Ipsos UK

Development & Data. Focus: Process Automation.

Research and Data Solutions

David McAllen

Front-end tech stack (React/Node/CSS/HTML).

Web Developer

Playter

Account Executive

Business Development Consultant

Worldwide Currencies

360 FX consultant

Currently Code Python/VBA. Previously FX/FinTech/WebDev.



    






___( o)>
\ <_. )
 `---' 


 
( o>
///\ 
\V_/


.... /\       
.. / . .\    
...|.......|     
...|.......|     
../.==.\    
|/*......*\|     
^^^^^
^^^^^
...^^^
.....^^

   

made ya look

Alexander Simpson

Why Your Funding Round Is Stalling (And How to Unblock It).

Fundraising is not a numbers game. It is a signal game.

If you have pitched 20 investors and haven't received a term sheet, the market isn't "tough" - your fundraising asset is defective.

Most founders try to fix this by "polishing the pitch deck" or asking for more intros. This is a mistake. You cannot design your way out of a structural problem.

I do not "coach" fundraising. I fix the signal.

As a serial founder ($75M+ raised), I act as the "Red Team" proxy for the investors you are trying to close. I look at your business the way a VC does: looking for the specific red flags that are causing them to pass.

The Seed Stage Trap:

At Pre-Seed and Seed, you don't have years of data. You have a narrative and a deal structure. If those are slightly off, investors will ghost you without telling you why.

The Solution: The 90-Minute Diagnostic
I run a forensic audit of your entire fundraising approach. We identify the "Silent Killers" hiding in your pitch—the specific friction points that stop an investor from writing the check.

You leave with one of two things:

1. A clean bill of health to close the round.
2. A diagnostic report on exactly why you are getting "No," and the surgical fix required to get to "Yes."

Do not burn your best leads on practice swings.

FundingDX.com

Mash B.

I am opening a few spots on Hubble for Investor Pressure Tests.

45 minutes. You pitch me cold. I narrate what the investor across the table is actually thinking at every stage of your pitch. Where they lean in, where they check out, and where they start writing the rejection email in their head while still nodding politely.

This is not pitch coaching. I am not going to tell you to make more eye contact.

This is structural. I will tell you for example that when you said X, the investor categorized your company as Y, and that is why they will never write a cheque no matter how polished your deck looks.

12 ventures. 7 exits. $75M raised. I have sat on both sides of that table.

Shoutout to Kevin Jurovich and Timo Gehrke for building Hubble around the idea that the right conversation at the right time can change the trajectory of a company. That is exactly what I have seen happen hundreds of times.

First slots are open now.

👉 https://lnkd.in/e_9Xhezn

Mash Bonigala

Investor Pressure Tests | $75M Raised | 12 Ventures, 7 Exits | Founder of FundingDX

No alternative text description for this image

An investor with a fast no is giving you a gift. The investor who passes in 48 hours just saved you 6 weeks of follow up emails, a second meeting that was never going anywhere, and the mental energy of treating a dead conversation like a live pipeline.

The expensive rejection is the one that takes 2 months. The partner who keeps saying they are interested, asks for one more data point, loops in a colleague, requests a customer reference call, and then eventually goes quiet. That whole time you were counting them as a warm lead and adjusting your strategy around a check that was never coming.

I have seen founders burn an whole quarter chasing 3 or 4 of these slow nos while ignoring 20 investors who might have actually moved.

Investor Pressure Tests | $75M Raised | Serial Founder: 12 Ventures | Founder of FundingDX

Founders who gets told to come back with more traction believes the same thing. If I just hit $1M ARR, if I just land 3 more enterprise logos, if I just double MRR, the round will come together. So they put their head down for 6 months, grind like hell, hit the numbers, go back out to market, and hear the exact same hesitation from investors wearing a slightly different mask.

I have watched this cycle repeat more times than I can count. The founder comes back with better metrics and the same positioning, and the investors who passed before can feel that something still does not click even though the numbers improved. They can not always name it. They just know the deal does not feel like a fund-returner, and no amount of traction fixes that feeling.

Traction solves a credibility problem. It proves the product works, customers want it, and revenue is real. What it does not solve is a clarity problem. If an investor could not figure out what they were actually investing in 6 months ago, better numbers inside the same frame just give them a more expensive version of the same confusion.

I have seen founders with $300K ARR close rounds in weeks because the investment thesis underneath was so tight that investors could see exactly where the money goes and why it compounds. I have seen founders with $3M ARR struggle for months because the thesis had gaps that no amount of revenue could paper over.

If you are about to go back to market with better numbers and the same positioning you had 6 months ago, the numbers are not what needed to change.

taplio

The Battle

Alexander Simpson

Mash B.

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreMash B.'s LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Alexander Simpson

Mash B.

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Mash B.'s LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreMash B.'s LinkedIn Performance