Slide-Ordering Principles Shared by the Airbnb, Intercom, and Dropbox Seed Decks

#The Actual Slide Structures of the Three Decks

The table below is reconstructed from secondary analytical sources. The Airbnb and Dropbox decks are cited from analysts' edited versions, rather than official publications by the companies; slide counts and detailed ordering may vary by source. Only the Intercom deck is a primary source posted directly by cofounder Eoghan McCabe on the official blog.

The sources do not verify the claim that all three decks follow one identical sequence of 'problem definition → market → solution → why now → team.' The shared ordering principle that is confirmed is placing the problem slide ahead of other content slides.

#Why 'Problem First' Works

Investors form a sequence of questions as they read a deck. When the problem comes first, they ask 'Is this a real pain?' before examining the solution. When the solution comes first, their initial question is 'What does this solve?' Even a well-designed solution slide then arrives after the investor's attention has already been disrupted.

Dropbox's first slide, 'Storage is a mess,' describes the user's situation rather than the product. That sentence brings to mind an inconvenience investors have experienced or can readily imagine. A problem slide should turn investors into people who have felt that problem at least once, so they continue to the next slide.

#Does the Market Come Before or After the Solution?

In the analyzed Airbnb deck, the solution comes first, followed by market validation and market size. In the analyzed Dropbox deck, vision precedes the solution. There is no clear evidence that all three decks put the market in the same position.

There is, however, a structural principle: the market is placed where it justifies the scale of the solution. Showing the solution first and then saying 'the market is this large' makes the market read as a justification for the solution. Showing the market first makes the solution a response to that opportunity. In either position, the market and solution must be connected logically.

Airbnb placed market validation after the solution to signal that the model was already working. At the time of fundraising in 2009, Airbnb already had early transactions. Putting market validation immediately after the solution pairs the model explanation with evidence that 'this model actually works.'

#Why the Team Comes Near the End

In the analyzed Airbnb deck, the team slide appears near the end. If investors do not know the people, showing the team first can amount to presenting a résumé. After the problem, solution, market, and model have been established, the investor's question changes to 'Are these people able to solve this problem?'

The team slide attaches people's names to all the preceding logic. If that logic is weak, the team slide is weak too. To make 'trust this team' the conclusion, the structure must first build reasons for that trust.

#Comparison with Korea's PSST Structure

The standard business plan for Korean government-support programs has four main PSST sections: P, problem recognition → S, feasibility/solution → S, growth strategy → T, team composition. The Korea Institute of Startup & Entrepreneurship teaches this framework through Startup Edu. The surface structure resembles the logic of a seed IR deck, but the emphasis differs.

Feasibility comes before the market in PSST because government-support evaluations focus on the ability to execute commercialization, rather than investment risk relative to return. Seed investors place bets from a portfolio perspective; government evaluators first check whether the support funds can realistically be put to use.

#Three Changes When Applying the Same Logic to PSST

The problem-first principle and structural ordering logic of an IR deck also apply to PSST. Transplanting the structure unchanged, however, leaves gaps.

1. How market size is presented: TAM, SAM, and SOM in an IR deck help convey the size of an opportunity. In the PSST growth-strategy section, the initial number of target customers and a concrete path to revenue matter more than 'the market is large.' A calculation such as '500 business customers within 3 years, each paying KRW 3 million annually' fills out feasibility more than a claim that 'the total market is 10 trillion.'
2. Where 'why now' belongs: seed IR presents market timing as a separate slide or an explicit emphasis. In PSST, this logic should be part of problem recognition (P). Explaining 'why this problem is becoming more serious now' in that section helps evaluators understand the urgency of the business.
3. Where team capability belongs: an IR deck presents the team once at the end. PSST differs. The feasibility (S) section first demonstrates why this team can implement this technology, and the T section consolidates that evidence. Confine the team to the final page, and feasibility is left without supporting arguments.