Every pitch deck claims audience understanding; very few can show their work. Map a prospect’s audience landscape in days using coded data from a 102M-domain database — not borrowed assumptions. The result is a pitch built on evidence the incumbent probably hasn’t shown.
Prospects hear the same audience generalities from every agency on the shortlist. What they rarely hear is their own audience landscape, mapped in a taxonomy they can verify.
Each step fits inside a normal pitch window and produces an artifact that goes straight into the deck.
Turn “active urban 25–34s considering premium running shoes” into checkable terms: age_bracket: 25_34, urbanicity: urban, INT.healthy_living.fitness_and_exercise, PI.clothing_accessories.footwear. The published taxonomy is the shared reference.
Run the prospect’s domains and three or four competitors’ through the real-time API or the database. You now know which audience each brand’s content attracts — and where the prospect’s profile diverges from its stated buyer.
Filter the 102M-domain database for domains carrying the buyer’s segment codes. The output is the addressable open-web landscape — publishers, niches and long-tail communities ranked by attribute fit and confidence.
Audience-gap chart, competitor benchmark table, curated inventory shortlist, and a persona view from 1,667 deterministic personas. Everything cites codes and labels, so the deck survives due diligence.
Three artifacts from the same data pull, all defensible in the room and in procurement afterwards.
The prospect’s attracted audience versus its stated target, attribute by attribute — the slide that shows you understand their problem.
Side-by-side audience profiles on identical coded fields — no methodology argument, one instrument for everyone.
A curated domain landscape reaching the buyer segment, including cookieless-heavy environments — ready to become the plan if you win.
Buyer definition from Session 1: 25_34, urban, fitness interests, footwear and athletics-equipment intent. Three findings shown as the deck would present them.
| Attribute | Prospect's own site | Lead competitor's site | Running-content publisher (opportunity) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interests | INT.style_fashion.street_style Street StyleINT.style_fashion.fashion_trends Fashion Trends |
INT.healthy_living.fitness_and_exercise Fitness & ExerciseINT.sports.track_and_field Track & Field |
INT.healthy_living.fitness_and_exercise Fitness & ExerciseINT.healthy_living.nutrition Nutrition |
| Purchase intent | PI.clothing_accessories.footwear Footwear |
PI.clothing_accessories.footwear FootwearPI.sporting_goods.athletics_equipment Athletics Equipment |
PI.sporting_goods.athletics_equipment Athletics EquipmentPI.apps.health_and_fitness_apps Health & Fitness Apps |
| Age bracket | 18_24 |
25_34 |
25_34 / 35_44 |
| Life stage | young_single Young single |
young_professional Young professional |
young_professional Young professional |
| Confidence | high |
high |
high |
| What it means for the pitch | Fashion audience, not the performance-runner buyer — the gap slide | Competitor owns the performance audience — the urgency slide | Exactly the buyer, under-contested — the opportunity slide |
One research pass produced the diagnosis (audience gap), the stakes (competitor position) and the plan (opportunity inventory). Each cell traces to a coded record the prospect can audit.
| Criterion | Syndicated panels | Social listening | Domain-level audience data |
|---|---|---|---|
| Covers specific competitors | Only large brands | Yes | Yes — any domain, 102M covered |
| Maps to actionable inventory | Indirectly | No | Directly — output is a domain list |
| Auditable by the prospect | Panel methodology on request | Rarely | Yes — fixed public taxonomy, confidence bands |
| Fits a pitch window | Depends on subscription | Fast | Fast — instant download or API |
| Captures brand sentiment | Partially | Yes | No — pair with listening tools |
The sources stack: listening tells you what people say about the brand; this data tells you where the buyers are — as an inventory list the media team can act on immediately.
The benchmark methodology from Session 2, in full depth.
Score how well any environment fits a brand — fit rather than gaps.
The same profiling applied to pricing domains instead of winning accounts.
Pitching a retail prospect? The offsite workflow your deck should propose.
Extend the pitch POV beyond the browser to screens and venues.
The industry view: audience data across planning, pitching and reporting.
Yes — that constraint shaped the product. The demo dashboard profiles domains interactively with no setup. The Top 1M database is an instant card purchase with immediate download, and the API needs one call per URL. The four-session workflow is typically a few working days.
The data describes what public web content attracts as an audience — the same judgement any planner forms by reading the site, made systematic. There is no PII, no user tracking and no access to private data. Agencies routinely present this research in the pitch itself because the method withstands scrutiny.
Most teams start with API credits (e.g. Pro at $99/month for 10,000 credits) and add a database tier for landscape pulls: Top 100k at $490 one-time, Top 1M at $1,990, vertical or country slices at $190–$490. Quarterly refreshes keep pursuits current. Details on pricing.
That’s the quiet advantage: the inventory landscape becomes the first media plan, the competitor benchmark becomes the reporting baseline, and the buyer’s coded definition carries into persona-based planning unchanged — because everything was expressed in versioned vocabulary terms from day one.
Profile your next prospect in the demo today, or license the database and make landscape mapping a standard step in every pursuit.