The investor's technical DD team will find every skeleton in your codebase. Better you find them first. Most fundraising prep is checklists from blog posts. This is a full adversarial simulation: I run the exact same DD process on you that I run for investors at €50-150K per engagement — then help you fix everything before real investors see it. The DD Ambush happens when founders walk into investor scrutiny unprepared. 90% of War Room clients pass DD on the first attempt. The alternative is a 40% failure rate.
You're 3-6 months from raising. Your code works, your product has traction, but you've never been through investor DD. You don't know what they'll find — and neither does your team, because nobody has looked with adversarial intent.
Your data room is a Google Drive folder with outdated architecture diagrams and a README last updated 18 months ago. That's not a data room. That's a DD red flag.
40% of deals fall apart during technical DD. Not because the tech is bad — because it's not documented, not tested, not ready for scrutiny. The DD Ambush kills deals that should have closed.
A competitor who raised last quarter got grilled on EU AI Act compliance, SOC 2 readiness, and key-person dependency. You have no idea how you'd answer those questions. They do. That's why they raised and you haven't.
A 6-week intensive that simulates real investor due diligence using the same Red Team methodology I sell to investors. Week 1-2: Attack. Week 3-4: Fix. Week 5-6: Prepare. You go into real DD prepared for everything.
I run the exact same Red Team process on your company: code quality, architecture stress test, AI moat assessment, security posture, team evaluation, scalability analysis, EU AI Act compliance, documentation audit. No mercy.
Prioritized fix list ranked by 'deal-killer probability' from 30+ real DD assessments. Sprint to fix the red flags. Rebuild documentation. Shore up security. Address the findings that actually matter.
Clean data room, mock investment committee presentation, investor Q&A rehearsal, technical narrative refinement. You walk into real DD prepared for every question — because you've already been through worse.
An adversarial fundraising preparation methodology that uses real investor DD processes in reverse. Built from running Red Team DD for PE/VC firms and knowing exactly what kills deals vs. what investors negotiate around.
Startups 3-6 months from a Series A or B raise. Founders who failed DD in a previous fundraising attempt and need to fix what went wrong. Companies raising €5M+ where formal investor DD will happen. You want to walk in prepared — not hope for the best.
A technical audit checks your code quality and security. The War Room simulates the full investor DD experience: adversarial architecture review, AI moat assessment, team evaluation, scalability stress test, and EU AI Act compliance — all through the lens of 'what would an investor think?' Plus, we don't just find problems — we fix them and prepare you to address what can't be fixed.
That's why you do it 3-6 months before raising, not during the raise. Weeks 3-4 are specifically for remediation. Most issues can be addressed: architecture refactoring, security hardening, documentation creation, compliance initiation. For issues that can't be fully resolved, we prepare disclosure strategies and mitigation narratives.
A compressed 4-week version is possible if your codebase is relatively clean and you have existing documentation. The tradeoff is less time for remediation. I'd recommend the full 6 weeks for companies that haven't been through DD before.
Only if you want me to. Some founders bring me in with board awareness; others prefer to prepare privately. I'm comfortable either way. If your existing investors are supportive, involving them can strengthen the narrative. If it's sensitive, everything stays confidential.
A document with: (1) The 20 most common technical DD questions and prepared answers, (2) Your specific vulnerability areas with mitigation narratives, (3) Architecture talking points that turn weaknesses into 'deliberate tradeoffs,' (4) EU AI Act and compliance status with honest disclosure language, (5) Team capability positioning that addresses key-person dependency concerns.
Explore other services that complement this offering
Let's discuss how this service can address your specific challenges and drive real results.