Capital formation
Find the claims doing the work, the proof they need, and the countercase your audience may see. Leave with a revised narrative and a concrete next move.
The example is hand-authored and wholly synthetic. It demonstrates the intended review format, not model performance or a fundraising outcome.
Synthetic example · saved editorial sample
The ask
A proposed $2 million seed equity raise to convert unpaid pilots into paying annual contracts.
What capital changes
The proposed allocation totals $2 million: $1.2 million + $600,000 + $200,000. That arithmetic reconciles with the ask. The supplied budget does not establish runway, expected contract conversion or which commercial milestone the $600,000 sales allocation buys.
Fit for the audience
The supplied audience description calls for customer-adoption evidence and a funded seed milestone. The unpaid pilots are relevant early evidence, while paid conversion remains unproven. This description is supplied context, not a verified investor mandate.
The narrative says pilots validate demand; the log describes unpaid use and no paid annual contracts.
An investor cannot tell whether customers will commit budget. Interest and usage are evidence of something narrower than purchasing.
Submitted narrative
Ten customer pilots validate demand
Invented pilot log
No organization has signed a paid annual contract.
The allocation reconciles to the ask, but the budget provides no burn, runway or customer-conversion assumptions.
A list of spending categories does not show what will be learned or achieved before the capital runs out.
Invented budget note
No monthly burn, runway, contract-value assumptions or target number of paying customers is included in this note.
A source can support what was said or provided. That does not independently verify the underlying claim.
Source-backed · not independently verified
The narrative reports ten pilots.
The supplied synthetic log corroborates the count in the narrative; neither source is external verification.
Invented pilot log
Ten organizations are using unpaid pilots.
Contradictory · unresolved
The company has demonstrated paid customer demand.
If demand is meant to imply paying customers, that implication conflicts with the supplied log. Unpaid use does not establish willingness to pay.
Submitted narrative
Ten customer pilots validate demand
Invented pilot log
No organization has signed a paid annual contract.
Unverified · evidence needed
The proposed raise is sufficient to reach the paid-conversion milestone.
The evidence does not provide burn, runway, target conversion or contract-value assumptions needed to assess sufficiency.
The pilots may be adequate early-stage evidence for an investor willing to finance commercial discovery. Lack of current revenue alone does not defeat a seed case. The stronger objection is that the proposed capital-to-learning bridge remains unspecified.
What would change this read
A credible conversion experiment, burn-and-runway model, and customer evidence that explains the path from unpaid use to purchasing would support a more specific investment argument.
We are seeking $2 million in seed equity to test conversion from unpaid software pilots into paying annual contracts. Ten organizations are using pilots; no paid annual contracts have been signed. Two participants have expressed interest in pricing discussions, which remain uncommitted. Our proposed allocation is $1.2 million for engineering, $600,000 for sales and $200,000 for operations. Before presenting this as a scale round, we need to specify the conversion milestone, the commercial test and the burn-and-runway assumptions connecting that test to the raise.
State the proposed $2 million seed raise and the paid-conversion decision it funds.
Show unpaid adoption and distinguish pricing interest from paid commitments.
Present the supplied allocation, then identify the missing burn, runway and conversion assumptions.
Set out the proposed evidence-gathering test and the conditions for deciding whether to scale.
The next step is to supply missing commercial assumptions. A human engagement is optional; the submitted material does not establish a need for one.
This example does not submit a request. A conversation about your own decision begins only if you choose to write.