Great piece of advice, so obvious in retrospect and at odds with many other pitch guidelines out there, that suggest you start with the management team / "company snapshot".
You start with your strongest suite. So, if you're an extremely early stage startup with a stellar team, you start with that. If, you're technology/traction/investment thesis is stronger, relative to your team, you start with that.
The first 60 seconds is key for any presentation (pitching investors or not). But even on a seed round, I wouldn't start with a team slide, unless it sends a powerful message of why this is a team of rockstars (but chances are, if this is the case, you wouldn't even need to talk about team upfront. Your reputation precedes you).
Open with the investment thesis -- or more specifically, lead with WHY this is a great investment compared to the other 100+ deals they're looking at.
- Friendster is the largest social network.
- Facebook is not present.
Something to keep in mind when considering how much emphasis to place on existing competition in a market.
Possible reason: Often, decks are shared before a meeting is taken, so the really good ones are designed to be read (not just presented).
In today's world (particularly in consumer Internet), investors often judge the "quality" of a team based on the aesthetics of the pitch-deck -- and website. All things being equal, the deck with the better design sense wins.
But it's worth noting this deck is from 2004, and thus should be judged in the context of contemporary designs.
This one line is simply bang on at so many levels:
...we knew that our pitch would need to steer into investors’ biggest concern: the lack of revenue.
And seemingly relevant in the current climate of 2013 again.
In 2013, it’s whether you can break through the noise. Today, there are probably a thousand consumer internet startups founded every quarter — how do you become one of the 1 to 3 that matter in a 7-year timeframe?