Hello Nick, this is May, answering on behalf of Capital Pilot. I wanted to personally reply as apologies are in order: as explained over email, I had read your email and launched an internal investigation immediately in order to better understand what happened. In my haste to get that done, I did miss the mark on replying to inform you of next steps, and for that, I apologise.
There are a few things to address here, so I thought I'd reply in bullet points to make it easier to follow:
- Following the investigation - we are confident that your submission was reviewed in full, and in accordance with our procedures.
- In relation to the feedback you applied following your first rating - as you mentioned, we provide copious amounts of feedback on how to imprpve a company's investor proposition. Our aim is to replicate the experience of dealing with a typical VC associate who would expect key information to be summarised in the pitch deck, and then provide feedback from that perspective. A company's rating is not determined solely by the amount of information presented, but rather by the clarity of it. Part of our process in dealing with a returning startup is to assign the assessment to a different team of Startup Analysts in an effort to eliminate bias and provide additional feedback. I understand that it can be frustrating if some of the feedback is similar after you've addressed it, however, something to consider here is that it's similar to approaching different investors - a person is likely to receive different responses, as each investor would have had a different takeaway. This could indicate that the information presented could be further clarified or made to be easier to follow. We encourage founders to ensure that all critical information is clearly presented within the pitch deck and financial and
for supporting documents to be included via links within the pitch deck to provide additional context as needed.
- It is also worth noting that it is our policy to have returning customers get their proposition assigned to a different set of Startup Analysts. This is done in order to normalise and eliminate bias.
- Regarding the score being lower the second time around - as mentioned over email - our Product team informed me that there was a bug and your assessment's results was affected by it. The individual category scores (Market - Business Opportunity - Executability - Scalabality) were affected as a result of the bug, and the values shown in your report are incorrect. The analysis and recommendations from our Startup Analysts were unaffected as a result of this bug, which has since been fixed. The team provided me with the correct scores for your reference; which I sent over email for your reference.
- The list of best-fit investor matches is a service that is provided at no extra charge. We do not provide introductions as that is a regulated activity. The list is automatically generated based on the information provided during onboarding; the list presented to you is filtered from a much larger database and showcases those who have made investments in companies similar to yours (per stage, raise size, etc).
When I replied to you last, we offered you a Power Hour session as a way to make up for a less-than-stellar experience. I will send you another email now outlining our CCO's availability over the coming couple of weeks in the hopes that one of the time slots will suit you.
Sincerely,
~ May (on behalf of the Capital Pilot Team)