How to Pitch Something That Does Not Exist Yet

Pitching something that exists is a sales problem. Pitching something that does not exist is a cognitive one, and treating the second like the first is why so many good projects land badly.

When you pitch an unmade project you are asking the listener to build it in their head, in real time, from a verbal description, while also evaluating it, while also thinking about their own position if they say yes. That is a lot of simultaneous work, and it is being done by someone who is tired and has heard four pitches today.

What is actually happening while you talk

Three processes at once.

• Construction. They are assembling an imagined version of your project from your words and from the nearest thing they have seen before.
• Evaluation. They are judging that imagined version, not yours.
• Positioning. They are working out what backing this would mean for them, internally, if it goes wrong.

The second point is the one that costs most projects. They are evaluating the version they built, which is assembled from references to other work. If your project is genuinely new, the version in their head is by definition wrong, and they are about to make a decision about it.

The comparison trap

Because construction is hard, everyone reaches for comparisons. It is X meets Y. This works, in the sense that it makes construction fast. It also caps you, because you have just told the listener that the ceiling of your project is the intersection of two things that already exist.

Comparisons are useful for locating a project in a market and useless for conveying what is distinct about it. Which means they should be short, early, and immediately followed by the thing that neither comparison contains.

Reduce construction, do not add to it

Every piece of material you bring either reduces the listener's construction work or adds to it. A dense deck adds to it. A long document adds to it. A description of the world adds to it.

Things that reduce it: an image that establishes the world in one look, so it does not have to be described. A piece of sound. A page that is a scene rather than a summary. And a film, which removes construction entirely for as long as it plays.

Everything you hand over either does the imagining for them or asks them to do more of it.

Lead with the thing that cannot be summarised

Most pitches are structured logically: premise, world, characters, plot, market, comparables, ask. This is a good order for a document and a poor order for a room, because the distinctive thing usually arrives fifth, by which point the listener has already built and judged a generic version.

Whatever is genuinely singular about the project should arrive first, even if it makes the structure feel odd. If the tone is the point, open with the tone. If the world has one strange rule that changes everything, lead with the rule.

Answer the positioning question without being asked

The third process, what happens to me if this goes wrong, is rarely addressed and is often the real blocker. It is not solved by enthusiasm. It is solved by evidence of control.

Showing that you have thought about the hardest part of execution, and that you know exactly which part that is, does more for a listener's confidence than any amount of upside. People do not back projects they believe in. They back projects they believe will survive contact with reality, run by people who have already imagined the reality.

The order that works

• Open with the singular thing, in one sentence.
• Locate it in one comparison, quickly, then leave the comparison behind.
• Show, do not describe. One image, one sound, one scene, or the film.
• Name the hardest thing about making it, and how you have handled it. Do this before they ask.
• Make the ask specific, with a date.

None of this requires a film. A film simply removes the largest source of error, which is that they are evaluating the wrong version of your project.

When it is worth building one, and what it should contain, is on the proof of concept page.

A listener builds their own version of your project and then judges that version. Everything you hand over either reduces their construction work or adds to it, and naming the hardest part of execution before they ask does more than any amount of upside.