01 / 15
Draft v3
SHUR IQ — Investor Briefing — April 2026

Three Brands. Same Structural Failure.
Nobody Diagnosed It.

AHA spent $150M+ on campaigns with zero structural visibility. Fiserv scored 46/100 on brand power despite Fortune 500 status. FrameBright had 10 structural gaps invisible to their analytics stack. This is systemic.

Shur Creative Partners — Confidential
02 / 15
The Pattern

Every Brand We Diagnose Reveals
the Same Blind Spot

ClientWhat They ThoughtWhat We Found
American Heart Assoc. Strong brand, healthy engagement metrics Structural gaps in competitive positioning invisible to campaign analytics. 5/5 satisfaction on our diagnostic.
Fiserv (Fortune 500) Market leader by revenue and reach Scored 46/100 on structural brand power. Growth stalled because the system was broken, not the campaigns.
FrameBright Growth metrics looked healthy 10 structural gaps in the brand ecosystem. Their marketing team had no framework to detect them.

The root cause is identical

Campaign optimization without system-level diagnosis. Every one of these organizations was optimizing inside a brand system without knowing whether the system itself was sound. Prescribing medication without running a blood test.

03 / 15
The Gap

$500B in Annual Marketing Spend.
Zero Structural Diagnosis.

What exists today

  • Consultancies sell opinion decks. Human analysts, static reports, $500K+ per engagement. Knowledge walks out the door.
  • Analytics platforms measure surface signals: impressions, sentiment, share of voice. No structural depth.
  • SEO tools optimize demand capture. They measure what people search for, not why a brand's competitive system is failing.

What does not exist

  • A system that encodes brand competitive dynamics as structured, queryable, time-series intelligence
  • A diagnostic that measures structural position the way S&P measures creditworthiness
  • A dataset that compounds automatically, getting more valuable with every engagement and every passing week

The knowledge gap

Generic AI tools produce generic insights. LLMs know everything in general and nothing in particular about structural brand dynamics. Domain-specific intelligence requires purpose-built infrastructure.

04 / 15
The Category

Structural Brand Intelligence

SHUR IQ is a structural brand intelligence platform. We encode brand competitive dynamics as scored, queryable, time-series data inside a proprietary knowledge graph. Every engagement and every nightly automation cycle makes the system smarter.

Expert-Designed Ontology

Domain experts define the schema. 12 classes, 22 properties encoding competitive dynamics no public dataset covers.

Graph Intelligence

Queryable, scored, temporal. SPARQL queries across 76,000+ structured facts with week-over-week trajectories.

Compounding Dataset

Grows nightly via $3 auto-research. Cross-vertical transfer proven. The database is the moat.

No existing system combines these three layers for brand diagnostics. L2 (acquired by Gartner for $100M+) is the closest precedent, but L2 ran on human researchers. SHUR IQ runs on autonomous agents and a knowledge graph that compounds.

05 / 15
The Insight

Brand Structure Is Measurable,
Comparable, and Predictable

The SBPI (Structural Brand Power Index) scores brand competitive position across five dimensions on a 100-point scale, updated weekly with full attestation provenance.

Content Strength Narrative Ownership Distribution Power Community Strength Monetization Infrastructure

Structure is the leading indicator

Campaign metrics are lagging indicators. Structural position is a leading indicator. A brand with strong distribution power and weak content strength will behave predictably. SBPI encodes that structural logic as scored, queryable data.

06 / 15
The Product

How We Diagnose Brand Systems

Structural Diagnosis Gap Validation System Architecture Drift Monitoring
TierWhatTimelinePrice
Tier 1Outside-in structural diagnosis using public data3–5 weeks$40K–$75K
Tier 2Gap validation with internal data (CAC, LTV, retention)6–10 weeks$90K–$150K
Tier 3System-level design that repairs value flows8–12 weeks$125K–$250K
MonitoringQuarterly structural drift detection + persistent scoringOngoing$8K–$20K/mo

Dual output from every engagement

The client gets a paid deliverable (the Artifact). SHUR IQ gets structured knowledge deposited into a proprietary graph (the Asset). Revenue on the front end. Compounding IP on the back end. Every engagement makes the next one more valuable.

07 / 15
Proof

Seven Clients. 90 Days.
Every URL Is Live.

7+
Enterprise Engagements
69.9%
Prediction Accuracy
1,694
Companies Tracked
5/5
AHA Satisfaction
ClientSectorOutcomeReport
American Heart Assoc.Healthcare NonprofitBrand power score, viz suite, 5/5 satisfaction, asked for 3 more verticalsView ↗
FiservFintech (Fortune 500)Brand diagnosis (46/100 Distressed) led to $40K naming follow-onView ↗
FrameBrightChild Safety TechFull pipeline: 10 gaps, value prop canvas, active engagementView ↗
MicroCoEntertainmentWeekly intelligence for 22 companies, ongoing SBPI scoringView ↗
Deckers BrandsConsumer (CPG)Portfolio gap analysis (HOKA 75, UGG 64), C-suite showcaseView ↗
Long ZhuEducation/GamingLayered ontology, BMC overlay, value flow analysisView ↗
AFDVINonprofitDonation strategy, $100K–$500K revenue opportunity mappedView ↗

Built by a 4-person team. Every deliverable is live on the web. The pipeline produced this. Now we scale it.

08 / 15
The Engine

$3 Reports. $40,000 Value.
Every Night.

$3
Internal Report Cost
$40K
Client Report Price
13,333×
Cost Advantage
69.9%
Directional Accuracy
$3
AUTO-RESEARCH
13,333x cost gap
$40,000
CLIENT-GRADE

The autoresearch pipeline produces the same structural extraction as a $40K client engagement for $3 in compute. Locally hosted models. Nightly cycle. At scale: 50,000+ reports per year for $150K total compute. The same intelligence output that would cost a competitor millions in analyst time.

The force multiplier

$150K/year in compute produces the same ontological output as thousands of client engagements. The $3 auto-research loop decouples knowledge graph growth from the client sales cycle. The database grows every night whether we have clients that week or not.

09 / 15
The IP

The First Structured Dataset of
Brand Competitive Systems

1,694 companies tracked across 3 verticals with 76,000+ structured facts. No public dataset encodes structural brand dynamics. This schema has no equivalent in Wikidata, Schema.org, or any LLM's training data.

SBPI Company Signal ScoreRecord Prediction DimScore Attestation 12 CLASSES · 22 PROPERTIES · 76,147 STRUCTURED FACTS
Node Density (D)
Entities and relationships per analysis
76K
01M TARGET
Ontological Alpha (A)
Schema uniqueness vs. public datasets
UNIQUE
12 classes 22 properties Wikidata: 0 overlap Schema.org: 0 overlap
Extraction Efficiency (E)
Cost per structured fact
$3
$3 AUTO
$40K CLIENT
Decay Rate (λ)
Domain information obsolescence
Weekly
Fast markets
Monthly
Growth markets
Quarterly
Structural patterns

Four variables investors can track

Node Density grows with every engagement and every nightly cycle. Ontological Alpha deepens with every new vertical. Extraction Efficiency improves with every experiment. Decay Rate dictates refresh cadence. These are quantifiable moat metrics, not claims.

10 / 15
Proof of Transfer

Same Pipeline. Different Industry.
Zero Code Changes.

Micro-Drama Entertainment

22
Companies Scored Weekly

ReelShort, DramaBox, Netflix, Disney, Amazon, and 17 more. Full structural scoring with week-over-week deltas and published rankings.

AI Agent Infrastructure

1,672
Companies Classified

Y Combinator batch analysis. Same scoring methodology. Same nightly cycle. Same knowledge graph substrate. Applied in 2–3 days.

K-Pop
Third Vertical (W13-2026)

8 entities scored from web-sourced data (BTS 87.55 to NewJeans 32.25). Same structural dimensions, same pipeline, different industry. Tests established market behavior alongside emerging categories.

Marginal cost of a new vertical: 2–3 days of configuration

No new code. No new infrastructure. Company list and dimension weight calibration are the only per-vertical inputs. Each new vertical adds to the shared graph. The system gets smarter at analyzing any vertical because it has already learned the structural behavior of markets.

11 / 15
The Flywheel

Revenue Funds Data. Data Improves Accuracy.
Accuracy Wins Clients.

Revenue Data Accuracy Clients $3/NIGHT

The dual-output math

Client engagement =
  Revenue ($40K–$250K)
  + KG Deposit (structured facts)

Auto-research =
  $3 compute
  + KG Deposit (same extraction)

Every engagement generates revenue AND grows the knowledge graph. Auto-research fills gaps between engagements at $3 per run. Both channels deposit the same structured intelligence into the same graph.

How each cycle widens the gap

  • Revenue from client engagements funds the operation and produces KG deposits
  • Data accumulation improves cross-references and inference quality across verticals
  • Accuracy gains from optimization experiments (69.9% and climbing) increase report quality
  • Product quality commands higher prices and wins more clients, restarting the cycle
  • Auto-research runs the loop 24/7 at $3/cycle, independent of the sales pipeline

The time advantage

A competitor who starts later starts with an empty database in a domain where historical trajectories are the product. Our database grows every night at 6:13 AM whether we have clients that week or not. Time cannot be purchased.

12 / 15
Competitive Landscape

Three Layers That Do Not Exist
Together Anywhere Else

Ontology

Expert-designed schema encoding competitive dynamics. 12 classes, 22 properties. No public equivalent.

Graph Intelligence

Queryable, scored, temporal data. SPARQL queries across 76K+ structured facts. Week-over-week trajectories.

Compounding Dataset

Grows nightly via $3 auto-research. Cross-vertical transfer proven. Each week of history is permanent competitive advantage.

PlayerWhat They HaveWhat They Lack
McKinsey, BCG, Bain Human expertise, enterprise relationships No compounding data asset. Knowledge walks out the door. $500K+ per engagement.
Brandwatch, Sprout, Talkwalker Surface analytics at scale Sentiment and impressions. No structural diagnosis. No competitive architecture.
L2 (acquired by Gartner) Closest precedent. $100M+ scoring digital brand competence. Human researchers. No autonomous agents. No compounding knowledge graph. No nightly automation.
13 / 15
Business Model

Agency Revenue Funds
a Platform Data Asset

Year 1 Target: $1.5M–$2M

TierVolumeRevenue
Tier 16$360K
Tier 24$480K
Tier 33$540K
Monitoring3$540K
Target$1.92M

Conservative: $1.38M (5/3/2/2). Gross margin: 55–70%. Core team: 3–5 operators.

Budget source: Strategy and transformation budgets, not marketing budgets. SHUR IQ competes with McKinsey project scopes, not Brandwatch subscriptions.

The crossover point

Service revenue grows linearly with headcount and sales effort. The knowledge graph asset grows exponentially through the $3 auto-research flywheel.

By Year 2–3, the cumulative value of the knowledge graph begins to exceed cumulative service revenue. At that inflection, SHUR IQ transitions from a consulting firm with strong tools to an infrastructure asset with a funded acquisition channel.

Future tier: Intelligence-as-a-Service

Post-critical-mass: subscription access to the SHUR IQ Atlas. Clients query the validated knowledge graph for internal simulations. Bloomberg Terminal economics for structural brand intelligence.

14 / 15
The Vision

S&P Built $140B Scoring Creditworthiness.
We Score Structural Competitive Advantage.

76K
500K
10M+
1B+
TODAY
3 verticals
18 MONTHS
5 verticals
YEAR 3
25 verticals
AT SCALE
100+ verticals

The timeline advantage

Every week of scoring data is a week of competitive history that did not exist before we created it. A competitor who raises $50M next year still starts with zero weeks of structural brand trajectories. Our database is bigger and older. In structural intelligence, time is the moat.

15 / 15
The Ask

Capital Builds Infrastructure
That Compounds

40% Infra
30% R&D
20% Experts
10% GTM
CategoryWhat It Builds
Infrastructure (40%)Local LLMs, graph databases. The IP factory that runs 50K+ reports/year at $3 each.
R&D (30%)Auto-research pipeline, cross-vertical transfer, accuracy experiments targeting 85%+
Expert Calibration (20%)Domain experts validate the graph. The human layer that separates verified intelligence from LLM noise.
Sales & GTM (10%)Channel validation. The public ranking IS the marketing (L2 model).
Phase 1
Months 1–3: GTM launch, 3–5 clients, $150K–$300K revenue
Phase 2
Months 4–12: $1.5M+ ARR, 10 verticals, auto-research at scale
Phase 3
Year 2–3: 20+ verticals, IaaS tier, KG asset exceeds service revenue

Limore Shur — limore@weareshur.com

Nuri Djavit — ndjavit@weareshur.com

Shur Creative Partners — Confidential — April 2026

Appendix A
← Back to Deck
Team

Four People. Enterprise-Grade Output.
Built This in 90 Days.

Limore Shur
Owns the Artifact — Creative Strategy
25+ years in brand building, creative direction, and client relationships. Founded Shur Creative Partners. The relationship engine that turns intelligence into enterprise revenue.
Nuri Djavit
Owns the Schema — Brand Architecture
Strategic positioning, commercial model design, enterprise advisory. The domain expert whose judgment defines what the knowledge graph encodes. Designed the SBPI methodology and 3-tier commercial model.
Jonny Dubowsky
Owns the Infrastructure — AI & Knowledge Systems
Totem Protocol architect. Built the autoresearch pipeline, knowledge graph, multi-agent automation, and nightly optimization cycle. 10+ years in algorithmic systems and knowledge architectures.
Diana Horowitz
Owns the Operations — Delivery & Quality
Client coordination, project management, delivery quality gates, internal systems. The operational backbone that turns a 4-person team into enterprise-grade output.

AI is the fifth team member

This entire portfolio — 7+ engagements, 15+ deployed sites, 76K structured facts, nightly automation, weekly publications — was produced by four people. Headcount scales linearly. The knowledge graph scales exponentially.

← Back to Deck
Appendix B
← Back to Deck
Use of Funds Detail

Line-Item Breakdown

CategoryAllocationLine Items
Infrastructure 40% High-VRAM local servers (H100s or Mac Studio clusters) for 24,000+ auto-research reports/year. Graph database infrastructure (SPARQL/RDF at billion-node scale). Local LLM hosting (Llama-3-70B quantized). Data pipeline for Common Crawl, Semantic Scholar, industry feeds.
R&D / Agentic Tuning 30% Karpathy auto-research loop engineering (Seed, Extract, Cross-Reference, Stack Rank, Finalize). TPE parameter optimization (12 parameters, 30 trials). Cross-vertical transfer R&D. 5 queued experiments. Ontological Referee agent for quality gating.
Expert Calibration 20% Domain expert RLHF (humans validate high-value nodes from auto-research). Ontology validation reviews per vertical. Vertical-specific industry specialists (K-Pop, biotech, fintech). Scoring methodology review for institutional-grade claims.
Sales & GTM 10% Channel validation for $40K–$250K engagements. Stack ranking publication (inbound driver). Prestige positioning and executive network activation. Beta diagnostic sessions for case studies.

Hardware scaling model

StageCostCapacity
Machine 1$25K5 verticals, 500K triples, 3 monitoring clients
Machines 2–3$50K25 verticals, 10M triples, 15 monitoring clients
GPU Cluster$100K50 verticals, 100M triples, real-time prediction
Billion-Node$250K–$500K100+ verticals, 1B+ triples, S&P-scale

Capital split

70% Machine CapEx / 30% Human CapEx

Capital builds the IP factory, not the consulting team. Machines extract intelligence. Humans bless it. Every dollar invested accelerates the flywheel by lowering the marginal cost of intelligence toward zero.

Detailed model: Use-of-Funds Spreadsheet

← Back to Deck