Meeting Prep — Peptide Portal Discovery Call

The Stakes

Target is a former operator (CEO, Formula → now Salter) who happens to be running a $75B PE firm and putting together his next fund. He's the rare combination of peptide expertise and peptide capital. Louie says he's the real deal.

Maximum theoretical outcome: thesis agreement → advisory yes → access to his network → he's high on the list when the next fund deploys. We are explicitly not asking for money on this call. Capital follows trust, trust follows demonstrated execution, and right now we're at week one of demonstrating execution.

Minimum acceptable outcome: unfiltered expert feedback on which wedge has the most leverage, plus 2–3 warm intros from his network.

Format

40 minutes total. Structure agreed:

0–2 min · Ed intros the room. Names Alton's product/AI background, Stan's engineering, his own sales/ops lane. Hands to Alton.
2–3 min · Alton's 60-second pitch. "We're building the front door to the peptide market. Hims, but neutral. Subscription on top, commission in the middle, network of medspas and TRT clinics underneath, private label coming next. Supplier signed, playbook ready, path to $600M revenue and a$ 2–4B exit."
3–5 min · Quick visual anchor. Show the portal sketch for 60 seconds so he has something concrete in his head while we talk.
5–28 min · Discovery. Ed orchestrates. All three ask. This is 60% of the call.
28–36 min · Deeper walkthrough. Alton drives the portal demo, Stan drives the brand site. Pass between you naturally.
36–40 min · The close. Ed asks for advisory + network. Specifically: "What would advising us look like for you?" and "Who else in your network would you want us talking to?"

Roles

Ed is the conductor. He frames the call, controls pacing, calls on Alton and Stan, and owns the close. If the target asks a question that should go to a domain owner, Ed routes it.

Alton owns the marketplace and supply thesis. When the conversation drifts to "how does this actually work on the supplier side" — that's Alton's ball.

Stan owns the brand and consumer thesis. He demos the brand site at the moment Ed signals — likely after the target has revealed his own DTC/brand priors. Stan: have the brand site open in a tab before the call.

The Wave Principles (Ken's Process)

Open-ended only. No yes/no questions, ever. Replace "Do you think X?" with "What's your read on X?"
Listen 80, talk 20. If we're talking more than him, we're losing.
Layer. Start broad, then drill on the words he uses. If he says "messy," the next question is "what makes it messy?" Not what we'd planned to ask next.
Everyone talks. No passengers. Each of us asks at least 2 questions during discovery. Silent attendees signal that we don't trust each other.
Don't fill silence. When he pauses, he's thinking. Wait.
Mirror his language. Use his framing back to him.
Build on his answers, not your script. The script is a safety net, not the path.

Questions — Alton (Marketplace / Supply Thesis)

These probe the marketplace and supplier consolidation hypothesis. Sequence broad → narrow.

When you were running Formula, what was the most painful part of the supply side that you couldn't fix from inside a single company?
Everyone's reading the vendor mortality story as an RUO problem. What's your read on whether the 503A pharmacies are next in the firing line, or whether they're the durable layer?
If you were going to consolidate compounding pharmacies into one demand rail, what would the first move be — exclusive supply, equity stake, JV, something else?
Walk me through the worst version of a peptide marketplace you can imagine. What's the failure mode that kills it?
Practices today buy from four to seven vendors. In your experience, what do they actually want — fewer vendors, better pricing, better data, or something nobody's named yet?
How do you think about the 503A → 503B transition for a buyer-side platform? Is that a moat we're racing to build, or a tax we'll pay forever?
If you imagine the winner in this space five years from now, what does their supplier relationship look like — built, bought, or licensed?

Questions — Stan (DTC / Brand Thesis)

These probe the consumer-direct hypothesis Stan has been pushing. He should ask these after the target has revealed his own brand priors — don't lead with #1 if Ed's earlier questions haven't surfaced consumer-side context yet.

You ran a peptide company. Where did your customers actually come from — paid, organic, referral, partnership? What surprised you?
"Trust" is the word everyone in the category uses right now. In your experience, what does trust actually mean to a peptide buyer — credentials, science depth, transparency on sourcing, third-party validation, brand voice?
When you compare a Hims-style brand play to the science-led, mission-driven brands, which model do you think will win in peptides specifically — and what's the fork in the road that decides it?
Where's the FDA/FTC line you'd never cross in marketing peptides direct to consumer, even if your lawyer said you could?
If a founder wanted to build the science-led category leader from scratch today, what's the one thing you'd tell them to spend money on first?
The peptide buyer is weirdly heterogeneous — biohackers, aging women, athletes, hormonal-decline men. Did you find one persona was disproportionately profitable?
What's the founder mistake you saw most often in peptide DTC plays that didn't make it?

Questions — Ed (Orchestrator / Big Picture / Close)

These are the load-bearing questions of the call. They open the discovery, set up the others' questions, and close into the ask.

You've sat at every seat in this game — operator, investor, supplier. Where do you see the biggest wedge in the peptide space right now that nobody is attacking properly?
What are you currently building or backing inside this category? What pulled you toward those specific bets?
If you put on your operator hat for a second — what would you do differently if you were starting Formula today, knowing what you know now?
The gap between RUO collapsing and pharmacy DTC scaling has created a real vacuum. Who do you think is best positioned to fill it — incumbents like Hims, the 503A pharmacies themselves, or new entrants?
What kind of founding teams get you excited to back? What signals tell you a team is going to make it through the messy middle?
Outside of capital, what do early-stage peptide companies typically need most — distribution, regulatory cover, supplier access, talent, or something else?
(The close.) If you were the right person to advise a team in this space, what would that engagement look like for you — and who else in your network would you want us talking to?

Tactical Reminders

Don't pitch during discovery. If he asks a probing question, answer it crisply and bounce it back: "That's our working answer — what's your reaction to it?"

Drop social proof naturally, not as a flex. If supplier conversations come up: "We're working with the CEO of Vesalius on supply terms." If product/clinical comes up: "We've been talking to the co-founder of One Medical." Once each, in passing, never twice.

If he hates the marketplace idea, do not defend. Say "tell me more about that" and listen. Defensiveness reads as fragility. Curiosity reads as confidence.

If he asks "what's the ask?" early — Ed handles it. Answer: "Honestly, the ask today is your unfiltered read on the space. We'll have a more specific ask at the end if it makes sense."

The 60-second pitch is locked. Don't improvise it. "Front door to the peptide market. Hims, but neutral. Subscription, commission, practice network, private label. Supplier signed. $600M revenue path,$ 2–4B exit."

Demo discipline. Alton drives portal first, Stan drives brand second. Whoever isn't driving stays muted and doesn't narrate over the driver. Hand-offs are clean: "Stan, want to show what you've been building on the consumer side?"

The close belongs to Ed. Two questions, in this order: "What would advising us look like for you?" then "Who else in your network do you think we should be talking to?" That's the whole ask. Nothing else.

After the Call

Within 24 hours: Ed sends a thank-you note that references one specific thing he said (signals listening), commits to one follow-up action, and proposes a 30-day check-in. Don't attach the deck. Do offer to send the investment memo if he asked for it.

Within 30 days: Fly to Dallas. Show him traction — first revenue, signed Vesalius contract, onboarded clinics. The story is we said we'd do it, and a month later it's done. That's how the credibility flywheel starts spinning.