#133: Quo Vadis Green Shoot AdTech Interviews
With David Mandeno, Co-founder/COO of Revving on Transactional-Based Funding
Last Media Dollar “Live” in London is on December 9 at Everyman Theatre in Borough Market. If you’re based in London/UK or happen to be in town on December 9, Quo Vadis is hosting our first LMD Live event. The courageous Cadi Jones will be playing the game live on stage as Tom Triscari plays color commentator. It’s an unscripted dialogue of media decision trade-offs in a room filled with inquisitive minds. The theatre only holds 100 people and is filling up fast. Quo Vadis subscribers get 25% off tickets with code LMD25.
Welcome back to Quo Vadis Green Shoot AdTech Interviews. In this series, we’re stepping into the shoes of “AdTech Equalizers” — the greenshoot companies changing how the advertising job gets done. We’ll delve into their worldview and unveil new strategies, tools, and perspectives that make advertisers more effective.
Today, we have the great pleasure of speaking with David Mandeno, Co-founder and COO of Revving, the category leader of transactional-based funding.
If you want to learn more about transactional-based funding, hit up David here: david@revving.io.
Q1: Why is adtech’s cash-flow problem the right problem to solve now?
A: David
It’s very simple. 120-day payment terms and chronic late payments are starving growth at precisely the moment the industry needs to invest. That’s not a “finance quirk”; it’s a competitive handicap. We see great teams forced to choose between payroll, vendor bills, and new inventory because revenue recognized today won’t land for months. That’s why our view is simple: if you’ve earned it, you should be able to use it — this week, not next quarter.
Q2: What’s fundamentally different about Revving versus old-school factoring?
A: David
Traditional factoring was built for paper invoices and manual checks. Adtech is data-rich and real-time. Revving integrates directly with all the primary digital platforms and marketplaces, automates verification of earned revenue, and advances funds by acquiring the underlying transaction data, all within the funding framework of traditional invoice factoring.
We call this new model Transactional-Based Funding (TBF) because we’re using technology to evolve from an invoice-based funding model to a transaction-based one, purpose-built for the digital economy. TBF reduces friction for publishers, networks, agencies, and advertisers, enabling decisions based on live performance signals, not tangled PDF archaeology.
Q3: You raised a significant war chest. How does that translate into value for customers?
A: David
The £107m investment we secured (led by DWS) lets us fund growth at scale, not just a handful of pilots. Practically, it means we can turn long payment cycles into same-week liquidity for more partners, more often, without compromising on risk discipline.
Our analysis suggests this funding capacity could free up as much as £1.8bn for digital businesses over three years, with a potential wider economic multiplier effect. That’s how we inject oxygen back into the system.
Q4: There are plenty of funders in the market. What’s the real edge?
A: David
As pioneers of Transactional-Based Funding, we’re offering a completely new and innovative liquidity model for the digital economy. By leveraging technology with data, we’re dragging old-school invoice factoring, with all its inherent benefits around flexible payor-focused credit risk, into the 21st century. Think high funding capacity combined with flexible, automated drawdowns without the commitments, restrictions, and hidden costs typical of standard lending products.
Q5: What should a prospective partner expect in week one?
A: David
Clarity, then acceleration. We start with data connections and eligibility so you can see exactly what revenue can be unlocked, and on what cadence. From there, it’s rinse-and-repeat: advance against earnings, stabilize working capital, then redeploy into growth, inventory, talent, or tech without waiting for the slowest payer in your chain.
My background is in engineering and operations so I’m allergic to “financial theatre.” If it doesn’t measurably reduce cash-conversion time and admin drag, then it doesn’t ship.
Bonus Q: I’ve seen the recent partnership announcement between Luma and SLR Digital Finance. Is SLR a competitor in this space?
A: David
We know SLR Digital quite well. They’re very much a standard asset-backed lender that has some exposure to digital media. So while they’re technically competitor-adjacent, in that we both provide capital to similar sectors, their approach is far more traditional. SLR (and other lenders) focus on the customer’s credit risk to provide senior secured loans over a fixed term with all the associated security, restrictions, and setup/utilization fees.
In contrast, Revving’s Transactional-Based Funding model leverages technology to capture and fund on the underlying transaction data (e.g., impression sales). Revving’s credit risk assessment is also based on the payment risk of our customers’ payors. This means we can often provide more funding, more flexibly, with fewer security requirements and restrictions, all while charging a single daily fee, which drives down overall funding costs.
Disclaimer: This post, and any other post from Quo Vadis, should not be considered investment advice. This content is for informational purposes only. You should not construe this information, or any other material from Quo Vadis, as investment, financial, or any other form of advice.