ALPHA Timepoint is in alpha Talk to Us
← Blog · July 17, 2026 · Sean McDonald

Writing the IC memo? The hardest section is the one nobody can staff.

If you sit on an investment committee — or write the memos that go to one — you know the weakness of every risks section: it was written by the person who wants the deal done. Big funds staff an adversarial read; small funds don't have the bodies, and the deal closes in days. Timepoint fills exactly that gap: the downside section, generated and argued by simulation, in time for the vote.

New here?

Timepoint AI is a Santa Monica company that runs decisions as grounded simulations: the specific, named actors around your decision, played forward through branching timelines. Findings come back ranked, with uncertainty stated in words — never sold as a prediction, always labeled as the AI simulation they are. Here's the full range of work →

The champion's problem

The issue isn't honesty — it's structure. A champion's downside list contains the risks that occurred to the champion. What an IC actually needs is the risk that occurred to no one, plus a disciplined answer to the only question that matters at the margin: what would have to be true for this to work — and which of those load-bearing assumptions does every rosy scenario quietly share?

So the deal runs as simulation: the market forward, the incumbent's product meeting from their side of the table, and the portal run — starting from the write-down everyone says can't happen and reasoning backward to its earliest common cause.

SIMULATED SCENARIO — FICTIONAL DEMONSTRATION. "The fund," its deal, and the incumbent and every finding below are invented to show how the method runs (FTC 16 CFR 465). This is an AI simulation of a fictional situation — not market research, not a real engagement, not client traction.

A seed fund (fictional) is deciding on a vertical-SaaS company selling scheduling-and-billing software into dental clinics, at a price that assumes a land-grab. One live question: does this survive the incumbent practice-management suite noticing?

THE DECISION The seed check, at a full price 1 Incumbent bundles a clone MODAL — TIMING 12–30 MO 2 Land-grab holds THE MEMO'S CASE — FRAGILE 3 Channel partner acquires TAIL — TERM-SHEET ITEM RANKED BRANCHES · UNCERTAINTY STATED IN WORDS · AI SIMULATION, LABELED
The memo appendix, as a picture: branches ranked by how the runs actually landed — the modal outcome first, the optimistic case marked fragile, the tail scenario priced as a term-sheet consideration instead of a footnote.
RankBranchWhat the runs showedStated uncertainty
1Incumbent bundles a clone, freeThe modal branch. The incumbent's simulated roadmap meeting reaches for the bundle reflexively — but the clone ships late and undercooked in most runs, and the startup survives if it has moved upmarket to multi-location groups by then. Stable on the response, divergent on the timing — 12 to 30 months across runs.
2Incumbent ignores; land-grab holdsThe memo's base case. Real, but rarer than the memo priced — it required the incumbent's (simulated) org to stay distracted by its own migration, which several runs didn't grant.The optimistic branch is the fragile one; the runs say the price assumes it.
3Channel partner acquires earlyThe branch nobody had discussed: the distribution partner the startup depends on is also its most motivated acquirer — capping the upside the valuation was paying for.Low weight across runs, high consequence; belongs in the memo as a term-sheet consideration, not a footnote.
The assumption every scenario shared

Backward from every good outcome: the founder's head of sales — the one person who has sold into dental groups before — is still there in month eighteen. Forward-looking diligence had a retention line item for the founder. The simulation priced the wrong person's departure.

What lands in your memo

A one-page appendix: branches ranked with the reasoning shown, the incumbent's most likely move and its timing spread, the load-bearing assumption to verify before wiring — and the sentence an LP most wants to see in an emerging manager's memo: here is what would have to be true, and here is how we'll know early if it isn't. Engagements are founding-pilot priced and scoped in one call; if the question is sensitive, it can run zero-knowledge — on public information only.

See it in practice

Free field guide

Field Notes on Deal Risk — an 8-page guide to stress-testing a decision across its branches: the five practices, a worked example, and the checklist. No gate, no sales call.

Get the PDF
Read this honestly The worked example above is fictional and labeled, because we don't publish client work — and we don't publish accuracy percentages, ours or anyone's, because no published calibration record substantiates one yet (here's what we test instead). What real engagements share with the fiction is the form: ranked branches, uncertainty stated in words, disagreement between runs reported instead of averaged away, and every output labeled the AI simulation it is.
Bring us a decision What we do Pricing & engagement