Your evidence that "no one uses X" is point number two. It is support for your first claim, which should be upfront. And the fact that you have a list of damned good reasons why no one uses X should help them get on board with your point - that is, after you've made that point, they should be thinking "Yeah, I can see why no one would use X." Then you present the evidence that no one uses X.

And if you don't have a list of damned good reasons why no one uses X, then they shouldn't give you any money.

True, what I wrote initially would seem arrogant in a vacuum. In a fuller discussion, I would cite their main actionable metrics that I've kept track of and show that there is no organic growth occurring. Then I would show what we are doing to make that actionable metric grow.

BTW, I don't waste too much time concerning their success (just a once a month check) especially since my company's success is most important. No one asks "Isn't your company just like X" when you are winning :)

I went to your site Knackeo. I have a tough time seeing what you are doing by going to the site and clicking all workable buttons. I'm sure investors did that too before meeting with you.

A really simple graphical explanation about who pays what might work? I really don't know, but what does peak my interest is that it seems like it will be a variety of crazy stuff rather than another lesson in math.

I liked the comment that you should start your pitch with what others are doing and how you will address a different market or beat them in their own market.

This stuff is obviously really tricky, but I feel like you have something you just are not showing.