{"id":81336,"date":"2024-03-08T17:00:42","date_gmt":"2024-03-08T17:00:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/entertainment.runfyers.com\/index.php\/2024\/03\/08\/pitch-deck-teardown-astek-diagnosticss-2m-seed-deck-techcrunch\/"},"modified":"2024-03-08T17:00:42","modified_gmt":"2024-03-08T17:00:42","slug":"pitch-deck-teardown-astek-diagnosticss-2m-seed-deck-techcrunch","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/entertainment.runfyers.com\/index.php\/2024\/03\/08\/pitch-deck-teardown-astek-diagnosticss-2m-seed-deck-techcrunch\/","title":{"rendered":"Pitch Deck Teardown: Astek Diagnostics’s $2M seed deck | TechCrunch"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n<\/p>\n

\n

Astek Diagnostics closed a $2 million round for its urine diagnostics system, despite the fact that raising money for medtech isn\u2019t for the faint of heart. The company\u2019s deck has some good stuff in it and could be a deep source for things we can learn from, too.<\/p>\n\n

We\u2019re looking for more unique pitch decks to tear down, so if you want to submit your own, here\u2019s how you can do that<\/a>.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Slides in this deck<\/h2>\n

Astek Diagnostics has a pretty beefy 22-slide deck that splits a lot of the narrative over multiple slides. In some aspects, the deck is comprehensive and impressive, but it also comes across as pretty defensive and slightly dated, even though this fundraising round closed recently. Some of the slides have been lightly redacted.<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Cover slide<\/li>\n
  2. Vision slide<\/li>\n
  3. Platform slide<\/li>\n
  4. Approach slide (Part 1)<\/li>\n
  5. Approach slide (Part 2)<\/li>\n
  6. Current focus slide (Part 1)<\/li>\n
  7. Current focus slide (Part 2)<\/li>\n
  8. Solution slide<\/li>\n
  9. How it works slide (Part 1)<\/li>\n
  10. \u00a0How it works slide (Part 2)<\/li>\n
  11. \u00a0Technology slide<\/li>\n
  12. \u00a0Team slide<\/li>\n
  13. \u00a0Advisory board slide<\/li>\n
  14. \u00a0Technology validation testing<\/li>\n
  15. \u00a0IP overview slide<\/li>\n
  16. \u00a0Company validation slide<\/li>\n
  17. \u00a0Company timeline slide<\/li>\n
  18. \u00a0Investment terms slide<\/li>\n
  19. \u00a0Commercial and Exit strategy<\/li>\n
  20. \u00a0Comparable transactions slide<\/li>\n
  21. \u00a0Executive summary<\/li>\n
  22. \u00a0Closing slide<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Three things to love about Astek Diagnostics\u2019 pitch deck<\/h2>\n

    Where the AD pitch deck is good, it\u2019s great: comprehensive, well-researched and well-designed. Slide 6 \u2014 the problem statement \u2014 is a great example of all three coming into play.<\/p>\n

    A comprehensive problem statement<\/h3>\n
    <\/p>\n

    [Slide 6] A great, comprehensive problem statement. Image Credits<\/strong>: Astek Diagnostics<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    Explaining the problem in a pitch deck is crucial because it lays the foundation for people to understand the necessity and relevance of your startup. This section should captivate the audience by highlighting a gap or inefficiency in the market that the company aims to address. It sets the context for the entire presentation, allowing investors to grasp the magnitude and urgency of the issue at hand. Better still, explaining the problem effectively helps to validate the market demand for a product or service.<\/p>\n

    In this slide, Astek takes the opportunity to present data and insights that back up its claim, thereby reinforcing the potential for growth and success. This section is a startup\u2019s first step in building a compelling narrative that aligns its mission with the interests and investment goals of would-be investors.<\/p>\n

    On this slide, Astek paints an impactful picture: huge amounts of hospitalizations, unnecessary treatments, problems with speed and accuracy. Solve these problems, this slide suggests, and almost 70,000 lives per year can be saved.<\/p>\n

    Another thing this slide does well. It describes the problem, but what\u2019s really<\/em> going to make investors lean forward is the immense proportion of the problem: 8.1 million hospitalizations indicates that there\u2019s a truly formidable market size at play here.<\/p>\n

    Solid defendability<\/h3>\n

    In biotech, a company is only as valuable as the ability to protect it, and having a great moat is a key part of building a startup for the ages. The fact that the company is thinking about IP protection is reassuring, although I did have some questions about what each of these actually mean<\/em>.<\/p>\n

    \"\"<\/p>\n

    [Slide 15] The legal moat around Astek is off to a good start. Image Credits<\/strong>: Astek Diagnostics<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    One question I have here is why the Test Algorithm patent is shown with a publication number rather than the patent number; the patent (US11,788,962) was granted in October 2023. The second IP entry \u2014 the Fluidic Cartridge patent \u2014 is marked as pending, but it\u2019s available to the public<\/a>.<\/p>\n

    The third one had me flummoxed, so I checked with the team at Run8 Patent Group<\/a>. They explained that that number is neither a patent nor a publication number: it\u2019s a provisional patent number. We weren\u2019t able to tell whether the patent was converted to a non-provisional patent, but at the very least, the terminology is confusing here.<\/p>\n

    The final entry on this list \u2014 for a Rapid Cartridge Modification \u2014 is also confusing. It appears that\u2019s a law firm docket number, which isn\u2019t much of an IP protection, and my friendly patent lawyer friends tell me that simply saying \u201cfiling in progress\u201d may have been clearer and potentially a more honest description of what\u2019s going on here.<\/p>\n

    Easy to understand (but \u2026)<\/h3>\n

    In slides 9 and 10, the company makes it very easy to understand how the system works:<\/p>\n

    \"\"<\/p>\n

    [Slide 9] \u2013 How it works, part 1. Image Credits<\/strong>: Astek Diagnostics.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \"\"<\/p>\n

    [Slide 10] \u2013 How it works, part 2. Image Credits<\/strong>: Astek Diagnostics.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    These two slides do a good job explaining how a user would use the product. Insert sample, bacteria are captured, then tested, then you can read what the machine found. From a sales perspective \u2014 if I were a buyer of one of these machines \u2014 that\u2019s a great top-level view over how a user would use the machine.<\/p>\n

    But, from\u00a0the perspective of a consumer, this is how I would\u00a0<\/span>expect<\/em> a machine like this to work. If I, a non-medically-trained person were to walk up to this machine, I think I could use it. the expectation of user experience is so high now, that this isn\u2019t an innovation: This is how things <\/span>should<\/em> be. Of course, in medical devices, user experience is sometimes not a high priority, and perhaps the ease of use is a selling point for the machine, but the way these slides are projected, I kind of go \u201cYes, and so what?\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

    What I\u2019d really love to have seen here is context. If all the other machines are much harder to use, tell that story. If the machine is way faster, show that comparison. If there is a major technology breakthrough, that<\/em> is what I would be curious about as an investor.<\/p>\n

    The product slides shouldn\u2019t show how to hit the minimum viable user experience. It\u2019s better to explain what it is about the product that makes it special, defendable and worth investing in.<\/p>\n

    Three things that Astek Diagnostics could have improved<\/h2>\n

    There were a lot of potential learning opportunities \u2014 many more than I have time or space to go into in this pitch deck teardown, but let\u2019s pick out some takeaways:<\/p>\n

    Tell the full team story<\/h3>\n

    The team slide has both too much and too little information on it.<\/p>\n

    \"\"<\/p>\n

    [Slide 12] Teeming with team members. Image Credits<\/strong>: Astek Diagnostics<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    The purpose of a team slide is to tell the story of why a team is uniquely positioned to build this specific company. As an investor, I don\u2019t particularly care about engineers or computer scientists. The team slide is for highlighting the founding team and senior leadership, the folks that are trusted to carry this company through the next few rounds of funding and product development. This slide needs more context to be useful.<\/p>\n

    Astek does get partial credit for including LinkedIn links to each of the team members, but a brief description under each name would be easier.<\/p>\n

    Since the company put links to the whole team\u2019s LinkedIn profiles, I went looking to see what I could find \u2014 and I found some yellow flags. Kevin is listed as a co-founder, not as CTO on LinkedIn. His profile reads that he is \u201ca versatile full stack developer with a background in Chemical Engineering. My expertise lies in developing web-based applications.\u201d So that\u2019s great and all, but hardware is hard, and medical devices are extremely specialized. Having a CTO that seems to have no startup or hardware experience could cause investors to ask some questions.<\/p>\n

    Rick is listed as the company\u2019s CFO \u2014 it\u2019s confusing why a company raising $2 million would even need a CFO \u2014 but he doesn\u2019t list Astek Diagnostics<\/a> on his LinkedIn at all.<\/p>\n

    On the slide, Scott is listed as the company\u2019s chief commercial officer \u2014 again, a strange role for a company that doesn\u2019t have a product in market yet \u2014 but he, too, doesn\u2019t have Astek Diagnostic listed on his LinkedIn<\/a>. On the bright side, he does appear to have relevant experience from Specific Diagnostics as the CCO and as a board member of LEX Diagnostics.<\/p>\n

    In a nutshell, make sure whatever information you include on your slides matches with public information that\u2019s available. If not, get ready for some prickly questions from investors.<\/p>\n

    Let\u2019s talk about the funding round \u2026<\/h3>\n
    \"\"<\/p>\n

    [Slide 17] That\u2019s a lot of redacted data. Image Credits<\/strong>: Astek Diagnostics<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    The company has something going on on its timeline, showing three rounds of funding, all of them redacted. Putting aside for a moment that I\u2019ve never heard of a \u201cpre-Series A\u201d round, this, too, raises some flags.<\/p>\n

    The irony, of course, is that a lot of this information is available through other data sources. When investors evaluate whether to talk to a startup, they use whatever information available to see the status of the company. In this case, I looked the company up on PitchBook and Crunchbase.<\/p>\n

    \"\"<\/p>\n

    Crunchbase \u201cknows\u201d about three rounds of funding. Image Credits:<\/strong> Crunchbase<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    Crunchbase tracked a $125k pre-seed round, a $256k grant led by the NSF (which turns out to be $275k<\/a>), and a $2 million seed round<\/a> led by Wexford Scitech venture fund, which was reported in June 2023<\/a>.<\/p>\n

    Pitchbook has a bunch more information:<\/p>\n

    \"\"<\/p>\n

    PitchBook shows a huge amount of information about company financials in its database. Image Credits<\/strong>: PitchBook<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    All of that is to say that I\u2019m not entirely sure why the company decided to redact this part of the pitch deck, since the information is so easily gathered from public sources.<\/p>\n

    What worries me more, however, is the next slide:<\/p>\n

    \"\"<\/p>\n

    [Slide 18] This slide is not only superfluous, it\u2019s potentially a red flag. Image Credits<\/strong>: Astek Diagnostics<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    There\u2019s a lot of things to worry about on this slide: Raising an amount to \u201cget to Series A target milestones\u201d helps answer why the company wrote \u201cpre-Series A\u201d in the previous slides: It\u2019s a bridge round. That could mean two things:<\/p>\n