Kerbtally Seed Extension

AI startup pitch deck example with the inference cost shown

An investor looking at an AI company in 2027 has one question the pitch has to answer without being asked, which is what a model call costs and who pays for the humans behind it. Kerbtally is invented, and its eleven slides put inference on its own bar and count the review team inside gross margin.

Create a presentation with OneCraft11 slides, read in order

Every slide, in order

The whole deck as it renders, one slide after another. Read it the way the audience would.

KERBTALLY · SEED EXTENSION 2027

Bookkeeping For People Who Work In A Van

4,200 tradespeople paying 38 dollars a month at a 72 percent margin

Jo Tanaka and Dylan Muir

Co-founders, Kerbtally, Newcastle NSW

Raising

$4M

Slide 1 · cover · Name the customer, not the technology, and put the margin on the cover.

Why now

Reading a crumpled fuel receipt photographed on a dashboard used to need a human. It now costs about eleven cents, which is the whole reason a 38 dollar product can exist.

The unit cost fell

Reading and coding one receipt cost about 40 cents in 2024 and about 11 cents now. At 55 receipts a month that is the difference between a loss and 72 percent.

The work is repetitive

A sole trader posts the same twenty kinds of expense every month. The task is narrow enough to check automatically and boring enough that nobody wants it.

The rival is a person

A bookkeeper charges 180 to 320 dollars a month for a one van business. That is the price the product is compared against, not another app.

02

Slide 2 · intro · Why this can be built now, argued from the cost of a model call rather than from hype.

What Kerbtally does

Reads the receipt

Photographed on the dashboard, in the rain, half folded. Supplier, amount, tax and date are pulled out and coded to an account.

Matches the bank line

Every receipt is matched to the bank transaction it belongs to, so the shoebox and the bank feed stop being two separate jobs.

Prepares the quarter

A business activity statement worksheet with every figure traceable to a receipt or a bank line, ready for the accountant to lodge.

Escalates what it cannot read

About six percent of receipts go to a person on our team. The user sees the answer, not the queue, and it comes back the same day.

A bookkeeper signs off every quarter

A registered BAS agent reviews every account before the quarter closes. That review is priced into the 38 dollars and is the reason accountants recommend us rather than resist us.

03

Slide 3 · pillars · Four things the product does, with the human review step named rather than hidden.

One month, one van

A plumber with 55 receipts, 38 invoices and one bank account. Measured with 40 customers before and after.

On a Sunday night

With Kerbtally

01

Ninety minutes emptying the glovebox and the ute console onto the kitchen table

02

Seventy minutes typing receipts into a spreadsheet, with about nine of them unreadable

03

Fifty minutes matching the bank statement line by line to what was typed

04

Forty minutes chasing the two suppliers whose invoices never arrived

05

Eighty minutes at quarter end assembling figures the accountant will query anyway

01

Receipts photographed at the counter, which takes about four seconds each

02

Coding and bank matching happen without the user opening anything

03

Six receipts a month go to a human and come back the same day

04

Missing supplier invoices are flagged on the fifth, not at quarter end

05

Forty minutes total, almost all of it approving what was already coded

04

Slide 4 · comparison · A month of bookkeeping done both ways, hour by hour, on the same one van business.

Where Kerbtally is

Gross margin here is after inference and after the human review team, not before them. A lot of AI companies quote a margin that excludes the people who catch what the model misses. Ours includes both, which is why 72 percent is a number we are happy to be held to as volume grows.

4,200

Paying tradespeople

$38

Per month, one price

72%

Gross margin, all in

05

Slide 5 · metrics · The three headline numbers with the margin definition stated, since that is where AI decks cheat.

Thirty eight dollars, where it goes

Per paying customer per month, averaged over the last quarter. Dollars, not percentages.

Price
Inference
Human review
Gross margin
010203040

06

Slide 6 · metrics · Price down to margin per customer per month, with inference as its own bar.

What changed, and when

Five model milestones. Each one moved either the cost per receipt or the share that needs a person.

Mar 2025

First version. Generic model, 40 cents a receipt, 31 percent escalated to a human. Barely a product.

Sep 2025

Trade specific account codes. Escalation fell to 19 percent because the model stopped guessing at categories.

Apr 2026

Cheaper model tier for clean receipts, expensive tier only for the hard ones. Cost per receipt halved.

Sep 2026

Bank matching moved in house. One pass now does reading, coding and matching instead of three.

Jan 2027

Eleven cents a receipt, six percent escalated. This is the cost base the 72 percent margin rests on.

07

Slide 7 · timeline · The model milestones, so the cost curve on the last slide has a history behind it.

PRICING

One price, no tiers

Kerbtally

One price for a one van business

$38

per month

Unlimited receipts, no per document charge

Bank matching on up to three accounts

Quarterly worksheet for your accountant

Human review on anything the model cannot read

A registered agent signs off every quarter

Start free

08

Slide 8 · pricing · One price, one card, with the thing that is deliberately not charged for listed.

What we do with the data

Every question an investor asks about an AI company at this stage is really a question about the data. Whose is it, where does it go, what happens if a model provider changes its terms, and what is actually defensible once anybody can call the same model. Four answers, all of them checkable in the contract rather than in a policy page.

The defensible part

Not the model. The defensible asset is 2.9 million receipts that have been corrected by a human and mapped to a trade specific chart of accounts. That correction history is what takes escalation from 31 percent to 6, and it belongs to us rather than to whoever we call for inference this year.

Customer documents stay in the customer account

Never pooled, never shared

Inference runs in an Australian region

Named in the contract

Two model providers, switchable in a day

Tested monthly, not assumed

Corrections are ours and they are the moat

2.9 million labelled receipts

09

Slide 9 · content · Four things that are true about the data, because this is where the diligence questions land.

THE ASK

Four million, 24 months

$4M

Seed extension, to break even

Use
Amount
Share
What it buys
Model and data
$1.60M
40%
Escalation from 6 percent to 2, which is 3.00 a month per customer
Growth
$1.20M
30%
Trade association partnerships and the referral programme that works
Human review team
$0.70M
17%
Eight reviewers, because the queue has to stay same day at volume
Working capital
$0.50M
13%
Inference is paid monthly, customers pay monthly, timing is thin
Break even at about 11,000 paying customers on the current margin, which the plan reaches in month 21.

10

Slide 10 · investment · Four million in a table, sized to a break even month rather than to a valuation.

Eleven cents a receipt

Everything in this deck follows from that number. The cost history, the margin build and the escalation data are all in the data room.

11

Slide 11 · closing · Close on the one figure that decides the round, with nothing decorative around it.

The structure

What each slide is doing, so you can reuse the order even with different content.

Slide 1cover
Name the customer, not the technology, and put the margin on the cover.
Slide 2intro
Why this can be built now, argued from the cost of a model call rather than from hype.
Slide 3pillars
Four things the product does, with the human review step named rather than hidden.
Slide 4comparison
A month of bookkeeping done both ways, hour by hour, on the same one van business.
Slide 5metrics
The three headline numbers with the margin definition stated, since that is where AI decks cheat.
Slide 6metrics
Price down to margin per customer per month, with inference as its own bar.
Slide 7timeline
The model milestones, so the cost curve on the last slide has a history behind it.
Slide 8pricing
One price, one card, with the thing that is deliberately not charged for listed.
Slide 9content
Four things that are true about the data, because this is where the diligence questions land.
Slide 10investment
Four million in a table, sized to a break even month rather than to a valuation.
Slide 11closing
Close on the one figure that decides the round, with nothing decorative around it.

Slide by slide

Slide one names the customer rather than the technology. Slide two argues why now from the cost of reading one receipt. Slide three is four things the product does, with the escalation step named. Slide four compares a month of bookkeeping done both ways. Slide five is the three headline numbers with the margin definition written out. Slide six is the price to margin waterfall in dollars. Slide seven is five model milestones and what each one moved. Slide eight is the single price card. Slide nine answers the four data questions. Slide ten is the four million ask as a table with a break even month. Slide eleven closes on the eleven cent figure everything else follows from.

How to adapt this deck

A company selling to enterprises rather than sole traders swaps the single price card for a contract value slide and adds a security appendix, because the buyer is procurement rather than a person with a phone. A business whose inference runs on its own hardware replaces the waterfall with a capacity slide, since the cost question becomes utilisation instead of price per call. A deck raising a Series A rather than an extension moves the model milestone timeline to the back and puts cohort retention in its place, because by then the question has shifted from whether the margin works to whether the customers stay.

What this audience asks for

The Australian tax office publishes what a business activity statement has to contain and when it is due, and the Tax Practitioners Board publishes who is allowed to prepare one for a fee. Those two documents are why this deck has a registered agent reviewing every quarter and says so on the product slide, because a bookkeeping product that quietly does regulated work is a liability rather than a margin. An investor who has funded accounting software before checks that first, ahead of any question about the model.

What makes this deck work

Margin is defined before it is claimed

Slide five says gross margin here is after inference and after the human review team, and then says plainly that a lot of AI companies quote a number that excludes the people who catch what the model misses. Defining the number is what makes 72 percent worth reading.

The waterfall is in dollars, not percentages

Slide six runs 38 dollars down through 6.10 of inference and 4.50 of human review to 27.40 of margin. Percentages let an audience assume a different cost base. Four bars in dollars leave nothing to assume, which is the point of putting the chart in the deck at all.

The moat slide says what the moat is not

Slide nine states that the defensible asset is not the model but 2.9 million corrected receipts mapped to a trade specific chart of accounts, and that two providers are tested monthly so inference can switch in a day. Naming the thing that is replaceable is what makes the rest credible.

Questions people ask

What goes in an AI startup pitch deck?

Why the cost curve makes the product possible now, what it does including where a human is involved, the adoption numbers, unit economics with inference as its own line, the model history, pricing, the data position and the ask. This example uses eleven slides.

Should I show inference cost to investors?

Yes, as a separate line. Investors have learned to assume the worst when it is folded into cost of revenue. This deck shows 6.10 dollars of inference against a 38 dollar price and puts the number that drove it, eleven cents a receipt, on the closing slide.

How do I handle the human in the loop in a deck?

Name the percentage and cost it. This example says six percent of receipts go to a person, that the reviewers cost 4.50 dollars per customer per month, and that they are inside gross margin. Hiding a review team is the fastest way to lose a technical investor in diligence.

What is the moat in an AI application company?

Usually the corrected data and the workflow, not the model. This deck says 2.9 million receipts corrected by a human and mapped to a trade chart of accounts, which took escalation from 31 percent to 6. A deck claiming the model itself is the moat invites a very short conversation.

How many slides for an AI seed or seed extension?

Ten to twelve. This one is eleven. Architecture diagrams are the usual filler and they belong in a technical session. What earns space instead is the cost history, because it shows the margin is a trend rather than a snapshot.

Do I need a separate slide about data handling?

If your customers upload their own documents, yes. This deck uses one slide for four answers: documents stay in the customer tenant, inference runs in a named region, two providers are tested monthly, and the corrections belong to the company. All four come up in diligence anyway.

Build your own in about a minute

The button below opens the generator with this use case already described. Change the wording to match your own, generate, then edit anything you like.

Make one like this

Other presentation examples

Want the steps in the builder? Read Make a pitch presentation with AI, then Add charts, maps and diagrams to slides. For everything this generator can do, see the presentation maker.

Sources

Written and checked by the OneCraft team. Last checked .