Service
Investor business plans for Saudi founders
An investor plan is not a longer bank plan. It is an argument about why this opportunity, why this team, and why now — supported by numbers that hold up in diligence.
- Written for the way investors actually read
- Problem, market, model, traction, ask, use of funds
- Unit economics and runway made explicit
- No promises about raising money
What investors read first
Most investors do not read a plan front to back. They read the first page, then the numbers, then the team section, then decide whether to keep going. That reading order should shape the document.
| Order | What they look at | What they are testing |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | One-paragraph summary and the ask | Is this legible in thirty seconds? |
| 2 | Market and wedge | Is the opportunity big enough, and is the entry point credible? |
| 3 | Traction or evidence | Has anything been proven outside a spreadsheet? |
| 4 | Unit economics | Does each sale make money, and does it improve with scale? |
| 5 | Team | Why these people, and what is missing? |
| 6 | Use of funds and milestones | What does this cheque buy, and what happens next? |
A plan that buries the ask on page 24 is a plan written for the wrong reader.
The argument, in order
Problem and customer. Who has the problem, how do they solve it today, and why is that inadequate. Specific beats broad. "SMEs in Saudi Arabia" is a population, not a customer.
Market logic. How the addressable market is built from the bottom up — customers, frequency, price — rather than asserted with a top-down percentage. Where published market data is used, it is cited and dated; where it does not exist, the plan says so.
Product and defensibility. What is being built, what is hard about it, and what compounds over time. Distribution advantages count; feature lists do not.
Business model. Price, cost to serve, gross margin, payback. If the model depends on a future price change or a cost reduction that has not happened, that is an assumption, and it is labelled.
Traction. Revenue, pilots, letters of intent, waitlists — whatever exists, described precisely. Early-stage plans are more credible when they separate what is proven from what is expected.
Team and gaps. Who does what, and which roles are being hired with the raise. Invented advisory boards are worse than an honest gap.
The ask. Amount, instruments, allocation, and the milestones the money buys.
What makes a plan fail diligence
- A market size with no derivation.
- Revenue that grows faster than the operational capacity described.
- Margins that improve every year without a stated reason.
- A use-of-funds table that does not match the cash flow.
- Team claims that cannot be checked.
- A plan that describes a product but not a customer.
I write with those failure modes in mind, which sometimes means telling a founder that the story is not ready. That conversation is part of the work.
What you need to bring
- The current deck or a written description of the business.
- Any traction evidence — contracts, pilots, revenue, pipeline.
- The intended raise, instrument and valuation logic if you have one.
- Cost and pricing assumptions, or the raw inputs to build them.
- The investor profile you are targeting: family office, VC, angel, corporate.
Deliverables
- Investor plan in Word and PDF.
- Financial model in Excel with assumptions, P&L, cash flow, scenarios and a use-of-funds schedule.
- A one-page summary version suitable for sending before a meeting.
- Two revision rounds within the agreed scope.
Pitch deck support can be added so the deck and the plan carry identical numbers. Mismatched figures between deck and plan are one of the fastest ways to lose credibility in a first meeting.
An honest limit
I do not know which investors will say yes, and I do not claim access to investors or introductions. What I can do is make sure the document is specific, internally consistent and written for the way the reader actually evaluates it.
If you want a plan that promises a raise, there are cheaper people who will write one. It will not help you.
The one-page narrative test
Before drafting, I ask founders to write the argument in five sentences:
- The customer — who has the problem, and what do they do today?
- The change — what makes the current solution inadequate now?
- The offer — what the company does differently, in one sentence.
- The proof — what evidence exists today.
- The ask — how much, for what, and what it achieves.
If the five sentences do not hang together, the plan will not either. Most drafting problems are actually thinking problems that surface at this stage.
What goes in the appendix
Investors who are interested will ask for detail. Putting it in an appendix keeps the main document readable:
- detailed financial assumptions;
- cohort or customer data;
- product screenshots or architecture notes;
- regulatory correspondence;
- reference letters or letters of intent;
- a full competitor comparison.
An appendix is also a signal: it shows the founder has the material ready, rather than promising to send it later.
Common investor questions the plan should pre-empt
- Why will this not be copied in six months?
- What happens if the first customer segment does not convert?
- How does the unit economics change at ten times the volume?
- Which hire matters most, and why?
- What would make you shut this down?
That last question is uncomfortable and revealing. A founder who has an answer is usually more credible than one who has never considered it.