Must Include

• —Company name and logo
• —One-line description: what you do and for whom on each side
• —Founder name(s) and contact info
• —Month/Year of the deck

Avoid

• —Cluttered design or too many fonts and colors
• —Vague taglines like "The future of X"
• —Missing contact information

Must Include

• —A specific, relatable story about a real person experiencing this pain
• —Quantified pain: frequency, cost, or time wasted
• —Why current solutions are inadequate or don't exist
• —Who specifically experiences this pain — your ideal customer profile

Avoid

• —Generic statements like "the market is fragmented" or "the process is inefficient"
• —Overstating or fabricating the severity of the problem
• —Skipping quantification entirely

Must Include

• —A specific enabling trend: a technology shift, regulatory change, or behavior change
• —Why this moment is different from 3–5 years ago
• —A reason why waiting to build this would be costly

Avoid

• —Vague references to broad trends like "the rise of the gig economy" without connecting to your specific market
• —Generic technology references that don't differentiate your market
• —Skipping this slide entirely — it's a common and costly omission

Must Include

• —A clear two-sided diagram showing who is supply and who is demand
• —How the matching or transaction process works
• —Value proposition stated separately for each side
• —A screenshot, mockup, or product walkthrough

Avoid

• —Showing only the buyer/demand experience and ignoring how supply works
• —Being too abstract — show the actual product, not just a concept diagram
• —Feature lists instead of benefit framing — show outcomes, not capabilities

Must Include

• —TAM: total addressable market if you captured everything
• —SAM: your realistically serviceable segment today
• —SOM: your specific 3-year target — what you can actually win
• —Source citations for your data

Avoid

• —"$500B market" without showing the calculation clearly
• —Relying only on top-down market research reports
• —Confusing TAM with revenue opportunity or conflating GMV with TAM

Must Include

• —A growth chart for your primary metric (GMV, transactions, or active users)
• —Month-over-month or quarter-over-quarter trend clearly labeled
• —Cohort retention data if you have it — this is the most compelling signal
• —Notable supply or demand partners worth mentioning by name

Avoid

• —Vanity metrics like total registered users without showing activity or transactions
• —Cherry-picking favorable date windows to make growth look better than it is
• —Hiding churn, presenting misleading charts, or burying the key number

Must Include

• —Take rate percentage and how it's split between buyer and seller (if applicable)
• —Transaction-level unit economics: revenue per transaction, COGS, contribution margin
• —Path to improving margins as you scale — why does the model get better?
• —Clear distinction between GMV (total transaction volume) and your revenue

Avoid

• —Vague language like "we take a small percentage of each transaction"
• —Showing GMV projections but not revenue projections
• —Ignoring the economics of one side — show how both sides contribute

Must Include

• —A 2×2 positioning matrix with clearly labeled axes that show your differentiation
• —Your specific competitive moat: network effects, proprietary data, switching costs, or brand
• —An honest accounting of your key competitors by name
• —A clear explanation of why you win in your chosen niche

Avoid

• —Dismissing all competitors as "old-fashioned" or "not really competition"
• —Claiming you have no competition — this signals either a non-existent market or poor research
• —A feature checklist where you conveniently win every single row

Must Include

• —Your wedge: the specific niche, geography, or supply type where you're creating initial density
• —How you acquire supply first — always your most critical and hardest asset
• —How you bring in demand once supply density reaches a threshold
• —A concrete expansion roadmap after proving the wedge

Avoid

• —Vague growth strategies like "we'll use SEO and content marketing" without specifics
• —Skipping the supply acquisition strategy and jumping straight to demand
• —Showing an ambitious expansion plan before explaining how you solve the cold start problem

Must Include

• —Co-founders and key hires with photos and concise bios
• —Specific prior experience in marketplaces, platforms, or the relevant industry vertical
• —Domain credibility: deep understanding of both the supply and demand sides
• —Advisors only if they are genuinely active and add real credibility

Avoid

• —Generic bios listing titles without quantified accomplishments
• —Listing advisors who signed a form but aren't actually engaged or helpful
• —Hiding team gaps — acknowledge what you still need to hire for and when

Must Include

• —36-month P&L projections with monthly GMV, revenue, and burn clearly modeled
• —All key assumptions listed explicitly — take rate, CAC, conversion rates, churn
• —Current burn rate and existing runway at current pace
• —Projected runway after this raise and key milestone dates

Avoid

• —Hockey-stick revenue curves without modeling the assumptions that create them
• —Projecting profitability in year 1 or 2 when early-stage marketplace dynamics make that implausible
• —Hiding current burn or averaging it with projected future efficiency

Must Include

• —Round size and structure — SAFE with valuation cap, priced round with pre-money valuation, or convertible note
• —Use of funds broken down by category (headcount, supply acquisition, product, operations)
• —Specific milestones you will hit with this capital — tied to marketplace metrics, not just product features
• —Timeline to the next raise or path to profitability

Avoid

• —Vague asks like "we are raising $2M" without explaining terms or use of funds
• —Raising too little (signals lack of ambition or poor planning) or too much (suggests poor judgment at early stage)
• —Milestones stated only in product terms — investors care about GMV, supply density, retention, and revenue