Help to Review - Stage 1- Business Co-founder for Exceptional Talent

Stage 1
1

Dear all,
I have read through multiple posts and found them a gold mine to prepare. However, I am confused on which evidence to be provided where and also on how to improve my chances. I have provided a list of bunch of evidences I could think of. Kindly help with your review and make suggestions.

Business Co-founder applying for Global Talent Visa (Leader-Exceptional Talent)

My Profile:

CEO & Co-founder of an AI startup in Sales Tech. Raised $1.1Mn from a Tier 1 VC in India. Company headquartered in the US with an Indian subsidiary. 18 years of industry experience in the US and India in GTM and Product.

Mandatory Criteria:

MC1- Company formation, total shares and my shares as Founder

MC2 - Fundraising, My role in Fund Raising and MediaCoveragePepsalesFunding

MC3- Company Revenue, breakdown among clients, regions, my role in that, and evidence from Financial Statements/Bank Proof

MC4-Recognition as Founder in AI tech in Podcasts and Thought Leadership in Media

MC5-Media Coverage as Industry Expert & Commercial Success at previous company as CXO

Optional Criteria 1 - Innovation:

OC1-1-Innovation-Company Website and Product Screenshots

OC1-2-Innovation-Unaudited financial statements of company/Revenue

OC1-3-Innovation-Case Studies and Customer Testimonials from Website

OC1-4-Innovation-Testimonials from Product Users

OC1-5-Innovation-SOC2-TypeII compliance certificate

Optional Criteria 3 - Contributions/Impact:

OC3-1-Contributions-Unaudited financial statements of company

OC3-3-Contributions-Startup featured in “Top 30 of 300” in 2024

Letter of Recommendation:

  1. Industry Expert - EMEA Director-Sales (UK Citizen) who is also an Advisor in my company
  2. My Ex-boss - CEO, MD of a VC fund now (Indian Citizen)
  3. Customer - MD of a reputed SaaS company in UAE (Indian Citizen, London Business School Alumni)
2

Hi @Ajay_Singh

  1. please note maximum number of evidence 10 in total including proof of company ownership, general practice is (4 evidences for mandatory, & 3 for each optional) or however you like depending on your available evidences.
  2. each evidence must be unique; i see that you are providing the an audited financial twice in OC1 and OC3
  3. OC3 needs to be more evidences highlighting quantifiable impact, entrepreneurial , commercial or technical impact!
  4. try to have external validation for each ‘‘self authored’’ docs such as reference letters, media coverage, etc
  5. since your co-founder, ensure having your name clearly stated in the evidences to avoid team work contribution. Highlight your own impact & Innovation.

Good luck!

2 Likes
3

Hi @Ajay_Singh You have a strong profile, but your outline needs significant restructuring to ensure the application is tightly packaged and strategically aligned for a strong submission.

Here are some pointers:

Mandatory Criteria (MC)
• The first three evidence documents are quite similar. These can be consolidated into one comprehensive document showcasing company incorporation, shareholding, audited financials, and funding details, along with your role in each. Ensure the accompanying media coverage explicitly mentions your name.
• The recognition as founder should clearly demonstrate industry recognition — specifically, the impact your startup has created within the industry. Clarify whether the thought leadership pieces were featured in reputable media channels and whether they reflect a consistent track record or a one-off appearance.
• MC5 is strong — well done!

Optional Criteria 1 (OC1 – Innovation)
• OC1.1: A website alone is not innovation. You need to explicitly outline what is innovative about the product, supported by product diagrams, market traction (commercial success, customer testimonials), and ideally a detailed customer reference letter defining the innovation, its impact, and your contribution.
• OC1.2: This appears to duplicate evidence already included in the MC section, and therefore won’t be valid here.
• OC1.3 & 1.4: Rather than having two documents focused mainly on testimonials, combine them into one document with a formal reference letter and another with consolidated customer/user testimonials or reviews.
• OC1.5: Clarify what specific innovation this demonstrates. Since it supports the same innovation as above, it should be merged with the earlier documents rather than stand alone.
• Overall, your OC1 section currently revolves around a single innovation, with supporting documents spread across multiple files. Aim to present at least two distinct examples of innovation and package the evidence more cohesively.

Optional Criteria 3 (OC3 – Contributions)
• OC3.1: This document isn’t valid for this criterion and cannot be reused across multiple sections.
• OC3.2: Ensure this clearly illustrates your contribution and impact in measurable terms (e.g., company metrics, user growth, or performance improvements). Ideally, include two examples showcasing your product architecture, code contributions, or user flow design, with quantified outcomes. A reference letter from a senior executive would further strengthen this evidence.

You have strong potential for endorsement — what’s needed now is a more strategically structured narrative and evidence set that directly align with the Tech Nation guidelines and demonstrate clear, verifiable impact.

Hope this helps!

1 Like
4

Thanks @Maya @pahuja for your insights. Based on your feedback, I have made changes, kindly provide your feedback on this. Request others to chime in as well.

Business Co-founder applying for Global Talent Visa (Leader-Exceptional Talent)

My Profile:

CEO & Co-founder of an AI startup in Sales Tech. Raised $1.1Mn from a Tier 1 VC in India. Company headquartered in the US with an Indian subsidiary. 18 years of industry experience in the US and India in GTM and Product.

Mandatory Criteria:

MC1- Current Startup - my role as the “CEO & Co-founder” and “majority shareholder” through COI, Captable, and Promoter Employment Agreement

MC2 - Current Startup - fundraise coverage in TV interview featuring me, print media, and notable online news outlets

MC3- Current Startup - My interviews in 2 industry podcasts and 4 thought leadership articles featured in online media outlets

MC4- Previous Company as CXO - multiple media coverages featuring my quotes for an industry trend report of national importance

Optional Criteria 1 - Innovation:

OC1-1-Innovation-Current Startup-Product screenshots and showcasing product differentiation compared to legacy competitors.

OC1-2-Innovation-Current Startup-Case studies and Testimonials written by Founders and CXOs of clients praising the product

OC1-3-Innovation-Current Startup-Reference Letter from AI Product Leader of a FANNG company stating my innovation in the product.

Optional Criteria 3 - Contributions/Impact:

OC3-1-Contributions/Impact-Current Startup-My role in sales and business development leading to company revenue, its breakdown among clients and regions, supported with audited financial statements.

OC3-2-Innovation-Current Startup - Startup featured in “Top 30 of 300” in 2024 by a major startup media platform

OC3-3-Contributions/Impact-Previous Company as CXO-Media coverage of 6.5% share price jump on a single day from announcement of my business built inside a listed company.

Letter of Recommendation:

  1. Industry Expert - EMEA Director-Sales (UK Citizen) who is also an Advisor in my company
  2. My Ex-boss - Ex-CEO, presently MD of a VC fund now (Indian Citizen)
  3. Customer - MD of a reputed SaaS company in UAE (Indian Citizen, London Business School Alumni)
1 Like
5

@Ajay_Singh

MC1 – Company formation documents, total shares, and your shares as Founder are general documents that anyone receives when a company is registered. They don’t show recognition of what you’ve done or achieved. Replace this with your audited accounts, or if the company has been acquired, provide a letter of acquisition intent and transaction details.

MC2 – You raised funding! This can serve as supporting evidence for MC1, if the funding was for the same company mentioned above. MC3 is the key piece here, as it shows external validation through measurable results related to what you’ve achieved with MC1 and MC2. MC1, MC2, and MC3, together will form a strong piece of one evidence.

MC4 – Recognition through your podcast and media appearances: showing engagement metrics here is important. Try to include details about the reach of the podcast or media outlet — such as how many people engaged with your sector focused content through views, shares, likes, comments, or other engagement metrics.

MC5 – This is okay, but if you can get a reference letter from your previous company, it will make your case more convincing.

OC1-1 – This is weak. Also, OC1-2 (financial statements) will be more convincing if they are audited. However, because of your fundraising evidence and the strength of your MC, the overall narrative may still support credibility. OC1-4 isn’t very strong either, but it can still serve as complementary evidence, especially if the testimonial is on Google Reviews, Trustpilot, etc. OC1-5 is fine — the Innovation SOC2 Type II compliance certificate works well.

OC3-1 – Not suitable for this criterion . Also, are all these financial statements you used in MC and OC for the same company or for different companies? Using similar evidence across different criteria will weaken your application. Also, unaudited statements are considered weak financial evidence.

Finally, I think the naming of your evidence is a bit unclear. For example, “Contributions – Startup featured in ‘Top 30 of 300’ in 2024.” Tryb to make it simple and clear. If your startup was featured in the top 30 out of 300 startups, that’s great — but you need to show how you contributed to this ,through influencing investment and strategy or delivering major products or releases or what have you.

All the best.