Had a couple of very hectic weeks with TiECon and couple of our partners visiting India. The opportunity to go around, see 10 “shortlisted” companies with some of my partners last week gave a good sense of contrast between what is expected in a mature venture system like the valley, and what is available here. One of the things that stood out was the lack of detail on pitches. What is interesting is that most of the missing detail did not seem to be a function of articulation, but of ignorance – people who had missed the details had not thought about those aspects. Also, most of the people who had missed details had not operated in those markets before. Nine out of ten presentations had no competitive analysis whatsoever — some more mentioned competition but with a dismissive tone.
I have noticed some of the same contrast in my visits to valley pitches. And if I may draw a parallel, I have seen similar lack of detail in corporate environment here in India — VP level plans and presentations get approved often without sufficient level of detail and analysis.
In terms of our education process for entrepreneurs on venturewoods and elsewhere, we have long focussed on “what all to cover” which again leads to a shallow view of the plan — entrepreneurs look at a question, and answer it at a high level, and they are done. We need to start putting more emphasis on the level of detailing. Maybe if someone can share their pitches, we could do a critique. I have a lot of, what in our view are, good and bad pitches, but I dont have the right to share any of them… Any volunteers?
- Promoters or Entrepreneurs – A choice for Private Equity players - August 3, 2019
- Startup Marathon Mindset - March 25, 2019
- What’s your Customer Culture? - March 4, 2019
Thanks. I will send it across by afternoon today.
-Animesh
Animesh
Would be great if you can send me a version that you want to be hosted. I will post it here, with my comments, and allow other people to comment on the same,
Thanks for volunteering,
Alok,
Timely. Let me add to these excerpts of yours –
” Nine out of ten presentations had no competitive analysis whatsoever — some more mentioned competition but with a dismissive tone.”
This has to do with the mindset. My experience has been that most of the founders would like to believe that their product stands out head and shoulders above competition. It is this very sense of wishful thinking which deters them from doing rigorous “inter-firm comparison” or “Global Standards Benchmarking” which would tell them about how they stack up. Most of the times, especially after enforcement of SOX Act, SEC filings of listed equivalents are available for inspection. In these filings one often gets a fair description by way of SWOT analysis and you get a feel of what’s hitting the business as on the date of filing, good or bad. This comes in handy for a startup coming up in similar space so that it can use those “early warnings” and avoid some pitfalls. I suggest it all the time, but few follow.
It’s quite natural for them to mention competition in a dismissive tone rather than to live with the relative insecurity of being cast aside as run-of-the-mill. In fact, when you point out these facts some of them quietly stop coming back to you even as they admit that you are right. The disgruntled reaction often is – ” Oh, you found that out..? thanks – now get lost…”
I completely agree with you that detail is totally missing in India. I remember that prior to 1st meeting Alok I was extremely enthusiastic because in his Jobs product I had seen a level of detail which was completely missing in Indian products. Every time I used those products, I couldn’t believe that they were used by millions….
And yes, I see the same think missing at the managerial level too. No Detail. Truly shocking.
Another quality missing at the managerial level is execution. It just does not happen anywhere near the slotted time and near the estimated budget. It probably due to lack of detail in execution planning.
No when I work with Indian companies, I look only for one quality: attention to detail. Simple things like presentation quality, depth of information in email replies, etc.
I think rather than sharing pitches, some coaching is required. This is what TIE is supposed to do, but hasn’t. How did those 10 presentations get past the TIE filter?
The coaching sould be given not just in a formalised set up, but at every opportunity. So eveytime a VC or an Angel here sees a presentation, at the end of the session they could spend a few minutes giving a critique to the presenter and guiding him/her on matters such as detail.
As far as making presentations go, there are some good ones available through Google. Search using filetype:ppt as a suffix to the search term.
I could volunteer for sharing the pitch that I have done in the past for a select few VCs/Angel Investors. Would it be the right kind for the discussion given that you might be somewhat familiar with stuff we have been doing at MirroZen. You could go ahead with the pitch we put in before you, if that is appropriate and you could recall the pitch.
There were some wonderful healthy criticism you had made, and I am richer from the experience.
Thanks,
Animesh
MirrorZen Software