OVER/UNDER+
The Operating Model · Investor Briefing

This page contains confidential investor materials. Enter the access code to continue.

People · Partners · Platforms

The Operating Model.

How O/U+ turns invested capital into acquisition instead of overhead — a tiny human core, an agentic technology stack that does the work of a department, and Partners who carry the licensing, inventory, and audience. Senior operating horsepower, without senior-hire burn.

01 · Executive Summary

The one-page version.

O/U+ is not a software company and isn't capitalized like one. The moat is the proven venue model, the fan relationship, and the owned first-party data — not code. So we buy or rent the technology, partner for the heavy lifting, and point an agentic stack at the work — invested capital funds the two things that compound, creative and acquisition, rather than payroll and infrastructure.

The operating rule: humans set strategy, approve, and close. Agents research, draft, enrich, personalize, and plumb. Partners do everything that would otherwise be a build or a balance-sheet risk.
2
Full-time principals — everything else is agents, platforms & partners
~$2–3K
Monthly software floor replacing an ops, ad-ops & marketing team
1
Technology owner to hire — the one role that de-risks the raise
7
Partner pillars doing work we never staff or license ourselves
01 · People
Everyone O/U+ engages directly
Our own roster — principals, advisors, and the technology owner we're adding. They set strategy, approve, and close. Nobody else is on this list.
02 · Partners
People at other companies doing work for us
The build partner, the exchange, the books, the venues, the creators. They carry the licensing, the inventory, and the audience we never capitalize.
03 · Platforms
The internal stack we execute on
Software O/U+ licenses and runs itself. Ad platforms are our ad-ops team, agentic tools our back office, one data backbone our P&L.
02 · The Critical Path

Four things that must be true.

Decide first
Prize structure
Free-to-play (non-cash) vs. sweepstakes decides our entire ad access. Locked with gaming counsel before a dollar of media.
Secure early
Channel access
Certification/permission on the ad platforms — and a community channel where we're actually allowed to promote.
Validate first
Postback proof
One end-to-end test conversion confirmed before acquisition spend. It is how revenue is recognized.
Hire
Technology owner
One person owns the stack, integrations, data & attribution. Retires the biggest structural risk in the plan.
03 · The Efficient Model

Build vs. buy vs. partner — across the whole company.

We build essentially one thing: the fan relationship and the owned data. Everything else is rented, partnered, or handed to agents.

FunctionDecisionHow we do it
Fan relationship + first-party dataBuild & OwnThe only real moat. Owned CRM/warehouse and owned agent logic — never let a partner hold this.
The AI agent (VBA)PartnerA specialist build partner delivers it; O/U+ owns the prompts, workflows, credentials & data contractually.
Licensing & compliance railsPartnerAn exchange partner's affiliate licenses + the CPA model keep us in the light tier.
National reach / audiencePartnerPrediction markets as the 50-state front door; venues, teams & creators supply warm reach we didn't buy.
Ad-ops & media buyingPlatformPlatform AI runs targeting, bidding & optimization. No ad-ops hire.
Creative, ops & lifecyclePlatform + AgentAI tools generate creative at volume; agentic ops do the repetitive work under human approval gates.
The technology functionHire (one owner)Fractional now → full-time at launch. Owns the stack, integrations, data & attribution.
The investment case, stated plainly

The entire human layer — two founders at $8K/month combined, a fractional technology owner at ~$5K, and $7K reserved for additional support — runs $20K/month against the $45–60K/month department it replaces. The difference becomes acquisition budget: the same raise buys materially more customers here than in a conventionally-staffed competitor.

04 · People

A deliberately flat, senior roster.

Founder · Operations
Ed Berry
30+ years in ad sales & sales management; built and ran the Over/Under sports-bar concept and the O/U+ model profitably for three years. The proof, the face, and the relationship engine.
Growth · Acquisition
Josh Champion
From Betting Hero — the category incumbent that sold for $37.5M — bringing the exact in-person bettor-onboarding playbook. Deepest around the acquisition engine, the agentic stack, and the data.
Mark Allen
CRM / ROI / ROAS
30+ yrs direct marketing & CRM — lead capture and automated remarketing for the VBA.
Dave Kirk
Retail Partnership Development
30+ yrs sales (Time Inc.), close ties to Caesars — deep venue, team & affiliate BD.
Erin Petty
AI Compliance
18 yrs PM & AI governance (Meta, WarnerMedia) — the bridge to responsible, compliant AI.
Matt Perrault
Sports-Betting "Muse"
Podcast host and authentic voice of the VBA; anchor of the creator channel.
Technology Owner
Open · At MVP
Early/mid-career, AI-forward builder (~$5K/mo fractional). Holds the partners accountable; owns the truth.
Additional Support
Flexible senior capacity · TBH
$7K/mo reserved — creative, BD, or ops — deployed wherever the launch shows strain.
How the AI workforce replaces headcount

Agents do: research & enrichment, drafting at volume, runtime personalization, and plumbing between systems. Humans keep: strategy & judgment, approval gates on anything touching money or contracts, closing, and taste. Everything else is not a person.

05 · Partners

Seven pillars — and the four leverage moves.

In hand
Exchange · Creators · Venues
WagerWire's marketplace + 35-state licensing; the anchor creator network; teams, venues & bar distribution.
In talks
Payments & crypto rails
Friction-light deposits, faster payouts, a second commission stream.
Targets
Prediction · Data · Compliance
Event-contract venues, official sports-data providers, and geo/KYC/responsible-gaming infrastructure.
The eighth partner — the one on the critical path

A specialist AI build partner delivers the Virtual Betting Agent — phased deliberately, QR/website first, native app later, so launch never waits on an app-store cycle. Three things hold it: contractual ownership (prompts, workflows, credentials and data assign to O/U+, not the builder), open connectivity (the agent layer stays swappable), and a counterparty who can grade it — the technology owner, on our payroll, from Day 1.

Partner risk we own — stated, not waved away

Outsourcing the machinery is efficient but creates dependency. Prediction-market legal status is actively contested, and CPA revenue depends on sportsbook postbacks firing correctly. Partners carry the risk; we carry the responsibility for verifying them — which is precisely what the technology hire is funded to do.

06 · Platforms

The stack that replaces a department.

In 2026 the ad platforms have absorbed targeting, bidding, and optimization — so money and attention go to creative volume, a clean data backbone, and an agent layer that runs the ops. Nothing needs an engineering department; a few pieces need one technical owner.

The product front door
The VBA stands up first as a QR-launched web experience (scan → chat → onboard, zero download friction at the bar), then as a native app once the base justifies it. O/U+ owns the guts contractually.
Acquisition & community
Paid-heavy on every platform that permits betting promotion, paired with community-native distribution where high-intent bettors already gather. The free-to-play front door is what keeps us advertisable.
Lifecycle & CRM
Email-primary + web push now, native push at app launch, voice via the VBA — SMS is modeled at zero until a gambling-tolerant carrier relationship exists. Consumer profiles live in the owned warehouse, never a partner's.
The data backbone — the flywheel
Postback fires → warehouse matches → a live "funded bettor" segment builds itself → activation syncs to the ad platforms → CAC falls. Each turn makes the next customer cheaper and the owned dataset more valuable.
The whole stack, one number

Acquisition, lifecycle, agentic ops, data backbone, compliance, and B2B GTM land the software floor around $1.8–2.8K/month — the entire "operating department," rented not hired, and fully swappable.

Constraint 1
Prize structure
The Challenge runs free-to-play with non-cash prizes, each promotion's aggregate value held under $5K — broadly advertisable, no gambling certification. Any change routes through gaming counsel first.
Constraint 2
Channel access
Every platform that lets us promote requires approval — the free-to-play front door is what unlocks them. Community-native channels are the lighter path.
Constraint 3
Postback proof
One validated end-to-end test conversion before a dollar of acquisition spend — a miswired postback is the most common way CPA affiliates quietly lose money.
07 · The One Hire

Not a CTO. Not a team. One technology owner.

What they own
The agentic stack, every integration, the data & identity model, and attribution — the single source of truth, reporting to us, independent of any partner.
When & what it costs
Now: fractional, 1–2 days/week at a ~$5K/mo target — partner audit, lock IP/data, stand up attribution. At the launch raise: convert to full-time. Not a strategy-only CTO; not co-founder equity for a stack we're buying.
The risk it retires
Ends the "orphaned stack" — partners with no in-house counterparty to grade their work. A named technical owner plus a multi-supplier shortlist materially de-risks the raise.
08 · The 90-Day Plan

What the first 90 days of capital buys.

First 30 days · De-risk & decide
Lock the prize structure with gaming counsel · engage the fractional tech owner · secure channel access · stand up the data backbone core and validate one test conversion.
Days 30–60 · Wire the machine
Turn on the agentic ops layer · stand up acquisition (AI campaigns, creative, landing, lifecycle) · wire attribution · contract the named stack and open the B2B venue pipeline.
Days 60–90 · Prove & compound
Run the Chicago paid pilot — validate cost-per-onboard & free-to-funded conversion · close the flywheel with first lookalike seeds · advance Second-Half partners · convert the tech owner to full-time at the launch raise.
09 · The Financial Arc

Cost, revenue, breakeven.

M6
First cash-flow-positive month — Super Bowl LXI
M~17
Cumulative breakeven, fully loaded — second season's playoffs
$9.3M
Year-3 model contribution on $31M revenue
30%
Net margin held across every phase
PhaseRegistrationsActivationsRevenue− Program cost= Contribution
Months 1–2 · MVP — free adoptionbuilding base0$0build + pilot$0
Months 3–8 · Launch — activate20,0006,000$642K$450K$192K
Months 9–18 · flywheel (~6%/mo)73,50022,000$2.35M$1.65M$704K
Year 3 · national + platform layer966,500290,000$31.0M$21.8M$9.3M
3-year arc1.06M318,000$34.0M$23.9M$10.2M
Basis: GTM model unit economics ($107 / $75 / $32) with operating overhead added at $20K/mo human layer + ~$2.5K/mo software. Seasonality follows the sports calendar — peak months are not annualized. These figures are projections, not guarantees.
The one-sentence version: a two-person core, an agentic stack that does the work of a department, Partners who carry the licensing, inventory, and audience — and one technology owner who makes sure it all works and that we, not our partners, own the truth.