This is the Arrcus Pitch Deck used to raise $30m series-B from Lightspeed Partners. This round was announced on Jul 23, 2019.
About
Arrcus was founded to enrich human experiences by interconnecting people, machines, and data. Its mission is to provide software-powered network transformation for the interconnected world.
WTF does that mean?
Devesh Garg thinks the networking market is sorely in need of its own version of Windows or Android.
To date, the industry has been dominated by a handful of companies that offer their own proprietary products. Companies such as Cisco and Juniper Networks make not only their routers and switches but also the software that runs on them and, in many cases, the chips that power them.
But that all-in-one model is about ready for a shakeup, Garg, the CEO of the San Jose, California, startup Arrcus, told Business Insider in a recent interview.
Already, third-party electronics-manufacturing companies are making unbranded networking equipment. Broadcom and other chipmakers are making their own networking chips that power some of those boxes and even some of the networking equipment made by the big networking firms. The only thing that’s been missing is software that’s not controlled by the networking giants.
That’s where Garg thinks Arrcus will fit in. The company has developed a Linux-based operating system dubbed ArcOS that’s designed to run on a wide variety of networking equipment.
“There’s all this innovation at the chip level and all this innovation at the system level, but the missing link to take advantage of that had been software,” Garg said. “And that’s what we set out to solve and what we’ve done.”
The networking industry may be due for its own PC revolution
The networking industry is similar to where the computing industry was in the mid-1970s, he said. At that time, the business was dominated by a handful of companies that offered all-in-one proprietary products. When you bought an IBM mainframe computer, it came with an IBM chip and IBM software.
When the PC came along, that model got blown apart. If you bought a computer from Dell in the mid-1980s, it typically came with an Intel processor and a Microsoft operating system. The advantage was that instead of being stuck with the computer makers’ proprietary software and processors, shoppers got a more competitive market and access to the best chips and software the market could offer, Garg said.
A shakeup in the networking industry promises something similar, and Arrcus is going to help make it happen, Garg said.
“We enable you to select the right software with the right hardware at the right cost,” he said.
Other startups, including DriveNets, which raised $117 million earlier this year, are also banking on the networking industry being ripe for disruption.
Arrcus came out of stealth mode last year in July. Since then, it’s been able to attract a collection of Fortune 100 customers, Garg said, although he declined to name any, citing nondisclosure agreements. Customers, who purchase per-device licenses to use ArcOS from Arrcus, typically start out with pilot-evaluation projects. But in some cases, equipment running Arrcus’ software is already replacing devices made by the big networking companies, he said.
The company has a big opportunity in front of it, Garg said. The networking-equipment market is huge — some enterprise and telecommunications companies purchased nearly $44 billion worth of routers and switches last year, according to the market-research firm IDC. Even if ArcOS-powered devices capture only a small part of that, that still translates into hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars in sales.
What’s more, there’s an appetite for nonproprietary products, Garg said. Survey data indicates that a large majority of customers are looking for and plan to purchase nontraditional networking equipment, in which the device, chip, and software aren’t all bundled together, he said.
“The market is very, very large,” Garg said.
Garg isn’t the only one who is convinced of Arrcus’ opportunity. In July, the company raised $30 million in a series B funding round led by Lightspeed Venture Partners. Garg plans to use the new funds to double the size of the company’s 55-person team by the end of the year. Most of the new hires will be on Arrcus’ development and customer-engineering teams, he said.
“We’re aggressively hiring,” he said.
Source: Business Insider
Raises
Pitch deck review summary
It’s a very technical deck. Arrcus start out with a solid(ish) narrative and then things unravel.
It’s clear this is only 60% of the full deck as all the traction etc slides are missing, in what I term the execution section.
Structured summary review
Words
It flip flops between not enough words and too many.
Slide length
It’s not the full deck. For the technical nature of the business, the length to explain their business is fine.
Headers
It’s positive that they have a designated space for their headers.
Appearance
I don’t like the word capitalization. I prefer sentence case.
If they dump the footer image they could have put the source down there to keep the body clean.
The logo should be on the left and the page numbers on the right.
It’s a good example of a deck probably designed by a founder. And it’s all you need. Don’t hire a designer unless you are a retail brand or are a total muppet and your decks needs help (which many founders are!).
Narrative
They start out very solid but fail towards the end. When you read the headers, the slides should all flow seamlessly, to the extent that they can.
Structure
Slides are typically structured well. No huge complaints are other than occasionally cramming in too much information. Add in another slide if you need to. There’s still the same amount of content, just an additional slide.
Slides
Pretty sure this is only half the deck so there is a whole section missing.
Arrcus Pitch Deck
The cover is typical corporate. Like, what’s the agenda today?
Don’t put the date on the deck. It serves no purpose other than to remind investors how long you have been pitching for.
I’m not against an overview slide, but this isn’t what I like. Rather than all the advisors I would want details about traction, raise to date etc.
Your advisors and board members aren’t what investors are interested in.
WTF does the mission mean? Corporate nonsense speak.
I don’t know what they do yet. They should have explained this on the first slide.
I like the structure of the slide so far. They have strong headers (yes I am obsessed with headers). If they dump the footer image they could have put the source down there to keep the body clean.
The logo should be on the left and the page numbers on the right.
Font size gets very wonky. Everything of the same level should be the same size. A body title should all the same, as should body descriptions.
The images they whacked in add nothing. My guess is that the deck was done by the founder. And the design is fine. You simply don’t need really pretty decks.
I like the fact the headers are connecting. That’s pro work (my bar is depressingly low).
I don’t like the word capitalization. I prefer sentence case.
Having takeaways on the bottom is something management consultants do. But they’re consistent. I use a second header and that’s where this would go. It keeps the body much cleaner and consistent, it’s also a lot easier to format.
Ok, the content is very technical. These guys are only targeting investors who are technically sophisticated. Generalist investors wouldn’t understand any of this. Or I’m just a total moron. Very possible.
I don’t really feel there is a takeaway here. What’s next?
The slide is very busy. There’s no negative space. I would cut the bullets down to three each. They have a case of “we need to say everything in case investors notice we missed something”. The deck is to get a meeting. You can explain the point 4 and 5 in person. Relax. This is a big learning.
Notice in new paradigms. They start with “video dominates but….”. If you do this you should wonder if you should be making a new slide instead.
Tbh, if this is all-important I would for sure have made two slides. As an investor you see a slide like this and think fark, do I really have to read all this?
The title is weak now. I frequently see this. Founders start strong with a narrative and then get bored, or due to lack of experience devolve to just writing a check list title.
What are the elements of transformation? Why do they matter. Why are they needed? I want the why more than the what. All humans want meaning.
Slide is weak. Lower TCO (total cost of ownership) compared to whom?
This needs to be explained better. The slide might suddenly make sense with just one more sentence in the sub-header.
Soooo lazy.
Scale isn’t just about “servers”. Scale is about your business.
And they end here. So all the good stuff is missing.
Deck Collection
See the rest of the collection here:
Comments (0)
There are no comments yet :(