Prompt 11 — Fundraise readiness

Read AGENTS.md first, then stack/CONTEXT.md, stack/01-company/company.md,
stack/03-market/market.md, stack/04-product/product.md,
stack/07-money/money.md and stack/08-capital/capital.md.

## Step 0 — Check the ground

Two files first, and stop if either is missing:

- stack/07-money/money.md past tbd. 07-unit-economics.md fills it. A raise
  built on unknown unit economics does not fail at the pitch, it fails in
  diligence, six weeks later, having consumed the six weeks.
- stack/01-company/company.md holding a cap table. Without it Steps 3 and 4 have
  nothing to dilute and would be arithmetic on an imagined ownership split.

Then, before anything else, answer this honestly:

- Is the actual constraint capital, or is it customers, product, or focus?
- What would change with money that cannot change without it?
- What is the current revenue, and is it growing?

At the earliest stage, money rarely solves the real problem — paying customers
do, and they also make money much easier to raise. Founders who spend six months
fundraising with no revenue frequently end with neither.

If your read is that the founder should be selling rather than raising, say so
plainly and give the reasoning. Then continue anyway, because they may have a
reason you do not have.

## Step 1 — Structural blockers

Check each and flag anything that would stop or complicate a raise:

- ENTITY. Is it the right structure? Most institutional equity investors will
  not invest in a proprietorship or partnership and expect a private limited
  company. If a conversion is needed, note the cost, time and tax consequences.
- CAP TABLE. Complete? Does the founder hold enough for decisions and for
  future dilution to still leave them motivated? If a majority sits with family
  or an early holder, that is workable but it will be asked about — is there a
  clean answer?
- UNDOCUMENTED EQUITY PROMISES. Anyone promised equity without a written
  agreement is an open liability that surfaces in diligence at the worst
  moment. List every one from 01-company and treat closing them as a blocker.
- DEAD EQUITY. Anyone holding a stake who is no longer contributing? An
  investor will ask what that percentage is doing there, and "I'm not sure" is
  a bad answer.
- IP OWNERSHIP. Is everything the company relies on actually assigned to it in
  writing? Agency-built code, freelance design, an intern's work.
- FOUNDERS ON THE CAP TABLE. If the company is registered in someone else's
  name for visa, regulatory or family reasons, say so — investors and
  incubators find it unsettling and it needs a clear explanation and a
  transition plan rather than a discovery in month two.

## Step 2 — Non-dilutive first

Grants do not take equity. Build the table:

| Scheme / programme | Administered by | Amount | Eligible? | Dilutive? | Deadline | Next step |

Search for what this specific company might qualify for: government innovation
and technology schemes, sector-specific programmes, state schemes, competitions
and prizes, university and accelerator programmes, and non-equity capital such
as customer prepayments, purchase-order financing and revenue-based finance.

Two honest notes to include:

There is rarely a single clean database. The work is manual: find the relevant
ministry or agency programmes, find their list of approved implementing agencies
or incubators, then check those organisations' own pages one by one for open
calls. You can pull names and URLs; a human has to check which applications are
actually live, because central lists are usually stale.

Eligibility is often narrower than it looks. Many innovation schemes target deep
technology, science and hardware and will not fund a consumer brand, a services
business or a marketplace however good it is. Check the actual criteria against
this company and say clearly which schemes it does NOT qualify for — a rejection
at the final stage costs weeks.

## Step 3 — The staged roadmap

| Stage | Amount | Type | What it buys | Milestone unlocking the next stage | Dilution | Founder % after | Timing |

Start from today's cap table and model it forward. Include the grant stage as
non-dilutive.

Then state explicitly, because these are the two things founders most often have
wrong: capital arrives in stages tied to milestones rather than in one event,
and dilution happens at every round and compounds. Show the arithmetic so the
founder is not learning it inside a term sheet.

Where possible, note how comparable companies in this sector were funded — how
much, at what stage, over how long. It calibrates expectations better than any
advice.

## Step 4 — This round

- Amount and instrument
- Use of funds, broken down by category with amounts
- Runway it buys, in months
- The milestone it unlocks — what makes the NEXT round raisable
- Valuation expectation and the basis for it

Then prepare the two questions:
  "Why haven't you grown more with the traction you already have?"
  "Exactly how does this money change the trajectory?"

And the exit. Name realistic acquirers — the larger player in the category, the
international group entering the market, the strategic buyer who needs this
capability — or state honestly that this is a cash-flow business, which is
legitimate and which some investors will correctly pass on.

An investor is buying an exit. Every question they ask is a version of "how does
that happen and what stops it?"

## Step 5 — Data room

Go through the checklist in 08-capital and report what exists, what is missing,
and what to do about each.

A founder who can send a complete, organised folder within an hour of a request
looks materially more credible than one who takes a week. Assemble before it is
needed.

## Step 6 — Investor pipeline

Design the CRM: columns, statuses, and the process for building it.

- What kind of investor fits this company: sector, stage, cheque size,
  geography?
- Where to find them and how to research thesis fit
- Warm introductions available and through whom
- The connection note — short, a line or two: who you are, the one-line company,
  one credibility marker, one specific ask
- A daily target. Thirty minutes a day, consistently, beats a two-week sprint.

Two cautions to include:

On timing: only approach investors properly when the house is in order — entity
clean, cap table sensible, data room assembled, numbers consistent. A reviewer's
job is to find the reason to say no, and a small avoidable inconsistency is a
free one. Early exploratory conversations are fine and useful, framed honestly
as relationship-building rather than an open round.

On intermediaries: some take a success fee to "help find investment" while
having no capital themselves. Check for a verifiable portfolio, a substantive
public presence, people who will speak to you, and named investments you can
confirm independently. Absence of all four is a reason to slow down.

## Output

Update stack/08-capital/capital.md. Update front matter and the INDEX row.

Finish with:
1. Whether this company is ready to raise, honestly
2. The three things to fix first, in order
3. The non-dilutive option most worth pursuing right now