// Confidential · For investor use only
Investor Brief · Aug 2026
This document accompanies the Level100 Investor Model Excel file. The Excel contains the numbers. This document explains the strategy behind them, the reasoning for each assumption, and the honest assessment of what is proven versus what is planned.
Download the investor model — last updated Aug 2026
// 00 · Executive Summary
Level100 builds creator-branded storefronts for game top-ups in Southeast Asia. Fans already spend on in-game currency. Level100 moves that spend through a store the creator owns, rather than a neutral platform. The thesis is simple: given the choice, loyal fans prefer buying through their creator, and when creators see real earnings, they promote actively.
The business has been live for twelve months. There is real GMV, real creators, and a gross profit earned every month since launch. This round raises $120,000 at a $1.2M post-money valuation to fund a three-month platform build and the full operating runway to breakeven. Phase 3 international expansion across Indonesia, Thailand, and Malaysia follows on a $5M Series A, contingent on reaching breakeven first.
// 01 · The Business
Level100 gives gaming creators their own branded store for game top-ups. A fan can buy Mobile Legends Diamonds or Free Fire Diamonds through a store that carries their creator's name, logo, and identity. The fan pays market rate. The creator earns a revenue share on every transaction. Level100 operates the platform.
Codashop processes 8.3 million monthly visits with no creator layer whatsoever. Every top-up platform in SEA treats creators as affiliate links: referral codes, small commissions, no store identity. Level100's position, a storefront a creator actually owns, is uncontested today. The Philippines is the primary market, with Indonesia, Thailand, and Malaysia following in Phase 3.
// 02 · Roadmap
Level100's development follows a deliberate sequence. Each phase has a defined goal, and the transition from one phase to the next is triggered by achieving that goal rather than by calendar alone. The business model improves materially at each transition, and the logic for that improvement is grounded in what the previous phase actually demonstrated.
Operating on Lapak's platform. Constrained margins accepted in exchange for speed. The goal is validation, not profit.
Seed raised. CEO leads pre-sales outreach. First sales rep joins in October. Software developer building the platform. No creators launched yet.
Own-store launches. Sales team hired. Managed creator programme with posting contracts. Philippines market only.
Series A ($5M) funds expansion. Each new country adds a dedicated team and sales pipeline. Publisher deals reduce COGS from 94% to 88%.
Level100's gross profit is calculated in two steps. Both the inputs and the percentages change across phases, which is why margins improve so significantly from one phase to the next.
GMV is the total value of fan purchases through creator stores — every top-up transaction at the price the fan paid, before any costs are deducted. Net Revenue Margin is the percentage of fan spend that remains after paying the game publisher for inventory and covering payment processing fees. In Phase 1 and 2, this runs at approximately 5.0%. In Phase 3, a publisher direct deal reduces COGS from 94% to 88% of GMV, pushing the margin up to 9.7%.
Level100 Revenue Share is the percentage of net revenue Level100 retains after paying creators their cut. In Phase 1, operating on Lapak's platform, Level100 earns only 15%; Lapak takes the rest. From Phase 2 onwards, Level100 owns the platform and retains 50% of net revenue on every transaction. This single change is the primary driver of the margin improvement between Phase 1 and Phase 2.
| Variable | Phase 1 | Phase 2 | Phase 3 | What drives the change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net Revenue Margin | ~4.8% | ~5.0% | 9.7% | Phase 1→2: own-store removes Lapak intermediary fees, modelled conservatively at historical levels. Phase 2→3: publisher direct deal drops COGS from 94% to 88% of GMV. |
| Level100 Revenue Share | 15% | 50% | 50% | Phase 1→2: Level100 owns the platform instead of earning a Lapak commission. Phase 2→3: unchanged across all markets. |
| GP on GMV | ~0.74% | ~2.5% | ~4.85% | Phase 1→2: launching our own store means Level100 captures the margin Lapak previously took, while paying less in supplier commission. Phase 2→3: publisher direct deals reduce what we pay for inventory, nearly doubling what flows through to gross profit. |
Before committing capital to building a platform, Level100 needed to establish that the core thesis was real. Working through Lapak's infrastructure with minimal overhead, Phase 1 was a deliberate test of three questions. The answers to these questions, both what they confirmed and what they revealed, are what shaped every decision in Phase 2.
Would creators sign up for a branded storefront, and would they actively promote it to their audience? This was the first unknown.
Would fans who already top up through neutral platforms shift their spend to their creator's store? This was the demand-side question.
Is the underlying economics workable, with enough GMV per creator, enough margin structure to build on, and enough repeat transaction behaviour to suggest retention?
On the first two questions, Phase 1 delivered clear answers. Creators signed up through direct outreach, and those who promoted actively generated material GMV from day one. Ranchop's store reached PHP 1.7M (~$29K USD) in April alone. Fans transacted in volume and repeat behaviour was evident across the creator base. The esports organisation channel was validated when AP Bren signed in April 2026, opening a more scalable acquisition path than individual creator outreach alone.
May and June 2026 saw a broad-based, seasonal GMV dip across almost every creator, bottoming at $29,803 in June. GMV partially recovered by July to $46,958, alongside a 12th and 13th creator (Papitien and Kbearshop) onboarding — still below the April peak of $52,981. July is treated as the true trend line; the model's forward projections resume from this level rather than the dipped June figure.
On the third question, the answer was more nuanced. The business model works, but the current version cannot fund itself. July's gross profit was $347 against $4,444 in monthly costs.
Phase 1 also revealed a second operational problem. Without a structural reason to promote, most creators treated the store as passive income — expecting sales to come in without actively posting or pushing their audience toward the store. Ranchop consistently outperformed every other creator not because of audience size, but because he posted and pushed his store actively. This insight is the foundation of the managed creator programme in Phase 2.
Phase 1 confirmed the thesis. What it also clarified is that the Lapak model has structural ceilings on both margin and creator activation. Phase 2 addresses both by owning the platform to capture a larger share of GMV, and by introducing managed creator contracts with posting requirements to solve the activation problem at the source.
The goal of Phase 1.5 is to ensure Phase 2 starts with immediate momentum rather than a cold start. The platform needs to be built, but equally important, the sales pipeline needs to be loaded: contracts signed and creators ready to launch on day one of the own-store opening.
During these three months, the CEO leads creator outreach directly. The first sales rep joins in October, the final month of the build period, to begin loading the pipeline ahead of the November launch. No creators are launched yet because the platform is not live, but by the time November arrives, the pipeline should be full. The software developer is building the platform, and the team is still operating existing creators on Lapak to maintain continuity.
| Variable | Phase 1 | Phase 1.5 | What changes and why |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platform | Lapak Gaming | Still Lapak (own store in build) | No change yet, platform not live until November 2026 |
| Revenue share | 15% (Lapak commission) | 15% (unchanged) | Own-store economics activate at Phase 2 launch only |
| Creators launched/mo | Organic / founder-led | 0 launched · contracts being signed | Sales rep is building the pipeline for November, not launching yet |
| Sales activity | CEO-led only | CEO only (Aug–Sep) · CEO + 1 sales rep (Oct) | First hire enables systematic outreach at scale |
| Software Developer | None | $5,000/mo (months 1–2), $2,000 (month 3) | Sprint rate for platform build; drops to maintenance rate in October |
| Software subscriptions | None | $500/mo | Added at seed close for tooling and infrastructure |
| Working capital required | None | None | Still on Lapak, no GMV float required until Phase 2 |
Phase 1.5 is the highest-burn period in the model. The software developer sprint cost ($5,000/mo in August and September) means total monthly costs reach $9,944 in the first two months before dropping to $7,744 in October. The seed absorbs this directly, which is why the platform build is the first call on the capital.
Phase 2 is where the business model fundamentally changes. The own-store platform launches in November 2026, and with it, Level100 transitions from earning a commission on Lapak's transactions to operating the transaction infrastructure itself. The 12 existing creators migrate from Lapak to their own storefronts, and new creator acquisition begins from a pipeline that was built during Phase 1.5.
The goal is operating breakeven, which the model reaches in August 2027. Getting there requires two things to work in parallel: the creator programme must drive consistent posting and GMV growth from the existing base, and the sales team must launch approximately 64 new creators. A second sales rep joins in December, giving the team more months at full capacity with conservative per-rep targets.
| Variable | Phase 1.5 | Phase 2 | What changes and why |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platform | Lapak (building own) | Level100 own platform | Platform live from November 2026, Lapak fully exited |
| Net Revenue Margin | ~5.0% (auto) | ~5.0% (auto) | Same calculation (avg of May/Jun/Jul 2026 actuals). Own store removes Lapak fee but this is modelled conservatively at historical levels. |
| Level100 Revenue Share | 15% | 50% | Own platform: Level100 retains 50% of net revenue on every transaction. This is the primary driver of margin improvement. |
| GP on GMV | ~0.74% | ~2.5% | Phase 1→2: own-store captures margin Lapak previously took, paying less in supplier commission. Phase 2→3: publisher direct deals cut inventory cost, nearly doubling net revenue. |
| Creator contracts | None (pre-sales only) | Managed: posting minimums, compliance clauses | Addresses the core Phase 1 operational problem: passive creators |
| Working capital | None | 100% of monthly GMV | Own platform requires funding publisher settlements before fan payments clear (2–4 week cycle) |
| GMV per creator | — | $6,000/mo | Average across creator mix, conservative vs top performers like Ranchop ($29K/mo actual) |
The first sales rep joins in October 2026 to load the pipeline ahead of launch. A second rep is brought on in December, earlier than the original plan, with their pipeline at full effect from January 2027. This earlier hire allows conservative per-rep targets while still reaching breakeven by August 2027.
| Period | Sales Reps | Creators Launched/mo | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug–Oct 2026 (Phase 1.5) | 0 → 1 (Oct) | 0 | Pipeline loading · contracts being signed |
| Nov 2026 | 1 | 4 | Launch month · 2nd rep hired |
| Dec 2026 | 2 | 4 | 2nd rep building pipeline · effect from Jan |
| Jan 2027 – Aug 2027 | 2 | 7 | Both reps at full capacity |
| Total launched by Aug 2027 | 2 | ~64 new + 12 existing = 76 total active |
| Role / Line | Monthly Cost | Active From |
|---|---|---|
| Ralph Aligada (CEO) | $3,622 | Aug 2025 (continuous) |
| Designer | $536 | Sep 2025 (continuous) |
| Misc / Infrastructure | $286 | Sep 2025 (continuous) |
| Software Developer | $2,000 | Oct 2026 (maintenance rate from month 3 of build) |
| Software Subscriptions | $500 | Aug 2026 (at seed close) |
| Sales Rep 1 | $800 | Oct 2026 (pipeline loading in final month of Phase 1.5) |
| Store Ops Manager | $800 | Nov 2026 (own-store launch) |
| Support Staff × 2 | $800 | Nov 2026 |
| Accountant | $300 | Nov 2026 |
| Sales Rep 2 | +$800 | Dec 2026 ($1,600 total from December) |
| Total OpEx (Dec 2026+) | $10,444/mo | Full team active, 2 reps in market |
The model reaches ~$432K/mo GMV by August 2027 through compounding. The existing creator pool grows at 1% per month from its July 2026 base of $46,958, while 4 new creators launch in November, 4 in December, then 7 per month from January 2027 onwards as both reps are at full capacity. Reaching ~$432K requires 64 new creators on top of the existing 13, for a total of 77 active stores. Each new creator is modelled at $6,000 GMV per month at full activation. The current base of 13 creators already averages $3,612 per month on the old Lapak platform with no posting requirements, no incentive structure, and limited support. The $6,000 assumption reflects a modest improvement over that baseline, which is what the managed programme and dedicated ops support are specifically designed to produce.
Reaching breakeven in Phase 2 is the pivotal milestone. It proves the own-store model works, demonstrates creator acquisition at scale, and makes Level100 a self-sustaining business. Phase 3 takes that proven, profitable playbook and replicates it across four countries, while publisher direct deals nearly double gross margin on the same transaction volume.
Phase 3 begins when the Series A closes at Phase 2 breakeven. The $5M raise funds expansion into Indonesia (December 2027), Thailand (March 2028), and Malaysia (June 2028), staggered one country at a time. Each new market replicates the Philippines playbook with a dedicated Ops Manager, sales team, and creator acquisition pipeline built locally from the ground up.
Alongside geographic expansion, Phase 3 activates the publisher direct deal, the single most significant structural improvement in the model. This deal drops COGS from 94% to 88% of GMV, pushing net revenue margin from approximately 5.3% to 9.7%, which nearly doubles gross profit on the same GMV base. It is modelled to take effect in month 7 of Phase 3, giving the team six months from Series A close to negotiate and activate.
| Variable | Phase 2 | Phase 3 | What changes and why |
|---|---|---|---|
| Net Revenue Margin | ~5.0% (auto) | 9.7% (from month 7) | Publisher direct deal eliminates intermediary; COGS drops from 94% to 88% |
| Level100 Revenue Share | 50% | 50% | Unchanged, same creator mix structure maintained across markets |
| GP on GMV | ~2.5% | ~4.85% | Margin improvement flows through the same revenue share structure |
| Active markets | Philippines only | PH + ID + TH + MY | Staggered quarterly launches: ID Dec 2027, TH Mar 2028, MY Jun 2028 |
| Creators launched/mo at full scale | 7 | Up to 19 | PH maintains 7/mo; each new country adds 4/mo after 1-month pipeline ramp |
| GMV per creator | $6,000/mo | $7,000/mo | Larger markets in Indonesia and Thailand support higher volumes than the PH baseline |
| Software Developer | $2,000/mo | $20,000/mo | Full engineering team required for multi-country platform infrastructure |
| Marketing | — | $2,500/country/mo | Creator launch campaigns per active country; scales linearly with expansion |
Phase 3 is conditional on Phase 2, and it is presented here so investors understand the full business arc, not as a guaranteed outcome. Proceeding requires Phase 2 breakeven, a signed Series A, and publisher deals actively being negotiated. The seed investor's return case is anchored on Phase 2 alone. Phase 3 is the upside from there.
// 07 · Use of Funds
The seed is sized for one purpose: fund Operations from today through Phase 2 breakeven. It is fully allocated to a single bucket, not spread across staff, working capital, and reserve.
Working capital is deliberately not funded by this raise. The own-store platform requires funding publisher settlements before fan payments clear (a 2–4 week cycle), and that requirement scales directly with GMV. It is asset-backed against receivables, not burned, but it is real cash that has to come from somewhere, staged separately as the business grows.
| Milestone | Working Capital Required |
|---|---|
| Phase 2 real launch (Nov 2026) | ~$67,000 |
| Breakeven / end of Phase 2 (Aug 2027) | ~$440,000 |
| End of Phase 3 (Aug 2029) | ~$3,391,000 |
This is a real, growing funding gap, not a footnote. It needs a dedicated facility or a staged follow-on raise as GMV scales, separate from both this seed and the Series A that funds Phase 3 expansion.
// 08 · Investment Case
This is not a pre-revenue bet. Level100 has real GMV, real creators, and a funded 13-month path to breakeven. The investment case is built on three things that are true today rather than projected.
Thirteen active creators are generating $46,958 GMV per month as of July 2026. The model works: creators promote their stores, fans top up, and GMV compounds. This raise funds the scaling infrastructure, not the proof of concept. That proof is already in.
Codashop has 8.3 million monthly visits and zero creator storefronts. Every competitor treats creators as affiliates. Level100 gives creators ownership of the transaction, the customer relationship, and the data. That positioning gap is uncontested today and is not easily replicable by incumbents without dismantling their existing model.
$120K takes Level100 from $47K per month GMV to ~$432K per month GMV and operating breakeven in 13 months. There is no bridge round, no extension, and no distressed re-raise before Series A. The 10% stake is protected until the Series A table. Working capital, which scales with GMV, is financed separately and is not a claim on this raise.
$1.2M post-money on $558K annualised GMV (July 2026 actuals) is a ~2.1× multiple. The model shows over 9× GMV growth in the 13 months to breakeven with a fully funded and executable plan. The multiple compresses rapidly as GMV scales.
The entire $120K funds Operations and is fully deployed by breakeven; there is no idle reserve and no working-capital exposure mixed into the seed. Working capital, which scales with GMV, is deliberately kept out of this raise and staged separately as the business grows, so seed capital carries only operating risk, not receivables risk.
10% for $120K at $1.2M post-money is at the conservative end of SEA seed pricing. Pre-revenue SEA commerce companies routinely price at $8–15M post-money at seed. Level100 is offering a tighter entry on a business that is already generating real GMV.
An exit multiple of 3× forward annualised GMV is applied at each phase milestone, comparable to Codashop and Sea Group transaction multiples in SEA digital commerce. The 3× is applied to the forward annual run rate at exit, not historical GMV.
| Scenario | Date | Monthly GMV | Forward Annual | Exit Value (3×) | Seed Return (10%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Base Phase 2 breakeven PH only |
Aug 2027 | $432K | $5.19M | $15.6M | 13.0× $1.56M |
| Mid Phase 3 Year 1 4 countries |
Aug 2028 | $1.50M | $17.96M | $53.9M | 44.9× $5.39M |
| High Phase 3 full 4 countries |
Aug 2029 | $3.38M | $40.58M | $121.7M | 101.5× $12.17M |
Even at half the projected creator acquisition rate, the business reaches breakeven within the raise window, just taking longer. This is not a pre-revenue company that burns indefinitely until Series A. The runway is structured to reach operational self-sufficiency on this raise alone.
Because working capital is financed separately from this raise, the full $120K is deployed to Operations and none of it sits as GMV float exposed to receivables risk. The working-capital requirement is staged and sized against GMV as it actually materialises, not committed upfront out of the seed.
The model reaches breakeven before the Series A. There is no bridge round required. The 10% at seed is the 10% at the Series A table, not diluted by a distressed extension round negotiated from a position of weakness.
| Acquirer | Why Level100 fits their strategy |
|---|---|
| Sea Group (Garena) | Publisher, payments, and ecommerce in one group. Creator storefronts are a natural extension of Sea Money and Shopee's creator economy infrastructure across SEA. |
| Moonton / ByteDance | As the MLBB publisher, owning the creator storefront layer gives Moonton direct fan monetisation infrastructure across all its markets without intermediaries. |
| Razer | The Razer Gold payments network extends its game commerce reach into creator audiences, a channel it cannot currently access at this depth. |
| Codashop / Asiasoft | A consolidation play. Level100's creator-brand layer is the differentiation Codashop lacks and cannot easily replicate without dismantling its existing neutral-platform model. |
// 09 · Common Questions
We are not glossing over these. As early investors in this business ourselves, these are the risks we have sat with and the honest view we have arrived at on each one.