What the deck did well:

Smart use of slide categories to show the product. They thought clearly about how they would use their slides to convey their narrative. They showed the product throughout the deck. What’s good about this approach is that it’s easy to see how the product directly affects their solution. That said, ultimately, they showed their product a little too much — the screenshots start to lose their luster.
Easily digestible. They had a clear idea of the narrative the deck was meant to tell, and they did so effectively. The structure made sense, and there was a good amount of words per slide.

What the deck would need to improve to secure funding in 2020:

More slide categories. This deck was also one that didn’t include a “Why Now?” slide or a team slide. In 2020, this deck would need to include these slides. This would also likely solve the problem of having the product on too many slides.
Hone in on important major points. Though the deck was easy to understand and there was a clear narrative, some of the important points still got lost within that narrative. For example, market share and competition slides should be very easy to delineate (perhaps using visuals). This did not happen in Foursquare’s deck.
Remove or reorganize superfluous slides. This deck had a slide at the end labeled “Trivia.” While we can’t say for sure that you shouldn’t add “fun” or miscellaneous slides to your deck, this slide actually wasn’t trivia — it contained what would now be considered essential information about the founding team, the product, and the market. If including slides like this, they need to be intentional and less of an afterthought.

Source: Docsend