Justin McKelvey

Building technology that shapes the future | SaaS | eComm | B2B | B2C

Helping to level-up your team & get more work done... faster!

I’m a creator, speaker, engineer, & consultant. I have a passion to partner with leaders and organizations to help them boost their growth through clear messaging and simplified technologies in accomplishing their goals. I love coming alongside from strategy to development to create KPI measurements and implementing the correct analytics to track success. 

I have partnered with a few of my closest friends, who are incredibly talented in their fields to start SuperDupr. SuperDupr helps businesses clarify their messaging to boost revenue, by offering custom software, web design, social media advertising, video production, digital marketing, graphic design, branding, SaaS & eCommerce consulting. 

I most recently architected a multi-level marketing ecommerce platform for a direct to consumer (B2C) subscription service, and B2B component to scale. (It's a mouthful ... I know)

When I'm not helping businesses reach their max potential, you can find me hunting down a good coffee shop or planning my next trip to the mountains.

You can see more of my work on my website: https://JustinMcKelvey.com or https://SuperDupr.com

I would love to connect with you on Twitter or Instagram: @JustinMcKelvey

Chief Technology Officer

The first media buying platform built for sales.

I’m the Co-founder & COO of Swipelux — an API-first fiat payment infrastructure backed with stablecoins.

Our mission is to connect the fiat world with Web3 by offering frictionless crypto purchases, seamless on/off ramping, and decentralized identity tools for the next generation of digital users.

Over the past 4+ years, I’ve led operations, go-to-market strategy, compliance support, and investor relations — helping scale Swipelux to 180+ clients globally, raise multimillion-dollar funding, and secure a VASP license in Estonia.

I’m deeply passionate about the intersection of technology, finance, and human behavior, and I’m especially excited by the transformative potential of AI and startups to reshape how we live, work, and connect.

Whether I’m building infrastructure, mentoring early-stage founders, or exploring new ways to reduce friction in the digital economy — I care about creating tools that enable progress, inclusion, and better user experiences.

Filip Kollert

4 things that kill your pitch in the first 90 seconds (that have nothing to do with your deck)

I've sat through hundreds of founder pitches. On both sides of the table.

Most founders think they lost because of slides or polish. 

They didn't.

They lost in the first answer they gave.

Here's what actually kills the conversation before it starts:

1. You can't name your round size in one breath

"We're raising between 500K and 1.5M depending on investor interest and..."

Stop. Pick a number. Investors read indecision as lack of conviction. If you don't know what you need, they assume you don't know what you're building.

2. Your use of funds is a shopping list

"Engineering, marketing, ops, maybe some product..."

That's not a plan. That's a budget you made up yesterday. Investors fund milestones, not line items. Tell me what changes in 12 months.

3. Zero reference points

You can't say "We're like X meets Y for Z." You think it sounds reductive. It doesn't. It sounds clear. Investors need to map you to something they already understand. Give them the shortcut.

4. You take 4 sentences to explain the problem

If I don't get it in one, you haven't crystallized it yet. And if you haven't, your customers probably don't either.

Big takeaway: Your pitch doesn't fail because of what's in your deck. It fails because of what's missing in your head. Clarity beats charisma every time.

When you pitch, which of these 4 trips you up most?

#startups #fundraising #venturecapital #founders #pitching

Helping startups fundraise | Founder at Swipelux | Startup advisor | Fundraising, GTM & Scaling

Your pitch deck has 40 seconds to answer the only question that matters: "Why will this be worth $100M?"

Most founders spend weeks perfecting 15 slides.
Then wonder why investors zone out by slide 3.

The problem isn't your design. It's that you're answering questions no one asked yet.

Here's the structure I use with founders to build inevitability into slides 2-5:

1. Market size that feels real
Not "$50B TAM by 2030." That's noise.
Show me the wedge you're attacking first. The specific customer segment. The pain so sharp they'll pay now.

2. Differentiation that removes doubt
"We're Uber for X" tells me nothing.
What can you do today that competitors can't replicate in 6 months? Distribution advantage? Regulatory moat? Locked-in supply?

3. Traction proof that shows you cracked distribution
Revenue is great. But what I'm really looking for: proof you know how to acquire customers repeatably.
MRR growth. CAC payback. Retention curve. Pick one metric that shows the engine works.

When we I raising, I restructured our deck around this exact flow. Conversations shifted from "tell me more" to "when are you closing the round?"

Big takeaway: Investors don't fund ideas. They fund inevitability. Your deck should make the path to $100M feel obvious, not aspirational.

The one-sentence test: Can someone explain your business model and why it'll scale after seeing slides 2-5?

What's the one slide in your deck that always kills momentum?

Retention data matters more than revenue in seed fundraising.

Sounds backwards, right? You'd think investors care most about the money coming in.

But here's what I've learned sitting across from 100+ investors: they're not buying your current revenue. They're buying your future potential.

And retention tells that story better than any revenue chart.

Here's why investors obsess over retention at seed stage:

1️⃣ Revenue can be bought, retention can't
You can always spend more on ads to juice monthly revenue. But if users leave after week one, that's a product problem no amount of marketing will fix.

2️⃣ Retention reveals true product-market fit
High retention means users find real value. They come back because your product solves a genuine problem, not because of your latest growth hack.

3️⃣ Retention predicts scalability
Investors want to see the unit economics work. If you retain 60% of users after 6 months, scaling becomes a distribution problem, not a product problem.

4️⃣ It shows founder-market understanding
Good retention metrics prove you actually understand your users. Bad retention usually means you built what you wanted, not what the market needed.

Big takeaway: Revenue shows where you are today. Retention shows where you'll be in 18 months. Investors are betting on the latter.

What retention benchmarks are you tracking in your space?

#fundraising #startups #seedfunding #retention #productmarketfit

Your 10,000 users mean nothing if they came from one lucky tweet.

I've seen founders pitch impressive user numbers that crumble under basic questions.

"How did you acquire these users?"
"Well, this post went viral and..."

Red flag for investors. Here's why single-channel traction kills your credibility:

1. It signals you can't systematically reach customers
Your viral moment was lightning in a bottle. Investors want proof you can turn on growth, not pray for it. One-hit wonders don't build billion-dollar companies.

2. It shows zero distribution discipline
Consistency beats peaks every time.

3. It makes your growth story unrepeatable
"We got lucky on social media" isn't a business model. Investors fund systems, not accidents. They want to see multiple engines humming, not one broken down on the roadside.

4. It reveals you haven't validated true demand
If people only found you through viral content, do they actually need your product? Or did they just click because the post was entertaining? Organic search, referrals, and direct traffic tell the real story.

Big takeaway: Diversified acquisition channels prove you understand your customers well enough to reach them anywhere. Single-channel growth proves you got lucky once.

Build 2-3 repeatable channels before you pitch. Show the system, not the spike.

What's your most reliable acquisition channel right now?

#fundraising #startups #traction #distribution #founders

AI didn’t just change startups.
It changed fundraising expectations.

What got investor attention in 2024 is often just baseline in 2026.

Here’s what shifted:

1️⃣ MVP is no longer impressive

Building got easier.

Investors now expect proof that people actually use the product — not just that it exists.

2️⃣ Early traction is required earlier

Not huge revenue.

But signals like:
 • first paying customers
 • real usage
 • retention
 • fast iteration

The question changed from “Can you build?” to “Does the market care?”

3️⃣ Distribution became the real moat

AI lowered the barrier to building.

It did NOT lower the barrier to getting users.

Strong distribution beats perfect tech.

4️⃣ Founder presence matters more

Audience = leverage.

Investors increasingly look at founders who already create pull — not just products.

5️⃣ Speed is the new baseline

What used to take 18 months now happens in 6.

Investors compare you to AI-native teams moving fast — not to last year’s startups.

Big takeaway:

Fundraising used to reward potential.
Now it rewards early momentum.
AI didn’t make fundraising harder.
It made expectations clearer.

Curious — are founders feeling more pressure to show traction earlier than before?

Most investors won’t tell you why they passed.

They’ll say things like:

“Not the right fit.”
“Too early for us.”
“Let’s stay in touch.”

But after sitting on both sides of fundraising conversations, I’ve noticed the same real reasons come up again and again.

If investors ghost you, it’s usually one of these 4:

1️⃣ The market feels too small (or unclear)

Even strong products struggle if investors can’t quickly see a big outcome.

If they have to calculate the upside themselves — you’ve already lost momentum.

Your job isn’t to show a market.
It’s to make scale feel inevitable.

2️⃣ Differentiation isn’t sharp enough

“AI-powered.”
“Better UX.”
“Faster.”

These are not positioning.

Investors want to understand why you win — not just why you exist.
If they can’t explain your edge in one sentence after the call, you’re forgettable.

3️⃣ Traction doesn’t reduce risk

Users, pilots, signups — they sound good.

But investors are asking a different question:

Does this prove something that wasn’t obvious before?
Good traction removes doubt.
Weak traction just adds numbers.

4️⃣ Founder signal isn’t strong enough

This one founders rarely hear directly.

Investors ask themselves:
“Is this the person who will dominate this category for the next 10 years?”
It’s not about charisma.

It’s about clarity, conviction, and how you think.

Here’s the uncomfortable truth:
Most rejections aren’t about the idea.
They’re about how clearly investors can see the path to a big outcome.

When that picture is blurry — they pass quietly.

Curious — which one do you think founders underestimate the most?

3 equity decisions that feel fine today but wreck your cap table by Series A.

I've seen founders give away 25% of their company before they even have a term sheet. Not to investors. To "helpers."

Here's what actually breaks cap tables early:

1. Giving 5-10% equity to an advisor who "knows investors"

You meet someone with a decent network. They offer intros. You give them 2-5% because it feels small and you need the help.

Six months later: zero intros that led anywhere. They still own a chunk of your company. And Series A investors now see a cap table red flag.

Advice has to be paid in cash or tiny equity with brutal vesting cliffs. Intros are never worth points.

2. Pricing your SAFE at $3M to "close it fast"

Low valuation feels like momentum. You just want the cash in the bank.

But you just gave away 16% for $500K instead of 8%. Do that twice and you're diluted to 60% before your seed round even starts.

Speed matters. But underpricing yourself by 50% because you're desperate isn't speed, it's expensive.

3. Raising 3 small friends-and-family rounds with no plan

$50K here. $75K there. Each one a new SAFE or convertible note.

By the time you talk to real investors, you've got 15 small checks on the cap table and no clear conversion strategy. It looks messy. It is messy.

Big takeaway: Your cap table is a signal. Investors read it like a psychological profile. Sloppy early decisions don't just cost equity, they cost credibility.

What's the worst cap table mistake you've seen or made yourself?

Newsletter #4 where I share startup tips & news from the startup world.

Three narrative shifts that actually open wallets (plus the psychological trap killing your momentum) In this issue: • The 'recession-proof' positioni

Open article: 🔥 The Fundraising Reality Check: Why Your Q1 2026 Pitch Isn't Landing by Filip Kollert • 3 min read

🔥 The Fundraising Reality Check: Why Your Q1 2026 Pitch Isn't Landing

The 3-question investor readiness test you can use. 

Most founders think they're ready to fundraise when they have a deck and some early users.

They're usually wrong.

After sitting through hundreds of investor meetings, I've learned that readiness isn't about having all the answers.

It's about having the right foundations.

Here's my simple test:

1️⃣ Can you explain your business in 20 seconds without mentioning features?

If you start with "We built an app that..." you're not ready. Investors want to hear the problem size and your unique angle to solve it, not your product specs.

2️⃣ Do you have one repeatable channel that's working?

Not just users signing up. Not just organic growth. A specific channel where you can predictably acquire customers month after month. Distribution beats features every time.

3️⃣ Can you use your current funding to hit 3 clear milestones in 18 months?

Vague goals like "grow the team" or "expand features" signal you don't understand capital efficiency. Investors fund milestones, not wishes.

Big takeaway: Fundraising readiness isn't about perfection. It's about having enough structure and clarity that investors can see a path from today to your next meaningful milestone.

The founders who pass this test raise faster and at better terms.

Which question reveals the biggest gap in your fundraising readiness?

#fundraising #startups #venturecapital #founders #seedfunding

In 2026, your MVP proves nothing. Your distribution proves everything.

I've sat in 100+ investor meetings this year — both sides of the table.

The pitch hasn't changed. Founders still lead with product features.

But the questions have shifted completely.

VCs don't ask "what does it do?" anymore.

They ask: "Who's already paying? How did they find you? What's your channel cost? How are you building an audience?"

Because AI killed the moat around building product.

Your competitor can ship your MVP in 6 weeks. Maybe faster.

What they can't copy: your 10,000 email subscribers. Your inbound pipeline. Your founder-led content engine. Your early customer stories spreading on their own.

Here's what traction looks like now:

1. You have a repeatable channel — not just early customers
2. People are discovering you organically, not just through your network
3. You can articulate cost per lead and close rate — even if the numbers are rough
4. Investors see proof you can distribute, not just build

When I raised for Swipelux, product was the story.

Today, if you're building in stealth until launch, you're already 6 months behind someone building their audience in public.

Big takeaway: MVP gets you to the table. Distribution gets you the term sheet.

Stop perfecting features in private. Start proving you can reach people at scale.

What's harder for you right now — building product or finding your first 100 customers?

#startupfundraising #foundertips #vcfundraising #preseed #seedfunding

Most founders answer the retention question like they're trying to hide something.

They stumble. They qualify. They explain why the numbers "aren't representative yet."

I've watched this kill momentum in dozens of investor meetings.

Here's what actually happens when investors ask about retention:

1. The defensive founder says: "Well, it's still early and we're iterating on product-market fit, so our retention isn't where we want it yet, but we're seeing some promising signals..."

Investor translation: They don't know their numbers or they're bad.

2. The transparent founder says: "Month 1 retention is 45%. Month 3 is 28%. We know that's below benchmark for our category."

Then they explain what they're doing about it.

3. The smart founder goes further: "Here's our retention by cohort. February cohort retained 31% better than January. We changed onboarding flow and added this specific feature."

They show the trend, not just the snapshot.

4. The exceptional founder anticipates it: "Our retention story has two parts - where we are and where we're going. Current numbers and our three retention experiments running now."

They own the narrative before the investor even asks.

Big takeaway: Investors aren't looking for perfect numbers. They're looking for founders who understand their business and think like operators.

How do you typically handle the retention question in investor meetings?

#fundraising #startups #founders #retention #investors

The 40-second pitch deck test most founders fail.

Here's what happens: investor opens your deck, scans slides 2-5, and decides if you're worth 20 minutes.

Most founders pack these slides with fluff. Wrong move.

Here's the framework that works for me: 

1. Problem (Slide 2): One sentence. One painful truth your market feels daily. Not three paragraphs about industry trends.

2. Solution (Slide 3): What you built in 10 words or less. Then one line on why it's inevitable, not innovative.

3. Market Size (Slide 4): TAM number that makes them lean forward. Skip the math lesson. Just the number that matters.

4. Traction (Slide 5): Your best metric. Revenue, retention, or growth rate. One number that removes all doubt about momentum.

The test: can someone understand your entire opportunity in 40 seconds of scanning?

I've watched investors flip through decks during calls while founders are still talking. Brutal but real.

Your slides 2-5 aren't storytelling. They're proof you can think clearly under pressure.

Big takeaway: Investors scan first, listen second. If they can't grasp your inevitability in 40 seconds, they won't give you 40 minutes.

Which slide do you struggle to keep simple?

#fundraising #startups #pitchdeck #venturecapital #founders

taplio

The Battle

Justin McKelvey

Filip Kollert

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreFilip Kollert's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Justin McKelvey

Filip Kollert

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);}Filip Kollert's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreFilip Kollert's LinkedIn Performance