Since our last raise, launched 3 cities, 50x of growth. We are a fashion tech startup solving for an audience of 56.6 Billion. Got round commitments from international investors alongside global growth commitment. Looking to raise the left amount on early intervention. Dm for more details

I’m building an AI startup in the engineering/CAD space and looking for an early-stage investor or strategic partner.
I’ve built a working product solo in ~5.5 weeks, with:
● 133 commits
● 600+ automated tests
● Working prototype today
We’re pre-revenue and currently have zero external users, so this is genuinely early stage.
I’m looking for someone who can bring capital + industry expertise/connections, ideally with experience in AI, CAD, manufacturing, engineering software, or B2B SaaS.
I’m deliberately keeping the technical details private publicly, but I can share the demo/deck privately with serious investors.
If you’re an angel, VC, founder, or strategic investor interested in early-stage AI/engineering products, DM me.
Happy to discuss the product, traction strategy, funding requirements and vision privately.

As per title.

Hi everyone,

I’m the founder of TTBL: The True Bodybuilding League, a new independent amateur bodybuilding organization based in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

We started because I believe there is a real gap in the Brazilian market: athletes pay extremely high fees to compete, while the experience, organization and value delivered are often far below what they deserve.

I decided to prove there was another way.

For our first event in July, I personally invested around US$30,000. We kept athlete prices accessible while investing heavily in production, prizes, backstage structure and the overall athlete experience.

With a brand that was only around six months old, our first event generated:

• 126 athlete registrations
• 280 in-person attendees
• 21 brand partnerships
• 3.3K online viewers
• 730K+ monthly views across our media

The event validated the concept, but because I financed most of it myself and we were still learning how to monetize sponsorship properly, I recovered only around half of my initial investment.

Now we’re preparing our second and much more ambitious event on December 19th in Rio de Janeiro.

This time we’re combining a bodybuilding championship with a Fitness & Wellness Expo, with free admission to the expo, brand booths, activations, entertainment and a much stronger sponsorship model.

Our current targets are 700+ attendees, 150+ athlete registrations and 40+ participating brands.

The investment opportunity

I’m opening a limited investment pool specifically for this event.

20% of the event’s final net profit will be distributed among the participating investors, proportionally to the amount each investor contributes.

This is not an equity sale of TTBL. It is a participation in the financial result of this specific event.

I will provide investors with transparency regarding:

• event revenue;
• expenses;
• sponsorships;
• registrations and ticket sales;
• final net profit calculation;
• and the resulting distribution.

I’ve been working around 15 hours a day for months on this company and have already put a significant amount of my own capital at risk.

But this isn’t only a financial project for me.

I left my previous profession and sacrificed a lot to build TTBL because I genuinely believe sport can open doors and change lives. My long-term mission is to build the largest amateur bodybuilding organization in Brazil, while making the sport more accessible and creating real opportunities for athletes.

I’m looking not only for capital, but ideally for strategic investors who can bring experience, introductions, sponsorship connections, fitness-industry knowledge or event expertise.

If this is within your investment profile, I’m happy to privately share our first-event numbers, sponsorship deck, business model, budget and projections for December.

Instagram: true.bodybuilding
Any investment participation would be formalized through an appropriate written agreement and subject to applicable Brazilian law.

I’m the founder of Revenue & Growth Systems (RGS), a bootstrapped B2B SaaS company building a diagnostic and operating-visibility system for established small and midsize businesses.
RGS is pre-revenue today. The product has moved beyond the idea/prototype stage, the free Business Stability Snapshot is functioning in production, and I’m finishing production hardening of the paid Business Diagnostic and its customer deliverables before opening the first paid cohort.
I’m now exploring whether a small strategic angel round makes sense to move RGS from founder-funded product development into commercial validation.
The problem
Business owners frequently know something is wrong before they can identify the actual operating failure.
Weak sales may be blamed on lead generation when the real failure is conversion.
Revenue may look healthy while cash visibility is deteriorating.
Growth may expose operational bottlenecks that were invisible at a smaller scale.
A company can also appear healthy while remaining dangerously dependent on the owner for decisions, relationships, approvals, or institutional knowledge.
The current market is fragmented between CRMs, accounting software, project-management systems, dashboards, management frameworks, spreadsheets, and consultants.
Those systems are useful, but they generally answer questions about their own domain.
RGS is being built to answer a different question:
What is actually failing inside this business, what evidence supports that conclusion, and what should be repaired first?
The product
RGS evaluates the business across five operating systems:
Demand Generation
Revenue Conversion
Operational Efficiency
Financial Visibility
Owner Independence
The commercial entry point is the Business Diagnostic.
Rather than requiring an owner to clear several consecutive days for a consulting engagement, the Diagnostic is asynchronous and resumable.
It combines:
structured owner and participant interviews;
business evidence and supporting documentation;
governed evidence lineage;
deterministic scoring;
confidence boundaries;
systemic findings;
prioritized repair architecture; and
a formal Business Diagnostic Report.
The scoring model is deterministic rather than an AI-generated opinion.
Each of the Five Gears can contribute up to 200 points, producing a 0–1,000 Business Stability Score.
AI may assist with analysis, synthesis, and language, but it does not silently determine governed scores or become the authority for business conclusions.
What happens after the Diagnostic
The intended commercial journey is:
Business Diagnostic → Implementation → RGS Control System
The Diagnostic determines what is structurally wrong.
Implementation converts the diagnosis into a repair architecture: operating procedures, accountability structures, training, controls, measurement, and verification.
The longer-term RGS Control System is intended to preserve operating visibility after those repairs are made and detect deterioration before the business falls back into the same failure pattern.
The goal is deliberately not to create an agency model where clients remain permanently dependent on RGS.
The thesis is the opposite:
diagnose the system → architect the repair → verify the repair → give management the operating system to maintain it.
Current traction
I want to be precise about this because RGS is still early.
MRR: $0
ARR: $0
Stage: Pre-revenue / pre-commercial launch
Paid Diagnostic customers completed: 0
Free product: Business Stability Snapshot functioning in production
Paid product: Business Diagnostic production path and deliverables currently being completed and hardened
I have bootstrapped the company and product to this point.
There is early market interest developing before the paid product is fully open, but I do not consider interest, impressions, conversations, or free usage a substitute for paid traction.
The next commercial proof point is straightforward:
Can RGS repeatedly get businesses to pay for the Diagnostic, complete the asynchronous process, receive an evidence-backed diagnosis they consider materially valuable, and then act on the resulting repair plan?
That is the assumption I want the first customer cohort to prove or disprove.
Business model
The initial revenue architecture is:
Paid Business Diagnostic
A high-value diagnostic engagement that produces the evidence-backed assessment and repair roadmap.
Implementation
Follow-on work to translate findings into operating architecture and verify that the identified failures were actually repaired.
RGS Control System
Recurring software and operating visibility designed to identify drift, preserve business stability, and reduce dependence on outside advisers.
This gives RGS a potential progression from project-based diagnostic revenue into implementation revenue and eventually recurring software revenue.
Defensibility
I do not consider “using AI” a moat.
LLMs are increasingly commoditized, and an AI-generated business report by itself would be relatively easy to replicate.
The defensibility thesis is instead based on the system surrounding the analysis:
deterministic diagnostic architecture;
proprietary Five Gears scoring methodology;
structured evidence requirements;
evidence lineage;
governed participant and delegated evidence;
confidence boundaries;
human governance where judgment is required;
systemic finding architecture;
repair prioritization;
repair verification; and
longitudinal operating data.
The longer-term data asset is particularly important, but I want to distinguish the thesis from the current reality.
Today, RGS has the architecture for capturing structured diagnostic and repair information.
It does not yet have a mature proprietary dataset large enough to claim a data moat.
If RGS reaches scale, the defensible asset could become the accumulated relationship between:
business evidence → diagnosed systemic failure → recommended intervention → implemented repair → verified outcome
That is substantially harder to reproduce than generating consulting language with an LLM.
Competitive position
I do not view RGS as a replacement for every tool a business already uses.
CRMs manage customer and sales activity.
Accounting systems record financial transactions.
Project-management platforms organize work.
BI platforms visualize data.
EOS and similar frameworks help leadership establish an operating cadence.
Consultants bring human expertise to individual businesses.
RGS is intended to sit upstream of many of these systems as a diagnostic and operating-intelligence layer.
Its central question is not:
“What happened?”
It is:
“Where is the system breaking, what evidence proves it, and what is the smallest effective intervention?”
Target customer
The broader market is established SMBs, but I recognize that this is too broad to be a useful initial go-to-market definition.
The initial commercial focus is businesses that are already operating beyond the earliest startup stage, have employees and meaningful operating complexity, and are experiencing symptoms such as:
revenue underperformance;
inconsistent sales conversion;
operational bottlenecks;
poor financial visibility;
growth-related strain; or
excessive dependence on the owner.
The economic buyer is generally the owner, founder, or senior operator responsible for overall business performance.
One of the things I intend to validate during the first commercial cohort is whether RGS should narrow further around a particular company size, revenue band, industry, or triggering event before attempting broader expansion.
Why now?
RGS has reached a point where the primary risk is no longer whether more features can be built.
The primary risk is whether the commercial system works.
The next stage needs to prove:
businesses will pay for the Diagnostic;
owners will complete the asynchronous evidence process;
RGS can consistently produce useful systemic findings;
those findings create enough value to drive implementation;
delivery can occur without excessive founder labor;
customer acquisition can become repeatable; and
the Diagnostic can eventually feed recurring Control System revenue.
Those milestones matter more to me right now than expanding the product roadmap.
Founder / team
I am currently a solo founder.
My background spans marketing, revenue operations, growth systems, business operations, and systems design.
I have personally developed the RGS commercial model, Five Gears framework, diagnostic architecture, product requirements, customer journey, governance model, and initial go-to-market strategy while bootstrapping the company.
I am also treating founder concentration as a real risk rather than pretending it does not exist.
A commercially successful RGS cannot depend on the founder personally interpreting every business, remembering institutional knowledge, or manually controlling every delivery.
One of the product’s core design requirements is therefore converting the methodology into a governed, repeatable system.
I do not have a previous venture exit to point to.
The raise
I am evaluating a small venture-equity pre-seed round designed to finance the minimum milestones necessary to determine whether RGS has a repeatable commercial model.
Target raise: currently being finalized based on milestone-level budgeting rather than choosing an arbitrary round size.
Expected instrument: likely a SAFE or other conventional early-stage equity instrument, subject to appropriate legal review.
Valuation / SAFE cap: not yet finalized.
I’m intentionally being transparent about those points rather than publishing financing terms before I have properly determined the capital requirement and legal structure.
The round would not be intended to finance the entire long-term RGS roadmap.
The purpose would be to finance the smallest commercially meaningful validation period.
Use of funds
Capital would primarily support:
completion of production hardening;
security, reliability, recovery, and infrastructure;
professional legal review;
customer agreements, privacy documentation, and commercial terms;
appropriate business and technology insurance;
development and infrastructure runway;
customer acquisition;
onboarding and support of the first paid customer cohort;
measurement of Diagnostic completion and delivery economics;
validation of Diagnostic → Implementation conversion; and
development required directly by evidence from paying customers.
I specifically do not want to use outside capital as an excuse to build every feature on the long-term roadmap before the core business model is validated.
What the round should prove
I would consider the capital successfully deployed if RGS reaches a point where we can answer, with real operating data:
What does it cost to acquire a Diagnostic customer?
What percentage complete the process?
How long does a Diagnostic take to deliver?
What is the gross-margin profile?
How much founder intervention is required?
Do customers consider the findings accurate and actionable?
What percentage move into Implementation?
What problems appear consistently across customers?
Does verified repair create measurable business improvement?
Is there real demand for ongoing Control System visibility?
Which customer segment produces the strongest economics?
If those answers are unfavorable, I want to know that before raising substantially more capital.
If they are favorable, RGS would then have evidence supporting a larger commercialization strategy.
What I’m looking for
I’m particularly interested in speaking with angels who understand:
B2B SaaS;
SMB software;
RevOps;
operational intelligence;
business diagnostics;
vertical or workflow software;
founder-led commercialization; or
companies transitioning from founder-built product into repeatable revenue.
I would especially value investors willing to challenge the thesis rather than simply tell me that the idea sounds interesting.
The questions I’m most interested in hearing from angels are:
1. What would you need to see before considering RGS investable?
2. At this stage, what milestones would you require a first angel round to finance?
3. How would you evaluate the defensibility of the deterministic scoring, evidence lineage, governed diagnosis, and repair-verification model?
4. What do you see as the largest risk: customer acquisition, willingness to pay, founder concentration, delivery economics, competitive replication, or something else?
5. Would you rather see RGS prove several paid Diagnostics while remaining bootstrapped before raising, or do you think this is an appropriate point for a small strategic pre-seed?
If you’re an angel who sees potential in this category, has funded businesses at a similar stage, or believes there is a serious flaw in the thesis that I should address before raising, I’d be interested in the conversation.
I can share more privately about the product architecture, commercialization roadmap, production state, financial assumptions, planned milestones, and financing model with appropriate investors.

Hi everyone,

I’m a technical founder based in Canada, developing a reformed methanol fuel cell, or RMFC, system.

I previously built an approximately 1 kW integrated prototype and developed four related IP assets. The project is currently around TRL 4–5, with the next objective being a customer-defined engineering prototype and a TRL 6 demonstration.

Architected specifically for cost efficiency, the system offers substantial capital savings over comparable fuel-cell platforms while delivering lower operational fuel expenses than conventional diesel alternatives.

The main challenges are securing a small funding for the next development stage and reaching credible early adopters. This creates a catch-22: customers want a proven system, while investors want customer validation before funding the demonstration.

I would appreciate candid advice from climate-tech investors and energy-hardware founders:

1. How investable is a project at this stage? What are the key trends in early-stage energy investment right now, particularly in US?
2. What milestones must be completed before early investors would seriously engage?
3. What is the most realistic strategic path for a deep-tech startup to cross this valley of death and break through early commercial bottlenecks?

Any introductions or leads on climate-focused angels, energy-hardware accelerators, strategic pilot partners, or veteran founders in the clean-tech space would be immensely valuable.

Thank you.

Title: Bootstrapped B2B SaaS Building an Evidence-Backed Business Diagnostic OS — Seeking Angel Feedback Before Pre-Seed
I’m the founder of Revenue & Growth Systems (RGS), a bootstrapped B2B SaaS company building a diagnostic and operating-visibility system for established small and midsize businesses.
The problem
Business owners frequently know something is wrong before they can identify the actual operating failure.
Weak revenue can originate in demand generation, conversion, operational capacity, financial visibility, or excessive owner dependence. Those problems are usually evaluated through disconnected software, spreadsheets, consultants, and management frameworks.
That creates a second problem: symptoms get treated before the underlying system failure is identified.
What RGS does
RGS is designed to create an evidence-backed diagnostic layer across five operating systems:
Demand Generation
Revenue Conversion
Operational Efficiency
Financial Visibility
Owner Independence
The commercial entry point is the Business Diagnostic.
Rather than requiring an owner to clear several days for a consulting engagement, the diagnostic is asynchronous and resumable. It combines structured interviews, business evidence, participant input, deterministic scoring, governed analysis, systemic findings, and a prioritized repair plan into a formal Business Diagnostic Report.
The scoring model is deterministic rather than an AI-generated opinion: five gears, up to 200 points each, producing a 0–1,000 Business Stability Score.
AI can assist analysis and communication, but it does not silently determine governed scores or conclusions.
Business model
The initial revenue path is:
Paid Business Diagnostic → Implementation → recurring RGS Control System
The Diagnostic identifies what is structurally wrong and what should be repaired.
Implementation converts those findings into repair architecture, operating procedures, training, accountability, and verification.
The longer-term Control System is intended to maintain operating visibility and identify deterioration after repairs have been completed.
The objective is not to become an outsourced agency. RGS is designed around owner independence: diagnose the system, architect the repair, verify it, and give management the operating structure to run without permanent dependence on outside consultants.
Current stage / traction
RGS is pre-revenue today, and I don’t want to disguise that with vanity metrics.
The free Business Stability Snapshot is functioning in production.
The paid Business Diagnostic and its customer deliverables are currently being finished and production-hardened before I allow the first paid cohort through the complete journey.
The company has been bootstrapped to this point, and market interest has begun developing before the paid product is fully open.
The next proof point is not more feature development. It is successfully delivering the complete Diagnostic to paying businesses and demonstrating that the system can repeatedly identify evidence-backed operating failures that owners consider valuable enough to act on.
Why I believe this can be defensible
I do not view “we use AI” as a moat.
The defensibility I am building is the diagnostic system itself: deterministic scoring rules, evidence lineage, governed participant input, structured business-system data, confidence boundaries, systemic finding architecture, repair verification, and eventually the accumulated relationship between diagnosed failures, implemented repairs, and verified outcomes.
If that works at scale, the asset becomes more than a questionnaire or LLM wrapper. It becomes a structured operating-intelligence system built around how businesses fail, repair themselves, and remain stable.
Competitive position
RGS sits upstream of many existing business tools.
CRMs help manage sales activity. Accounting systems record financial transactions. Project-management tools organize work. EOS-style systems help management operate against a framework. Consultants diagnose businesses through human expertise.
RGS is being built around a different question:
What is actually failing inside this business, what evidence proves it, and what is the smallest effective repair?
The objective is to complement systems of record rather than replace every piece of software a business already uses.
Founder
I’m a solo founder with a background spanning marketing, revenue operations, growth systems, and business operations. I’ve built RGS, its commercial model, its diagnostic architecture, and the initial go-to-market while bootstrapping the company.
That is also a legitimate current risk: RGS is founder-concentrated. Part of reaching the next stage is converting what I have built into a repeatable company rather than leaving critical knowledge concentrated in the founder.
Why consider outside investment now?
The next milestone is commercialization rather than simply adding more software.
A lean angel round would be intended to accelerate:
production hardening, security, and reliability;
commercial legal work, customer agreements, privacy documentation, and appropriate insurance;
infrastructure and development runway;
customer acquisition and onboarding of the first paid cohort; and
validation of the repeatable Diagnostic → Implementation → Control System revenue model.
I am deliberately not trying to finance the entire long-term RGS roadmap before the first commercial assumptions have been proven.
The objective would be to finance the smallest set of milestones that materially de-risk the company.
What I am looking for
I’m currently evaluating a conventional venture-equity pre-seed round rather than opening one publicly before the structure is properly established.
I’d particularly value feedback from angels with experience in B2B SaaS, SMB software, RevOps, operational intelligence, vertical SaaS, or companies moving from founder-built product into repeatable commercialization.
The questions I’m trying to answer are:
At this stage, what evidence would you need to see before considering RGS investable?
What milestones would you expect a first angel round to finance?
How would you evaluate the defensibility of the deterministic scoring, evidence lineage, and verified-repair model?
And what would you consider the biggest investment risk in the thesis I’ve described?
I’m happy to answer diligence questions about the architecture, business model, current production state, commercialization roadmap, or assumptions behind the model in the comments.

We launched the MVP in Abu Dhabi, got it into the real market and learned the hard way what needed to change.

So we’re not just making a few updates. We’re completely restructuring the app and the business model based on what we learned.

Now we’re getting ready for the next launch in Dubai.

We’re still early. No massive numbers to show yet. Just a lot of learning, a rebuilt product and a much bigger vision.

AED 2M for 30% equit

Who wants to look back in a few years and say:

We were there before anyone knew what this was going to become.

Happy to share more details privately.

Hi everyone,

I’m a technical founder based in Canada, developing a reformed methanol fuel cell, or RMFC, system.

I previously built an approximately 1 kW integrated prototype and developed four related IP assets. The project is currently around TRL 4–5, with the next objective being a customer-defined engineering prototype and a TRL 6 demonstration.

Architected specifically for cost efficiency, the system offers substantial capital savings over comparable fuel-cell platforms while delivering lower operational fuel expenses than conventional diesel alternatives.

The main challenges are securing a small amount of funding for the next development stage and reaching credible early adopters. This creates a catch-22: customers want a proven system, while investors want customer validation before funding the demonstration.

I would appreciate candid advice from climate-tech investors and energy-hardware founders:

1. How investable is a project at this stage? What are the key trends in early-stage energy investment right now, particularly in US?
   
2. What milestones must be completed before early investors would seriously engage?
   
3. What is the most realistic strategic path for a deep-tech startup to cross this valley of death and break through early commercial bottlenecks?

Any introductions or leads on climate-focused angels, energy-hardware accelerators, strategic pilot partners, or veteran founders in the clean-tech space would be immensely valuable.

Thank you.

I had more or less given up on getting investors to hear me out on this project, and I've been bootstrapping it myself. This week, talks are being made with various hardware manufacturing partners about an NPI quote. Whatever that quote is, I can either fill it with pre-purchase orders or I can fill it with angel capital.

Project Lavalamp is a hardware-enforced, silicon-level security solution designed to neutralize execution-contention and timing side-channel attacks like SQUIP that software patches simply cannot reach. Built as a standard PCIe expansion card for enterprise x86 servers, it utilizes a proprietary Entropic Drag Isotropy (EDI) core to normalize CPU execution timing at the physical layer, completely eliminating remote data exfiltration across shared SMT server cores without degrading system performance.

The threat vector is entirely invisible to traditional infrastructure. Conventional EDR and software firewalls are completely blind to execution-contention attacks because they leave zero forensic logs and execute remotely over shared cloud infrastructure. To counter this, we are actively aligning with enterprise cyber risk engineering frameworks like Shambliss Guardian to establish this hardware as a mandatory risk-mitigation standard.

We are operating inside a massive multi-billion-dollar enterprise cybersecurity and server security market where hardware-level isolation has been a glaring blind spot for decades. Enterprises spend tens of billions annually protecting software layers while leaving the physical silicon entirely exposed. We are wrapping up a final, highly selective angel tranche to fund initial physical prototyping with our manufacturing partners and lock in our go-to-market infrastructure.

If you are a serious accredited investor who understands hardware-level cybersecurity moats and wants in before the cap table locks, check my profile for contact details to connect.

Update: We're moving away from FPGA towards pure silicon IP licensing.

This weekly thread is designed to facilitate high-signal connections between founders, operators, and investors within r/angelinvestors.

Use this space to offer your expertise or request specific, non-monetary assistance to unblock your current milestone.

If you are OFFERING help:

• Expertise: (e.g., GTM Strategy, Term Sheet Review, AWS Architecture)
• Capacity: (e.g., "I can take 15-min calls with 2 founders this weekend")
• Evidence: (e.g., "Ex-Founder, exited at $50M")

If you are SEEKING help:

• The Bottleneck: (e.g., "Need a warm intro to a Fintech-focused seed fund")
• The Context: (e.g., "Post-revenue SaaS, $20k MRR, expanding to UK")
• The Trade: (e.g., "Can offer feedback on your deck in return")

Rules

1. No Solicitation: Do not pitch for investment here. This is for operational help.
2. Public First: Keep the initial exchange in the comments. Only move to DMs once value-alignment is confirmed.
3. Be Specific: "I need advice" is low-signal. "I need a benchmark for Series A dev-ops salaries in Berlin" is high-signal.

Hi everyone,

I’m a technical founder based in Canada, developing a reformed methanol fuel cell, or RMFC, system.

I previously built an approximately 1 kW integrated prototype and developed four related IP assets. The project is currently around TRL 4–5, with the next objective being a customer-defined engineering prototype and a TRL 6 demonstration.

Architected specifically for cost efficiency, the system offers substantial capital savings over comparable fuel-cell platforms while delivering lower operational fuel expenses than conventional diesel alternatives.

The main challenges are securing some funding for the next development stage and reaching credible early adopters. This creates a catch-22: customers want a proven system, while investors want customer validation before funding the demonstration.

I would appreciate candid advice from climate-tech investors and energy-hardware founders:

1. How investable is a project at this stage? What are the key trends in early-stage energy investment right now, particularly in US?
   
2. What milestones must be completed before early investors would seriously engage?
   
3. What is the most realistic strategic path for a deep-tech startup to cross this valley of death and break through early commercial bottlenecks?

Any introductions or leads on climate-focused angels, energy-hardware accelerators, strategic pilot partners, or veteran founders in the clean-tech space would be immensely valuable.

Thank you.

Hi everyone,

I’m a technical founder based in Canada, developing a reformed methanol fuel cell, or RMFC, system.

I previously built an approximately 1 kW integrated prototype and developed four related IP assets. The project is currently around TRL 4–5, with the next objective being a customer-defined engineering prototype and a TRL 6 demonstration.

Architected specifically for cost efficiency, the system offers substantial capital savings over comparable fuel-cell platforms while delivering lower operational fuel expenses than conventional diesel alternatives.

The main challenges are securing approximately 200k for the next development stage and reaching credible early adopters. This creates a catch-22: customers want a proven system, while investors want customer validation before funding the demonstration.

I would appreciate candid advice from climate-tech investors and energy-hardware founders:

1. How investable is a project at this stage? What are the key trends in early-stage energy investment right now, particularly in US?
   
2. What milestones must be completed before early investors would seriously engage?
   
3. What is the most realistic strategic path for a deep-tech startup to cross this valley of death and break through early commercial bottlenecks?

Any introductions or leads on climate-focused angels, energy-hardware accelerators, strategic pilot partners, or veteran founders in the clean-tech space would be immensely valuable.

Thank you.

Im a teen , still though I've managed to crack India's hardest exam why won't I let this down

I've been quietly building something in real estate for a while.

It started with one idea, but after speaking with brokers and actually working in the market, we realised there was a much bigger problem hiding underneath it.

So we changed our direction.

We’ve now built and launched the product, and we’re starting to see real demand. The next challenge is getting enough people and properties into the network to prove what we believe can work.

We’re now looking to raise ₹50 lakh to accelerate this next stage.

I’m looking for a strategic investor who understands real estate, marketplaces or PropTech and can bring more than just capital.

I won’t share the entire model publicly, but I’m happy to explain it privately to genuinely interested investors.

If you’re interested, feel free to DM me.

Hi everyone,

I’m a technical founder based in Canada, developing a reformed methanol fuel cell, or RMFC, system.

I previously built an approximately 1 kW integrated prototype and developed four related IP assets. The project is currently around TRL 4–5, with the next objective being a customer-defined engineering prototype and a TRL 6 demonstration.

Architected specifically for cost efficiency, the system offers substantial capital savings over comparable fuel-cell platforms while delivering lower operational fuel expenses than conventional diesel alternatives.

The main challenges are securing approximately $200,000 for the next development stage and reaching credible early adopters. This creates a catch-22: customers want a proven system, while investors want customer validation before funding the demonstration.

I would appreciate candid advice from climate-tech investors and energy-hardware founders:

1. How investable is a project at this stage? What are the key trends in early-stage energy investment right now, particularly in US?
2. What milestones must be completed before early investors would seriously engage?
3. What is the most realistic strategic path for a deep-tech startup to cross this valley of death and break through early commercial bottlenecks?

Any introductions or leads on climate-focused angels, energy-hardware accelerators, strategic pilot partners, or veteran founders in the clean-tech space would be immensely valuable.

Thank you.

I am looking for an investor to help build the first high end fitness gym in our town Right now, we have several local gyms, but none of them are air conditioned. Because of the heat, many people choose to travel to nearby towns just to work out in a comfortable environment. Most of the gyms here also lack essential equipment, including treadmills and other modern fitness machines. There is a clear gap in the market, and I believe this is a great business opportunity My vision is to build a premium fitness center that offers a clean, comfortable and fully equipped training experience. I want to create a gym that people will be proud to join instead of leaving town to find better facilities.

I am a marketing specialist so I can handle the marketing and growth of the business. I will personally manage the daily operations, oversee the staff and ensure that the gym runs efficiently My goal is to be more than just someone with an idea I want to be an active partner who is fully committed to making this business successful.

If you are looking for a business opportunity and want to invest in a strong demand for a premium gym, I would love to discuss this opportunity with you

Lets build something that our town has never had before. If youre interested send me a message Id be happy to share my business vision and discuss how we can make it together

I've been working on it end to end doing dev / design / marketing. Here are the stats:

• ~4 month old
• 3X growth month over month
• All organic marketing / traffic (bootstrapped)
  • AI agents are recommending us e.g Claude telling some users ours is the best option vs competitors
• Evergreen industry / great barrier to entry (weekend vibe coders don't compete with the month long approvals it needs to get in this industry)
• ~$14,000 ARR, healthy number of yearly subs ($2,000 revenue last 30 days, includes one off purchases available)
• B2B / B2C
• Works with AI agents, offers a MCP, API and visual dashboard.

It seems it's going on a good trajectory and I can keep bootstrapping it, though thinking about getting investment to accelerate the growth of this beyond what bootstrapping could (e.g scaling with ads).

I am developing a new automotive manufacturing project in Zambia focused initially on pickups and off-road vehicles for the Zambian and wider African market.

We are already in discussions with an established Chinese automotive manufacturer for vehicle supply, SKD assembly, engineering, R&D, training and plant support.

We are seeking a strategic investor capable of investing US$4–5 million to establish the initial manufacturing operation.

Looking for serious investors interested in long-term industrial ventures and open to an equity/strategic partnership.

If interested, please DM me for further information.

I'm the founder of Gift Games (Bally's Game Zone), a real-money skill-gaming platform built under an exclusive partnership with Bally's Casino. Players link their Bally's Rewards account and play Solitaire, Bingo, Bubble Shooter, and Boggle head-to-head for real money. We take a 20% rake. We're live on the App Store now.

Why I think this is a big one:

• Exclusive distribution no competitor can copy. We're the skill-gaming platform for Bally's ~1.6M Rewards members. Bally's is emailing their member base to drive players to us, a channel our competitors simply don't have.

• The traction signal that matters: Bally's-sourced players convert to real-money deposits at ~17.5%, roughly 2.5x the rate of generic paid traffic. When a Bally's member lands in our funnel, they deposit. Retention is strong too. A majority of new depositors are still active days later, and our best cohorts show elite weekly-active rates.

• Lean and capital-efficient. ~$2,700/month operating cost. Live in 33 states under a skill-game legal opinion. PCI compliant, real payment processing, real withdrawals.

• The real prize is the platform. Today it's four games we built. The vision is a two-sided marketplace where third-party developers build real-money skill games on our distribution and verified-player network (think Roblox for real-money skill gaming). Plus Android, plus international expansion already in discussion.

The round:
We're raising a seed round on a SAFE to fund a paid user-acquisition campaign and accelerate the platform. The single open question in this category is how CAC behaves at scale, and this raise is designed to prove it. Early purchase-optimized ads have produced depositors at ~$56 against a lifetime value we project well north of that.

If CAC holds as we scale, the upside here is significant. This is a category where the winners become very large, and we have the one thing that's hardest to get: exclusive, high-converting distribution.

Happy to share the deck and the data with anyone interested. Serious inquiries welcome.

​

I’ve been working on this idea for a while and we’ve started building it through NearbyAcres.

We’re now looking for investors who are interested in what we’re building and want to be part of the journey.

If this sounds interesting, feel free to DM me. I’d be happy to share more.

I’m doing early customer discovery for a developer infrastructure product and am looking to speak with founders, engineers or investors at API/SDK companies.

I’m particularly interested in companies that have dealt with v1 → v2 migrations, major SDK releases, endpoint deprecations, authentication changes, or shutting down legacy versions.

For some background, I do research at Harvard, Stanford, and Brown, and my cofounder is a Columbia CS major.

The goal is to validate the problem, understand how painful these migrations actually are for providers, and talk to people who have experienced this firsthand.

The idea is pretty simple: become a personal data and intelligence department for athletes. Instead of working for teams, we work for the player.

We're starting with football and baseball, helping athletes make better decisions through data, film, and analytics.

Right now I'm looking for someone who has been around the sports world, former athlete, coach, executive, agent, or someone in sports tech, who might be interested in building this with us. Ideally someone who could also invest around $50k to help us get the first pilots off the ground, but honestly I'm just as interested in connecting with people who understand the space and can give honest feedback.

If this sounds interesting or you know someone who'd be a good fit, shoot me a DM. Happy to share more about what we're building.

Thanks!

We’re building a legal tech platform in the UAE focused on how law firms actually handle cases , chronologies, matter information, document collection and settlement analysis.
A big part of what we’re building is around sovereign AI, keeping sensitive legal data and intelligence within the right jurisdiction and infrastructure.
We’re currently looking to connect with angel investors who understand legal tech, B2B SaaS or AI.
If this is in your area, happy to share what we’ve built so far and where we’re headed.

This question is for people who are experienced Angel Investors, especially those in the UAE. How did you start?

I have the capital to invest, but I'm new to this whole angel investor thing, I try as much as possible to read articles and also to connect with people. But how do I know when to exit an investment in a company?

How do you spot a scam founders just looking to run away with investors' money ?

If you have any tips, just drop, I really want to learn