This is the Bind pitch deck this health tech startup used to raise what might be a $10m series-A. It’s a little hard to tell. In total, they say they did $70m in their series A.
About
Bind is built for the way we live now. Unlike traditional health insurance that charges for services, you may never need or want, Bind allows you to pay for what you need not what you don’t-and adjust your coverage when those needs change.
Health insurance startup Bind knows its health plans aren’t like others.
Bind was founded in 2016 by Tony Miller, who previously started two companies that he sold to UnitedHealth Group. Bind has raised $70 million from investors including UnitedHealth, Lemhi Ventures (where Miller is a managing partner), and Ascension Ventures, the venture arm of the giant Ascension hospital system.
Bind provides health plans for employees who get their insurance through their work and covers more than 10,000 people.
The health plans Bind offers look a bit different from the insurance that you probably get at work. They’re based on the idea of making it easier to figure out how much your healthcare will cost ahead of time.
To do that, the plans ditch deductibles and co-insurance in favour of fixed amounts you know you’ll have to pay before going in for treatment.
Deductibles can require health plan members to pay thousands of dollars for medical care and prescriptions before their health insurance kicks in, while co-insurance requires members to pay a percentage of the total cost of care.
Bind displays information about treatment options and their costs in its app and online and is hoping that individuals will tend to pick cheaper healthcare options that will provide care that’s just as good.
“The insurance doesn’t look complicated for consumers at all,” Miller, Bind’s CEO, told Business Insider.
Even so, the new approach takes some time to get used to.
To help, Bind set up this slide deck to convince employers to sign onto Bind.
Raises
| Announced Date | Transaction Name | Number of Investors | Money Raised | Lead Investors |
| Oct 21, 2020 | Series B – Bind On-Demand Health Insurance | 3 | $105M | — |
| Oct 1, 2019 | Debt Financing – Bind On-Demand Health Insurance | — | $60M | — |
| Jun 28, 2018 | Series A – Bind On-Demand Health Insurance | 3 | $10M | — |
| Feb 20, 2018 | Series A – Bind On-Demand Health Insurance | 1 | $60M | Lemhi Ventures |
| Jul 27, 2017 | Venture Round – Bind On-Demand Health Insurance | 1 | $2.5M | Lemhi Ventures |
Pitch Deck Review Summary
Structured Summary Review
Words
Normally more visual decks are better, but what the founders are trying to communicate isn’t obvious without a voice-over. There need to be more words to explain the point.
Slide length
This isn’t the full deck. Ignoring that fact it is on the long end.
Headers
The headers are inadequate. You have to read the slides to get the point.
Appearance
It’s a pretty enough deck, though they go a little weird on two. Best to be more boring and consistent. You get $ for being smart, not pretty in this world.
Narrative
There is sort of a narrative. You have to read all the content to get it though. Seems like the order for the slides they share are solid.
Structure
The slides are structured well for the way they think to do it, they’re not for how I like things.
Slides
They say some slides have been omitted in the deck. This is very normal.
Bind Pitch Deck
The cover slide is great. The privacy disclaimer should be removed. No one cares.
Start out explaining what you do first so investors get it.
Ok, the slide is very broad, they better get to the point or I will get lost soon. The images are very lazy.
I want there always to be a header. Then you can have two boxes, but I never want random-ass background images.
What’s going on with the header? It’s a different colour and not consistent.
You can’t dump an image like this in and not explain it. It takes too long to understand so I don’t even read it.
According to the founder, presently, health plans are set up to pay for doctors, hospitals, and drugs.
Back to a consistent format.
The title is a “what”, there’s no why or how. I am forced to read the slide to understand the point of the slide.
Miller explains instead, that Bind’s idea is to shift that thinking to discussing particular conditions and their treatments.
For more costly conditions to treat, like cancer, the plan would cover more of the healthcare cost. A more common condition, in this case, toe fungus, might have less coverage on the plan.
“The bad thing about plans today is they treat all services and all providers as the same,” Miller said. “We’re going to make subsidizations smart.”
What’s going on with the criss-cross background? The text is a little too small. The image is hard to understand and there is far too much going on. The header is weak.
Miller explains his slide. Take knee pain. Physical therapy might be covered under the core part of the plan. But say you want to get a knee arthroscopy, a surgical procedure. You’d need to add that coverage to your core plan, paying an additional amount. The hope with this strategy is to help members try out less-invasive or lower-cost treatment plans first, ideally saving employers money, too. “What we do is we’re flexing how much coverage costs depending on what you used,” Miller said.
Super lame slide. Never have an interstitial.
Send the link to a demo in the email. Read: How to do a demo in a venture capital pitch
Ok, there are 5 slides now on the product. That’s a lot. I normally have one, just so investors get a broad conception. If you are getting into features, you have an issue.
Miller says “Say a Bind member is having some ear pain and wants to see a doctor about a possible ear infection. The member can search in Bind’s app to see if that’s covered under the core plan and how much a visit might cost depending on where they go. For instance, a virtual visit might be free while a visit to an urgent care centre might cost the member $125.”
Exactly how much value do you think investors get from 5 words? They then have to study three photos. Annoying.
Miller says “For members who need to get an MRI, the app can help them figure out what centre might be the best to go to.”
Miller says “The same goes for prescriptions. Should a member have a question about whether a branded prescription drug, like the heart drug Plavix, is covered, the member would see that he or she could be taking the generic version instead. A map lays out where he or she can pick up the drug at the lowest cost.”
The slides keep going… Here’s where the add-on care comes in.
Miller adds “Say a member is interested in getting the knee surgery and wants to know what it would cost at a local medical center. The app can inform them that it’s not a part of the core plan. Ahead of the surgery, however, the member can buy add-in coverage, giving a better sense of what their medical costs will be.”
And going…
“At that stage, the member is shown what is included in the core plan, such as physical therapy. The app can also inform the member if there’s a cheaper add-in option.”
And going… but at least there is not a chart. It’s formatted correctly with a title and a source.
“As part of a typical health plan, an insurer isn’t sure whether you’re going to get a procedure at a facility that will hand them a $24,000 bill or a $6,000 bill. To make sure the plan has enough money to cover the more expensive place, it sets higher premiums.
The slide should have a proper title for a narrative, this isn’t a McKinsey paper (and they do headers properly). The header should be in the subheader.
Miller adds “Here’s another look at the costs that factor into a knee surgery at different locations. There’s a lot of variability on what each place charges.”
No interstitial slides! If your deck flows correctly it just flows correctly and it is obvious.
They attempt to explain how Bind’s premiums compare to other health plans an employer offers its workers.
Don’t deviate. Keep the proper header for the narrative, and use the subheader to explain the point. Why did they pick bind 65% of the time?
Miller adds “A PPO, or preferred provider organization, plan came with $143 in premiums, while the Bind plan cost $82 a month. The price point, Miller said, is in line with a plan that would normally come with a high deductible. Bind plans don’t have high deductibles.
In this instance, the employees picked the Bind plan 65% of the time over other insurance options.”
The slide is ok in theory. I have to read it all to understand it. It’s not a tall order, it’s still just annoying. A subheader serves that.
The whole people thing is a bit of a form over function.
Miller says “Because Bind requires members to interact more than standard health insurance does, it’s important that they log in and use the app or website.
Across Bind’s whole business, 54% of members activated their Bind accounts within the first three months, a number Miller said is growing as members start to need healthcare throughout the year. With one particular employer, Bind noticed that 83% had used the app or Bind’s website for their care.”
Rx is clearly an American term. The slide is lazy.
Apparently, Bind also saw that its members were more likely to use a lower-cost prescription compared to other health plans.
The slide is a bit hard to understand.
What they meant to say was “Bind members more frequently used their pharmacy benefit, the average per member, per month spending on the pharmacy benefit was roughly half of what traditional plans pay out in pharmacy benefit.” Did that come across? I don’t think so.
Eh, do you think this is valuable? Do you really believe it?
You have to spend a minute understanding this slide. Hard pass. Don’t make investors think.
Ok, you keep them under budget, HOW? WHY?
Same with this slide, only it’s less intense.
Bind says that 96% pay less than $2,000 each year in out-of-pocket costs, and 79% of the members from this early client paid less than $500 a year. Why couldn’t they just write that?
Again. Miller explains “The members tended to pick more cost-effective treatments than they might have on regular plans as well.” Why couldn’t that literally have been the title? Well worded better, but you get the point.
Never ever do this thanks slide. Summarise why investors should invest.
Deck Collection
See the rest of the collection here:
Comments (0)
There are no comments yet :(