<!-- Adapted from sendaifun/solana-new@e81c261, skills/launch/create-pitch-deck/references/investor-audience-guide.md. MIT © 2026 SendAI and Superteam; notice in THIRD_PARTY_NOTICES.md. Rewritten; the hackathon section now follows Colosseum's published judging guidance, and fund-specific and 2023-era framing is removed. -->

# Audience guide and self-scoring rubrics

Pick the audience first; it decides the slide set ([pitch-structure.md](pitch-structure.md)) and the rubric. Each section's "Backbone" line names a framework that often fits that audience: vocabulary for the spine, not a step ([storytelling-frameworks.md](storytelling-frameworks.md)), and the spine test in [SKILL.md](../SKILL.md#3-narrative-spine) step 3 applies whichever you use. Score each dimension 1–10 (8–10 strong, 5–7 moderate, 1–4 weak) to find the weak spots. The score is the author's view of the deck, so it doesn't decide when the deck is ready: the reader check in [SKILL.md](../SKILL.md#5-reader-check-not-a-self-score) step 5 does.

## Hackathon judges

Colosseum runs its hackathons as startup competitions and reviews the pitch video first, so a hackathon final is a short seed pitch with a working product behind it, not a tech demo. Its factors and process are in [hackathon judging-criteria](../../hackathon/references/judging-criteria.md); score against those, unweighted, since Colosseum publishes no weights.

- Time: the pitch video is 2–3 minutes; a live final, if any, is similar.
- Order: problem, team, solution, demo, why crypto, traction, ask.
- Show the hardest thing you built, and an explorer link that proves it ran.
- Say you intend to keep building. Colosseum judges for full-time intent.
- Other organisers (Superteam, sponsor tracks) publish their own criteria; use theirs.

## Pre-seed and seed VCs

- Time: 20–30 minutes with Q&A. Send the deck a day before so the meeting is a conversation.
- Backbone: the 6-part investor arc.
- Crypto VCs expect, beyond the standard slides: onchain traction (active wallets, retention, volume; not Discord counts), unit economics **after** onchain costs, a real why-crypto answer, and, if there is a token, utility, allocation, vesting and a stress test. Securities questions go to counsel; see the Regulatory readiness slide in [pitch-structure.md](pitch-structure.md).
- Know your numbers cold: retention, burn, what happens in a bear market, why not an existing protocol.

| Dimension | Strong | Weak |
|---|---|---|
| Team | Domain experts who have shipped | No domain fit |
| Market | Bottom-up, clear wedge | "Crypto is a $NT market" |
| Traction | Onchain metrics with a trend and a source | Vanity metrics or none |
| Defensibility | Network effects, data, integrations, liquidity | Forkable in a weekend |
| Why now | A named change in the last 12–18 months | No timing argument |
| Business model | Revenue with unit economics after fees, RPC and rent | "Monetise later" |
| Crypto necessity | Impossible without the chain | The chain is optional |
| Ask | Amount, instrument, use, milestone, timeline | "We're raising" |

## Ecosystem grants (Solana Foundation, Superteam)

- Format: a written application with links, sometimes a short call. Deck optional.
- Backbone: Hero's journey, with the ecosystem as the hero.
- Reviewers weigh what *other* builders gain, open-source delivery, and your history of delivering. Milestones with a budget per milestone beat a vision.

| Dimension | Strong | Weak |
|---|---|---|
| Ecosystem value | Other teams will use it | Only your project benefits |
| Open source | Open, documented, maintained | Closed or abandoned |
| Why Solana | Uses something Solana-specific | Chain-agnostic |
| Track record | Past grants delivered, active commits | No shipping history |
| Scope | Milestones, dates, budget per milestone | Vague deliverables |

## Accelerators (for example Colosseum's, Alliance)

- Format: a 10–15 minute interview, deck as backup.
- Backbone: Before-After-Bridge: what you shipped, what users said, what changed.
- Colosseum's accelerator draws its teams from hackathon winners and weighs founder potential and adaptability over the submission itself ([workshop recap](https://blog.colosseum.com/perfecting-your-hackathon-submission/), 8 May 2025). The recap said 10–15 teams; Cohort V, drawn from Frontier, had 21 ([Colosseum Codex](https://blog.colosseum.com/cohort-v-demo-day-solana-microscope-alpenglow-migration/), Sep 2026).
- Show the last two weeks of shipping, not next year's plan. Adapt to pushback live.

| Dimension | Strong | Weak |
|---|---|---|
| Execution speed | Shipping weekly | Still planning |
| User signal | 20+ conversations, quotes | None |
| Coachability | Adapts in the room | Defends every point |
| Timing | A named catalyst | "Someday" |
| Commitment | Full-time on this problem | Side-project energy |

## Strategic partners (protocols, wallets, DAOs)

- Format: a 30-minute working call. Bring integration docs, not a fundraising deck.
- Backbone: Before-After-Bridge for *their* users.
- Propose a bounded pilot with a metric and a date. Leave your raise and your token out unless they bear on the integration.

| Dimension | Strong | Weak |
|---|---|---|
| Integration value | Clear benefit to their users, easy to ship | Unclear |
| Readiness | SDK or API documented, reference integration | Concept only |
| Mutual benefit | Both sides gain users, fees or features | One-sided |
| User overlap | Same users, complementary need | Different audiences |
| Track record | Live integrations elsewhere | First attempt |