch Deck Breakdown
• Brex Pitch Deck Breakdown
• Mint.com 2007 Seed Pitch Deck Breakdown
• Super.com Pitch Deck Breakdown: The $60M Series C Deck, Slide by Slide
• Exeq Pitch Deck Breakdown: The 2017 Consumer Fintech Deck That Left Its Business Model in Another File
• Square Pitch Deck Breakdown
• Stripe Early Pitch Deck Breakdown
• BakeSale Pitch Deck Breakdown: The 24-Slide Product Deck That Demos a Product and Never Pitches a Business
• Monzo Pitch Deck Breakdown: Building the Bank of the Future

More pitch deck teardowns (16)

• Northspyre Pitch Deck Teardown: A Data-Driven $25 Million Series B for Real Estate OS
• Nory Pitch Deck Teardown: A Masterclass in Founder-Market Fit and Efficiency Metrics
• Nostos Genomics Pitch Deck Teardown: A Masterclass in High-Science Market Positioning
• Notably Pitch Deck Breakdown: Selling the Future of AI-Powered Qualitative Research
• Notation Capital Fund 1 Pitch Deck Teardown: A Thesis-Driven Approach to NYC Pre-Seed
• Notation II Pitch Deck Teardown: A Masterclass in Pre-Seed Fund Thesis and Portfolio Construction
• Not Boring Capital Fund II Pitch Deck Breakdown: The Media-First Venture Model
• Not Boring Capital Fund I Pitch Deck Breakdown: The Rise of the Solo Capitalist
• Notion Pitch Deck Breakdown: The Case for SaaS Consolidation and Unified Workspaces
• Noto Pitch Deck Breakdown: Vertical SaaS for the $11B Lesson-Based Economy
• Nourish Ingredients Pitch Deck Teardown: A $28.6M Bet on Fermented Fats for Alt-Protein
• Novamind Pitch Deck Breakdown: Building Infrastructure for the Psychedelic Medicine Revolution
• Novelty Lab Pitch Deck Teardown: A 2014 Vision for Mainstream Bitcoin Adoption
• Calix Pitch Deck Teardown: Modernizing the Access Network Edge for Public Markets
• Aveda Transportation Pitch Deck Teardown: Scaling Oilfield Logistics Through Consolidation
• Novisto Pitch Deck Teardown: A Data-Driven Masterclass in Enterprise ESG Reporting

Recently published pitch deck teardowns (12)

• MedX Pitch Deck Teardown: Transitioning from Hardware to a SaaS Telemedicine Model
• Medalist Diversified Pitch Deck Teardown: A Regional REIT Focus on Secondary Markets
• Medgenics Pitch Deck Teardown: A Public Biotech's Case for Sustained Gene Therapy
• Medalist Diversified REIT Pitch Deck Teardown: A Regional Real Estate Consolidation Play
• Medirom Healthcare Technologies Pitch Deck Teardown: Bridging Physical Salons and Wearables
• MEDIHERE Pitch Deck Teardown: Scaling Medical Tourism and Telehealth via Lead Generation
• Mediico Healthcare Pitch Deck Teardown: A High-Level Vision Lacking Operational Detail
• Medlio Pitch Deck Teardown: Visualizing the Shift Toward Patient-Driven Healthcare Payments
• MedKart Pitch Deck Teardown: Targeting India's Tier 2 and 3 Medical Supply Chain
• MedReleaf Pitch Deck Teardown: Dominating the Canadian Medical Cannabis Market
• MedReleaf Pitch Deck Teardown: Scaling Medical Cannabis Through Operational Efficiency
• MemberPass Pitch Deck Teardown: A 2013 Look at Fitness Payment Simplification

Browse by topic (1)

• Pitch Deck guides

Fundraising library · Pitch deck examples · Investor directory · Founder database