Strong Startups Still Can’t Explain What They Do

At one point in my career, I was invited to run a workshop for finalists of a large international accelerator. Dozens of startups, selected from hundreds of applicants, were preparing for their demo day in front of investors. My role was clear: help them shape their presentations for the big stage.

I expected to fine-tune things. Polish structure. Adjust flow. Maybe clean up some visual noise. These were companies with traction, real users, experienced founders. They had already passed a serious filter and proven their ideas had potential.

The reality was different.

Once I started reviewing their decks, it became obvious that the issue wasn’t design. It wasn’t even taste. The problem was deeper. It was structural thinking. Slides were overloaded. The narrative kept falling apart. Important ideas were buried under details. Teams tried to say everything at once, afraid to remove anything, as if adding more would somehow make the story stronger.

One common example was the metrics slide. Five charts. Multiple lines on each. Tiny labels. Numbers you couldn’t read from a distance. Technically, all the data was there. But if a chart needs three minutes of explanation, it doesn’t work. An investor isn’t going to decode your analytics. They either get the signal in seconds, or they don’t.

Another pattern was the fear of cutting. After feedback, someone would say, “But this is important. We can’t remove it.” That’s usually the key moment. If removing one slide breaks your entire pitch, your structure was never solid to begin with. Strong logic survives reduction. Weak logic depends on volume.

These were strong products. But weak communication.

A lot of founders treat the presentation as a decorative final layer. Something you “design” before stepping on stage. But demo day isn’t a design competition. Investors are not judging typography. They’re trying to answer much simpler questions: Do you really understand the problem? Do you clearly understand your solution? Do you know why you, specifically, can execute it?
If the answer to any of those questions is scattered across fifteen slides, then the answer doesn’t really exist.

The most interesting part happened during the workshop itself. I went through what I consider fundamentals: narrative structure, order of ideas, prioritization, visual clarity. For me, these principles have been standard for years. But judging by the reaction in the room, they weren’t standard for everyone. People were genuinely engaged. They asked thoughtful questions. Some later asked for help reworking their decks entirely.

That stuck with me.

When you spend years working on products, structure, and communication, certain things start to feel obvious. You assume that any strong founder can clearly articulate their value. You assume narrative logic is a basic skill.

It’s not.

Even experienced teams can build solid products for years and still struggle to present a clear, persuasive story. Not because they lack intelligence. But because no one taught them to see a presentation as a tool for thinking.

An overloaded slide usually reflects an overloaded mind. A chaotic structure isn’t a visual problem. It’s a cognitive one.

That was the real takeaway for me. A presentation isn’t about slides. It’s the moment you demonstrate how much control you have over your own idea. If you can’t explain it simply and sequentially, that sends a signal. And investors are very good at reading those signals.

That experience made me reflect on something else as well: how easily experts start assuming their skills are universal. But that’s a separate conversation.