Coming Soon: The 1752vc Pitch Deck Analyzer!

@reda_roqai_chaoui Founders often fall short on their GTM slide and keep it super generic. That's exactly why our accelerator's focus is on GTM and sales, to address this gap. Nail a specific, credible go-to-market and you're ahead of most decks.

@reda_roqai_chaoui why you are one who should tackle this specific problem. many can think about it. ideas are not as unique as most founders think. but are you the person who has the added edge, the extra domain knowledge, the personal story behind it that sets you apart from 5 other founders that thought of the solution and now want to make money?

I started a platform to fix the dating crisis. why me? I suffered trought it for 20 years but mores I experienced the system failures personally. I churned as a customer because the existing solutions were not working, were not ethical (dating app subscriptions to string anyone along?)or did not address the problems (pay more for higher visibility "tinder gold" does not solve performance dating mechanics, it promises to rig the numbers game only).

@reda_roqai_chaoui if you bring a unique perspective thats more valuable then just waking up one day and deciding you are starting a company to switch jobs as you hate yours. drive, passion motivation cannot be bought, aquired or faked! either they are there or not.

@muhammed_anwar No generic advice. It reads your full deck and gives feedback personalized to what's actually on your slides. It separates deck quality (narrative, clarity, structure) from fit (sector, stage, thesis), so you'll know what's objectively weak vs. just mismatched. Built specifically for early-stage founders.

@dr_saasfounders_net Yes. We've seen founders upload multiple versions of the same deck, applying the feedback each round, and the improvement from first to final is dramatic. Investors in our network have tested it too.

@dr_saasfounders_net Run your deck for free and let us know if the analysis was helpful

@mshen316 Love this question. At pre-seed, yes — a strong narrative can absolutely carry a deck, because there often aren't meaningful numbers yet, so investors are underwriting the team, market size, the "why now," etc. What a great story can't do is contradict the numbers you do have; if traction is present but weak, the move isn't to hide it behind narrative, it's to frame it honestly and show the trajectory. The analyzer takes account for what stage you're at.

@tarqiya_forgah Congrats on getting ready to raise! Our honest view: founders who lean into AI for fundraising are going to do really well. It's not about letting AI write your deck — it's about using it to work smarter across the whole process. Think building targeted lists of VCs whose thesis and past investments actually match what you're building, so you're reaching out to the right people instead of spraying and praying. And using tools like ours to refine your deck so it communicates the important things clearly to investors. Founders who do both — smart targeting plus sharp, well-communicated decks — are the ones who'll win. You'd be a perfect person to run your deck through when you start drafting, so we'd love to help.

@sseanydNo investor funds a deck for being beautiful — clarity beats polish every time. But sloppy design costs you in a real way: if slides are cluttered or hard to follow, a reviewer skimming dozens of decks may just pass rather than work to understand yours. The bar isn't "gorgeous," it's "clean and legible so nothing gets in the way of the story." The analyzer focuses on that substance-first clarity rather than heavily grading aesthetics.

@thomas_digaetano Great question. It reviews a deck across the dimensions investors actually weigh — problem clarity, solution and product, market size, business model, traction, team, competition, and the ask — plus the connective tissue like narrative flow and a clear "why now." You get feedback slide-by-slide on where each is landing and where it's falling short. And because 1752 sits on the investor side, the criteria are grounded in how decks actually get read in a review, not a generic checklist.

@mayukh_bit  Great question — and yes. The analyzer weighs a deck against what investors actually look for at your stage and in your category, so a pre-seed regulated-industry story reads very differently from a growth-stage consumer SaaS deck. For a medical-device platform, that means it credits you for de-risking the regulatory and clinical path and for translating deep technical work into a clear commercial opportunity — rather than dinging you for not looking like a SaaS rocketship. The goal is feedback grounded in how a deck in your specific situation actually gets read on the investor side. Would love to hear what you think once you try it!

@andreas_jablonka Interesting thought on different stakeholders and something to consider-- might be tough getting that granular especially around angels because what they care about is so wildly varied-- but something to look at for sure

For the second piece no simply because I am not a believer in an intro deck-- deck should give me the desire to have a meeting and understand what you're doing/ thought process around execution-- everything else we will either request in a data room or chat with during a call