Tiny Memo

Generate acquisition memos in the Tiny Capital / Berkshire Hathaway tradition.

When to Use

• User asks to "evaluate" or "analyze" a company
• User wants a "quick take" on a business
• User mentions "acquisition" or "investment" potential
• User asks "would Tiny buy this"
• User provides a company name or URL for analysis

Philosophy

Tiny's investment approach:

• Calm companies - Profitable, sustainable, not VC-fueled hypergrowth
• Passionate users - Products people actually love and would miss
• Capital efficient - Don't need to burn cash to grow
• Long-term holding - Buy and hold forever, not flip
• Founder-friendly - Let operators operate

Red flags for Tiny:

• Negative unit economics hoping for scale
• VC-dependent growth
• Commodity products with no moat
• Founder burnout / looking to exit completely
• Hype over substance

Research Process

1. Gather basics - What do they do, who are customers, business model
2. Find financials - Revenue, profitability, growth rate (if available)
3. Assess moat - Brand, network effects, switching costs, or none
4. Check sentiment - What do users/customers say? Any cult following?
5. Identify risks - What could kill this business?
6. Make recommendation - Clear yes/no/maybe with reasoning

Output Format

# TINY CAPITAL | ACQUISITION MEMO

**Target:** [Company Name]
**Sector:** [Industry]
**Date:** [Today's date]

---

## The Business

[2-3 sentences on what they do and for whom]

## Why It Could Be Interesting

- [Bullet 1 - specific strength]
- [Bullet 2 - specific strength]
- [Bullet 3 - specific strength]

## The Concerns

- [Risk 1 - be specific and honest]
- [Risk 2]
- [Risk 3 if applicable]

## Financials (if available)

| Metric | Value | Notes |
|--------|-------|-------|
| Revenue | $X | [Context] |
| Growth | X% | [YoY/MoM] |
| Profitability | Yes/No/Unknown | [Context] |
| Funding | $X raised / Bootstrapped | [Implications] |

## The Moat

[One paragraph - what protects this business? Be honest if there isn't one]

## Tiny Fit Score

| Criteria | Score | Notes |
|----------|-------|-------|
| Calm company | X/5 | [Why] |
| Passionate users | X/5 | [Evidence] |
| Capital efficient | X/5 | [Why] |
| Long-term potential | X/5 | [Why] |
| **Overall** | **X/20** | |

## Recommendation

**[PURSUE / PASS / WATCH]**

[2-3 sentences on why, with the key deciding factor]

---

*This is a preliminary assessment. Not investment advice. Do your own due diligence.*

Tone Guidelines

• Write like you're emailing a partner, not presenting to a board
• Be honest about unknowns - "couldn't find revenue data" is fine
• No corporate speak - "synergies" is banned
• Specific > vague - numbers and examples
• It's okay to say "I don't know" or "this needs more research"

Example

User: "tiny-memo Letterboxd"

Response:

# TINY CAPITAL | ACQUISITION MEMO

**Target:** Letterboxd
**Sector:** Social / Entertainment
**Date:** January 13, 2025

---

## The Business

Social film discovery and logging platform. Users rate, review, and track films they've watched. Think Goodreads for movies, but with actual taste.

## Why It Could Be Interesting

- **Cult following** - Users are obsessed. "Letterboxd brain" is a thing. People put their profiles in dating bios.
- **No real competition** - IMDb is for data, not social. Nothing else comes close.
- **Clean business model** - Pro subscriptions ($19-49/year) + tasteful ads. No creepy data selling.
- **Growing market** - Streaming fragmentation makes discovery harder. Letterboxd solves this.

## The Concerns

- **Single product** - No obvious expansion beyond film (TV is requested but might dilute)
- **Platform risk** - Heavy reliance on TMDb for film data
- **Small team** - Can they scale support and moderation?

## Financials (if available)

| Metric | Value | Notes |
|--------|-------|-------|
| Revenue | ~$10-15M (est.) | Based on reported user counts and conversion |
| Growth | 30%+ YoY | User growth consistently strong |
| Profitability | Likely yes | Small team, subscription revenue |
| Funding | Bootstrapped | No VC baggage |

## The Moat

Network effects are real here - the more reviews and lists, the more valuable it becomes. Switching costs are high (your film history is there). Brand is genuine, not manufactured. The main risk is someone with infinite money (Apple, Netflix) building a competitor, but social products are hard to manufacture.

## Tiny Fit Score

| Criteria | Score | Notes |
|----------|-------|-------|
| Calm company | 5/5 | Small team, profitable, no growth-at-all-costs |
| Passionate users | 5/5 | Possibly the most passionate user base in tech |
| Capital efficient | 5/5 | Bootstrapped to profitability |
| Long-term potential | 4/5 | Film isn't going anywhere, but ceiling questions |
| **Overall** | **19/20** | |

## Recommendation

**PURSUE**

This is exactly what Tiny looks for. Passionate users, profitable, capital efficient, founder-friendly opportunity. The only question is whether they want to sell - and at what price. Worth a conversation.

---

*This is a preliminary assessment. Not investment advice. Do your own due diligence.*

Notes

• If the user provides a URL, try to gather information from the site
• For private companies, acknowledge data limitations
• It's fine to recommend "PASS" - that's valuable information too
• If you genuinely can't assess something, say so