I review decks from the investor side. None of it is work I can point to publicly

It is a good question, and I think it's a question of market saturation. Right now, there are big firms that review decks for high prices, expensive individual consultants, and heavily AI-enabled tools that lack experience evaluating investments against each other. These tools often try to optimise the deck across a set of indices that they are trained on as LLMs and related technologies; their ability to weigh USPs against each other is too formulaic and over-prioritises novelty or an ability to fix within existing structures. Hybrid-approach ventures, which can also become very successful, get left behind.

Positioning this far upstream — before founders receive the support of incubators, investors, and mentors — is exactly the point. I want to make it easier for people to convert ideas to businesses, and I think the gap in the market right now is that AI tools are good at packaging ideas but lack the experience to properly evaluate decks according to the founder's personality, likely investor questions, and the product itself. In a best case AI scenario, only one of these is over indexed, but oftentimes there are more obvious signs that occur in the verbiage and argumentation.