Misfits AI · Pre-seed · Built from the ground up
Seven steps, top to bottom. Each one feeds the next: it starts with the money set aside for finding people and ends with the number of months the round buys. Drag any handle and every step below it moves.
This page takes nothing from the Use of Funds page. The only thing the two have in common is the size of the round — everything else is worked out here from the ground up, which is the point of having both.
€55,000 of it is held back as a reserve and never spent, which leaves €945,000 to actually spend. Every step below is measured against that figure, not against the whole round.
The largest single line in the round. It pays creators and paid placement — the people and channels that put the app in front of somebody who has never heard of it. At €20,000 a month across the twenty months the round is planned for, that comes to €400,000. That is exactly what the Ask slide sets aside for it.
Not a click and not a download. This counts somebody who installs the app, sets up a profile and generates a look. (The industry calls this CAC, short for customer acquisition cost.)
This is the least proven number on the page. None of that money has been spent yet, so the figure is an estimate rather than a measurement, and settling it is one of the things the round is for. It is also why the Use of Funds page deliberately carries no figure like it: that page sets the budget and lets you set the number of people by hand, so the two never lean on the same guess.
The budget divided by the cost of one person, and nothing else. Keep it up and the number of people using the app climbs month after month — how far it climbs depends on how long the money lasts, which is step 7, so that running total is stated there rather than here.
About 2.5 a month each. That is an average across everybody who has joined, not a limit — most people who install an app do not open it every week, and the quiet majority pulls the figure well below what a keen user asks for.
An assumption, not a figure taken from the brief. The brief sets monthly allowances for the subscription ladder that is built, priced and held in reserve — five a month free, then twenty-five, sixty and a hundred and thirty — but it sets no single figure averaged across everybody. 2.5 is the value that squares with the money the Ask slide sets aside for making the looks, and the handle is here so you can test others.
At €0.051 a look. That rate is the brief's $0.054 — $0.039 to draw the picture, $0.014 to work out what the outfit should be, $0.001 to store and serve it — converted at the €1 ≈ $1.06 the brief uses.
This is the cost of making one more look and nothing else. The servers and monitoring that the Use of Funds page carries as a line of its own are deliberately absent here, because that cost does not move with the number of looks and has no place in a figure built up one look at a time. It is one of the real differences between the two routes, and part of why they land near each other rather than exactly on top of each other.
That last line is an average, and so is the total. In the first month there is almost nobody using the app, the looks cost €425, and the month comes to €43,123. In the final month the looks cost €8,550 and the month comes to €51,248. The figure above is what it averages out to across the whole period, which is the number the round has to cover.
€945,000 to spend, at €46,973 a month. By the time it runs down, 67,060 people have joined and they are asking for 167,649 looks a month between them. What those months have to buy is one thing: a sizing engine that measurably works, running on people who are actually using the app.
The €55,000 reserve is held back and never spent, so this is the number of months until the reserve is reached — not months to an empty account.
Where the chain closes
Steps 6 and 7 lean on each other. What the looks cost depends on how many months there are for people to accumulate, and how many months there are depends on what the looks cost. Rather than guessing one and then the other, the page solves both from a single equation at once, so the two can never disagree on screen. Every step above those two runs one way only, top to bottom.
At the settings this page opens with
| Where the money goes | This page | The plan in the brief | Difference |
|---|
How much a person can generate is earned, not unlimited. Buying something, and keeping it, raises that person's monthly allowance. So the cost of making the looks is a dial the company sets rather than demand it has to absorb.
No income is subtracted anywhere on this page. Not commission on anything a person buys, and not the subscription, which is built and priced and held in reserve. Everything above is money going out with nothing coming in, which makes this the cautious version rather than the flattering one.
Why the looks-per-person figure is lower here than on the other pages. This page counts looks across everyone who has ever joined, including the large quiet share who signed up and rarely came back. The other pages count against a smaller base of people who are actively using the app. Same activity, different denominator.
Salaries are pay before tax plus Swedish employer fees at 31.42%. Running the company is €1,500 a month, which is the brief's €30,000 spread across twenty months. Nobody is assumed to stop using the app, so the running total counts everyone who ever signed up, including anyone who has since drifted away.