Bringg Series-E

This is the Bringg pitch deck to raise a $100m series-e round in 2021.

About

Bringg helps retailers and logistics providers scale up and optimize their fulfilment and delivery services for exceptional last-mile experiences and greater operational efficiency.

The data-led cloud platform digitizes and connects supply chain systems, delivery fleets, and customers. Automation and business logic are applied to delivery and fulfilment so businesses can improve delivery capacity, fulfilment services, and operational efficiency.

Bringg customers such as Walmart, Albertsons, SEKO, Day & Ross, Leroy Merlin, Autozone, Boulanger, COOP, KFC and Coca-Cola, have experienced double-digit growth in sales from rapidly introducing new fulfilment channels while reducing operational costs.

Bringg was founded by Lior Sion and Raanan Cohen in 2013 and has offices in Chicago, Tel Aviv, and London.

Funding rounds

Announced Date	Transaction Name	Number of Investors	Money Raised	Lead Investors
Jun 16, 2021	Series E – Bringg	8	$100M	Insight Partners
Apr 7, 2020	Series D – Bringg	6	$30M	Viola Growth
Jan 15, 2019	Series C – Bringg	8	$25M	Next47, O.G. Tech
Jan 16, 2018	Series B – Bringg	5	$12M	—
Mar 14, 2017	Series B – Bringg	5	$10M	Aleph, O.G. Tech
Sep 1, 2016	Series B – Bringg	4	$5M	Cambridge Capital
Dec 1, 2013	Seed Round – Bringg	—	$2.5M	—
Jan 1, 2013	Pre Seed Round – Bringg	1	—	—

Pitch deck review summary

Structured summary review

Words

There are generally too few words to explain the slides properly. I feel like a lot of the slides need to be talked to and explained in person which isn’t how you should do a deck.

Slide length

The deck is 24 slides which is fine. My guess is that this isn’t the full deck so the real one was longer. If you are raising $100m, I’d almost say you could have a 40 slide deck if needed.

Headers

There isn’t a slide in the deck that I think is done properly (according to Alexander).

Appearance

This is an example of the danger of letting a designer run wild. There are a lot of slides in which I think the content is a bit crap but it looks pretty. Pretty doesn’t mean good.

Narrative

The deck come from a site and I had to go back to make sure my assistant didn’t mess up the order when she did it for me. I’m terribly confused about the slide order as it is truly bizarre. Since there are no page numbers I can’t manually check the order to be sure.

The sort of attempt to create a narrative on a few slides, but then everything breaks down like a car in Soviet times.

Structure

There are no page numbers. Always have them!

The deck is clearly designed, but I don’t like how it is done. When I do decks I purposefully make then ‘more ugly’ by making them easy to read.

Slides

There are a lot of commercial slides missing such as the ask, revenue, GTM etc. They raised a lot of mullah (and don’t look dumb) so I absolutely assume that this isn’t their actual deck used to raise and rather it’s a marketing version shared for PR.

Understand that it took me about 7 years to get to 120 decks on my site and about a year to get to 500. Most decks shared these days are for PR (in my estimation) so do not assume you’re looking at real decks in totality.

Slide by slide review

The largest text could be a little smaller to create some negative space. I generally don’t like superlatives such as “#1” as gives a sales vibe.

Don’t bother with the legal bla on the bottom of the slide as no one cares.

You only start with the team slide in a deck if you are straight-up ballers. There is just the name and title on the slide so I have absolutely zero clue who anyone is…

The point of the team slide is to create credibility. If you are raising $100m, then ok, the investors might know of you already, but don’t do this unless you are a bit famous. I want to know what you achieved and why you’re kick ass.

They spend zero time introducing who they are and what they do. They just say COVID happened and it worked out well for us.

Flark knows what completed tasks and active drivers mean? You need to explain these things if investors don’t explicitly understand already.

The fancy design crap on the right is not necessary.

I presume that they removed the axis and labels so you know their ARR (to share their deck).

3 year CAGR is from when? 20017 to 2020? You need to spell out or put it in the footer as a note.

There’s never a reason to have interstitial slides in a deck. The deck shouldn’t be long enough to need them.

All the design crap is not needed and is getting in the way of reading (especially the magic floating boxes? “Leviosa!”).

I’m writing as I am reading, but I’m getting the feeling that this whole section should be how they start and not with their traction.

I want the context of the business before I want to look at its traction.

For the 3 points, I would always add a  short and bolded header so I can parse the points without reading each of the full sentences.

The header is a bit nebulous and a bit cheesy. I prefer to be more factual and include data points to prove what I want to say.

So the ‘so what’ is missing. Brands face competition because of? I have to read the slide to infer that Amazon is cheaper than Walmart. What’s the point of Colgate?

Don’t make investors have to think or figure anything out.

Design-wise, notice that the world went from the top right in the last slide to the top right on this one. Why is this needed? What value does it add?

The headers allude to the point but don’t spell it out. The slide is something about alternative fulfilment. Can you tell me what the alternative is? No. You have to read the charts to figure out what the point is. Investors don’t want to do that and they shouldn’t have to if you structure your content properly.

The slide is almost great, but it needs to be more clear to aid more rapid comprehension.

The sources are in black bold making them prominent. They should be the least important on a slide. Typically format in grey, size 8, and in grey.

You have to read the whole slide to understand what the point is. There are ways to help investors get points faster.

What are the logos? Clients?

I find the order of the slides weird. We bounce between sections.

I never include mission slides in decks because they add no value. Does this slide make you want to invest and why? If this was written from the point of view of explaining what it is they do at the start of the deck, it could be useful.

I find the order of the slides really bizarre tbh.

I have no idea what the expectations are in these images – it might be to do with delivery?

There is way too much going on with this slide. It’s like a word cloud. A very weird slide.

They wrote that orange box basically in their mission slide. Why have they snuck it in here? Never repeat yourself in your deck. Say things once.

I feel they sort of covered the content on this slide on other slides?

The slide (ignoring the footer and the rubbish header) is a stock slide I would make if I didn’t have something better to show.

The slide looks pretty but is it actually useful?

Again, it’s a pretty slide, but is it easy to understand? Tell me the point in 10 seconds.

Again, this is form over function. A matrix would present this better.

I just feel they made a load of slides and they are arbitrarily dumping them into a deck at this point.

Why is there an image above the header now? Be consistent.

There are 5 slides about their platform now and I’m not sure which ones add value and why there needs to be more than one?

I guess this is about onboarding clients? Is 60 days to onboard fast or not? How does that compare to the competition?

It feels like they are pulling slides from a sales deck and just reusing them in their investor deck.

As case studies go, this isn’t a bad structure. I like numbers.

You’ll note that the clients are on a no-names basis in the 4 slides. This is smart. You can always tell investors who they are in person.

 

A case study is the last slide, so clearly there are slides missing from the deck. Normally ‘the ask’ aka how much they are raising is the last slide.

Deck Collection

See the rest of the collection here:

BACK TO THE DECK COLLECTION