81–90 of 93 posts
What I found original and nicely intuitive is the way to show fragmentation of the playground field. But it is missing a clear view (in a snap) of the cause of this fragmentation. Because the next slide is supposed to explain how to solve the problem.
Making critics is very easy, making the art is very difficult.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's totally possible, even likely, that my fast read of their investor presentation missed facts. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to point a couple of them out?
If your first read of their presentation missed important facts, does that imply it's an ineffective presentation?
There is a logical sequence to the pitch but that is not reflected in the visual structure. The top horizontal menu keeps the "Problem" disjoint from the "Solution". The precursor to this pitch deck was the DressRush pitch (http://investors.dressrush.com/), which does a better job at showing the logical sequence of a pitch, from Intro to Team to Problem to Solution.
But even DressRush is missing a key mechanism: a simple Next arrow that cycles you through all the content. After all, we are only talking about 10 screens or so. There should be no need for fancy navigational mechanisms that get in the way.
Some of the screens get truncated at the bottom but show you an arrow on the right side. The user is torn between scrolling down or scrolling right. (Violating the UX mantra: "Don't make me think").
It almost seems like the Piccsy pitch is trying to get the user to meander aimlessly through the content. And in that respect it is successful. I went through the path I thought they wanted me to follow, but then when I skipped back I found I had missed some important charts and data.
The visual appearance is over-designed and over-fontified (a made-up word) at the expense of readability. Perhaps because it is at the end of a long day for me, but at this hour I don't want to puzzle out coy infographic-style design when looking for basic numbers. The journey is not the reward.
Is this legal?
Let me rephrase> Is it legal to put a pitch deck aimed at private investors online for all to see? I know this is a grey area in the past, and recent legislation has changed things, so I ask again, in hopes of actually getting an answer: Is this legal?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I promise: no snark intended with this question, but I don't know a better way to ask it: does starting a design shop count as company operations experience in startupland? Totally prepared for the answer to be "yes". And clearly there are design shops that have become serious companies, with growth trajectories, quarterly and yearly revenue forecasts, employee turnover, the whole nine yards. Is Moxy one?
At scale, I think running a creative servies business is much harder than a typical tech startup. Mapping billable hours to bodies, some of who you haven't even hired yet, is a difficult process that's hard to scale.
Always when I see such exceptional HTML based pitch decks (the last one was from a wedding thing, don't know the name anymore) I am on the fence: They look so damn good and for sure you get attention en masse (today you should get 20K from HN and many VC related people). BUT: - Isn't this a hell of work? A good JS/frontend guy should need at least one or rather two weeks? Please tell us how many people did this gem o…
I believe you're referring to http://investors.dressrush.com/
Cost to acquire customer: $0.55
Long term customer value: 5-7x of "cost to acquire".
Either my English comprehension is declining with age, or someone just shot themselves in the foot.
They list revenue of $2750 - 3850 for 1,000 customers.
That's ATROCIOUS. Groupon-land.
If that's the state of quality of companies, no wonder the whole market is crumbling.