Results, also known as ResultsOnAir, utilizes a high-contrast, low-text deck to pitch a TV advertising analytics solution. The narrative centers on the inefficiency of the $40 billion TV ad market, which the founders liken to a lottery. By positioning themselves as 'Mixpanel for TV,' they promise digital-style attribution for traditional broadcast media. The deck highlights significant early traction, including $200K in Annual Recurring Revenue (ARR) and 40% Month-over-Month (MoM) growth. While the deck excels at establishing a clear value proposition through a specific case study (Peachy.co.…
Key takeaways
- The company positions itself using a 'Mixpanel for TV' analogy to immediately communicate its value proposition to tech investors (Slide 1).
- The deck identifies a $40 billion market opportunity where 80% of spend is implied to be inefficient or unmeasured (Slide 2).
- Traction is presented as the core hook, citing $200K ARR and 40% Month-over-Month growth (Slide 5-6).
- A single customer case study for Peachy.co.uk claims a 75% increase in sales and an 80% reduction in costs (Slide 8).
- The product interface, shown on Slide 4, displays metrics like Budget ROI (72%), Cost per Subscription ($14.7), and Cost per Lead ($7.8).
- The team consists of three founders (Cristo, Kristel, Kristo) with previous experience at Rocket Internet, Southwestern, and FCB (Slide 10).
- The deck completely omits a 'The Ask' slide, leaving investors without information on the funding goal or use of proceeds.
- There is no mention of competition or unit economics beyond the customer-facing case study.
Executive Summary: The Minimalist Traction Deck
The Results (ResultsOnAir) pitch deck is a masterclass in brevity, relying on high-contrast visuals and bold metrics rather than dense text. At only 10 slides, it follows a narrative arc that moves quickly from a massive, inefficient market to a specific solution, validated by rapid revenue growth and a successful case study. By branding themselves as "Mixpanel for TV," the founders leverage a successful digital incumbent's reputation to explain a complex attribution product in three words. However, the deck's extreme minimalism leaves significant questions regarding the "how" of their technology and the specifics of their fundraising goals.
Slide 1: Title and Hook
The cover slide introduces the company as "Results On Air" and immediately utilizes a high-concept pitch: "Mixpanel for TV." This is a strategic choice. Mixpanel is a well-known entity in the venture capital world for event-based analytics. By tethering their identity to Mixpanel, Results tells the investor that they provide granular, actionable data for a medium (TV) that has historically been measured by vague estimates like Nielsen ratings. The slide also includes the company URL, AngelList profile, and a founder email address, ensuring accessibility from the start.
Slide 2: The Market Opportunity
Slide 2 uses a simple graphic of a television set containing the figure "$40B" connected to a large "80%." While the slide lacks a caption, the implication in the context of the following slides is clear: $40 billion is spent on TV advertising, and a staggering 80% of that spend is either wasted or unmeasurable. This sets the stage for a "pain point" narrative, highlighting the massive scale of the inefficiency the company intends to solve.
Slide 3: The Problem Statement
The problem is articulated through a visual metaphor. Over a background of lottery balls, the text reads: "BUYING TV ADS = LOTTERY." This is a direct attack on the status quo of the media buying industry. It suggests that without the analytics Results provides, advertisers are essentially gambling with their budgets, hoping for a return without any data-driven way to ensure one. It is a provocative slide designed to trigger an emotional response from anyone who has managed a marketing budget.
Slide 4: The Solution and Product Interface
This slide bridges the gap between the old world and the new. On the left is a vintage, wood-paneled television set; on the right is a modern iMac displaying the Results dashboard. The contrast symbolizes the modernization of the medium. The dashboard itself is the most information-dense part of the deck, showing real-time metrics such as "Budget ROI: 72%," "Cost Per Subscription: $14.7," and "Cost Per Lead: $7.8." This proves the product isn't just a concept—it is a functional tool capable of tracking specific digital conversions back to TV airings.
Slides 5, 6, and 7: The Traction Triple-Threat
The founders chose to dedicate three consecutive slides to their three primary growth metrics. This repetition serves to hammer home the message of momentum. Slide 5 highlights "40% MoM" (Month-over-Month growth). Slide 6 highlights "$200K ARR" (Annual Recurring Revenue). Slide 7 highlights "100% HAPPY" (customer satisfaction). By isolating these numbers, the deck forces the investor to acknowledge the company's early success before moving into the specifics of how that success was achieved.
Slide 8 and 9: The Proof of Concept
These slides focus on a single customer: Peachy.co.uk. Slide 8 shows the client's website on a tablet alongside two massive figures: "+75% SALES" and "-80% COST." Slide 9 concludes the case study with a bold "10X RETURNS." Using a real-world example of a short-term lender—a category that relies heavily on direct-response advertising—provides a concrete use case. It demonstrates that the platform doesn't just provide data; it provides data that leads to significant bottom-line improvements.
Slide 10: The Team
The final slide introduces the three founders: Cristo (CEO), Kristel (CMO), and Kristo (CTO). Rather than long biographies, the slide uses logos of previous employers to establish credibility. Rocket Internet is the most notable, known for its aggressive execution and scaling of startups. Southwestern and FCB provide a mix of sales and traditional advertising agency experience. The photo, taken at an event with an Estonian hashtag, suggests the team is part of the vibrant Baltic tech ecosystem, which has a reputation for capital efficiency.
What Works in This Deck
Clarity of Vision: The "Mixpanel for TV" analogy is incredibly effective. It eliminates the need for three slides of technical explanation by borrowing the mental model of a successful existing company.
Focus on Traction: For a Seed-stage company, $200K ARR with 40% monthly growth is a compelling story. Dedicating 30% of the deck to these figures ensures they are not missed.
Visual Contrast: The use of the vintage TV versus the modern dashboard is a simple but powerful way to communicate the "digital transformation" of a legacy industry.
What Is Missing
The Ask: This is the most glaring omission. A pitch deck is a tool to raise money, yet there is no mention of how much capital is being sought, the valuation expectations, or what the milestones for the next 18 months look like.
Competitive Landscape: Results is not the only player in TV attribution. Companies like iSpot.tv or TVSquared (at the time) were active in this space. Failing to address competition can make founders look naive or like they are hiding the difficulty of the market.
Technical Defensibility: How does the system actually work? Does it use audio watermarking, ACR (Automatic Content Recognition), or simple time-stamp correlation? Investors will want to know if this is a proprietary technology or a service layer built on top of someone else's API.
Founder Takeaways
Use Analogies Wisely: If your product is "[Famous App] for [Different Industry]," use that. It saves time and builds immediate understanding. · Don't Bury the Lead: If you have $200K ARR and are growing 40% a month, make that the centerpiece of the deck. Results did this perfectly. · Show, Don't Just Tell: The Peachy.co.uk case study is more effective than five slides of theoretical benefits. Real numbers from real clients win arguments. · Include the Basics: Never forget the "Ask" slide. Even if you want to negotiate the terms, you must state the amount of capital required to reach the next stage of growth.
Frequently asked questions
- What is the core problem Results is trying to solve?
- Results addresses the lack of precise attribution in the television advertising industry. Slide 3 explicitly compares buying TV ads to a 'lottery,' suggesting that advertisers currently lack the data to know which spots are actually driving conversions. By providing a dashboard that tracks digital actions (subscriptions, leads) against TV airtimes, they aim to bring digital-level accountability to a $40 billion traditional media market.
- How much revenue does the company have according to the deck?
- The deck states the company has reached $200,000 in Annual Recurring Revenue (ARR). This figure is highlighted across three separate slides (5, 6, and 7) to emphasize momentum, alongside a 40% Month-over-Month growth rate. This suggests the deck was likely used for a Seed or late-Pre-Seed round where early revenue serves as the primary proof of product-market fit.
- Who are the founders and what is their background?
- The team consists of three individuals: Cristo (CEO), Kristel (CMO), and Kristo (CTO). Their professional backgrounds include stints at Rocket Internet, a well-known European venture builder; Southwestern, likely referring to the sales training organization; and FCB, a global advertising agency network. The team slide (Slide 10) also features a photo with a '#ESTONIAN' backdrop, indicating the company's geographic origins.
- What specific results did their product achieve for clients?
- The deck highlights a case study for Peachy.co.uk, a UK-based short-term lender. According to slides 8 and 9, the Results platform helped the client achieve a 75% increase in sales and an 80% reduction in costs, ultimately leading to '10x Returns.' The dashboard preview on slide 4 further shows the platform's ability to track Cost Per Subscription and Cost Per Lead in real-time.
- What is missing from this pitch deck?
- The deck is missing several standard components: a specific funding ask (how much they are raising), a slide detailing the competitive landscape, a breakdown of the total addressable market (TAM) beyond a single $40B figure, and a roadmap for future product development. It also lacks a slide on unit economics (LTV/CAC) or a detailed explanation of the underlying technology used for TV-to-web attribution.
