You finish a sponsor pitch and run into the same issue again. The deck answers what it wants, and your standard DDQ misses what is specific to this deal. So you pull up last quarter’s questionnaire, swap sections, add a few one-off questions, and hope nothing important slips through for this asset class and strategy. Due Diligence ~10 min to run Issue a Tailored Sponsor DDQ Vic prompt Use Vic to build a DDQ to issue to this sponsor for a value-add industrial fund. Purpose Receive the answers the pitch did not provide. Saves about 50 minutes per questionnaire compared to manual assembly. Inputs Deal Or Fund Context Required Focus Areas Optional Output Format Optional Outputs A tailored DDQ organized by topic, delivered in Word or in-chat format, with priority questions highlighted. Time saved Saves about 50 minutes per questionnaire. How it works Give Vic the deal or fund context. That can be a value add industrial fund, a single asset development, or any sponsor strategy you are underwriting. Add focus areas if you have them, such as key person risk, fee alignment, or construction controls. Choose an output format if you care, either in chat or a Word ready document. Run: Use Vic to build a DDQ to issue to this sponsor for a value add industrial fund. Vic returns a tailored questionnaire organized by topic. It covers firm and track record, strategy, team and key persons, terms and alignment, operations and controls, conflicts, and references. The questions match the asset class and the specifics you provided, so you are not sending generic prompts any GP can answer from a boilerplate. Priority items are flagged. This is where it pays off. Instead of a flat list, you get a clear read on what to press first when time is tight or you are prepping for a call. If the strategy brings certain risks, those show up as higher priority questions in the relevant sections. The output is ready to send with light edits. If you prefer Word, you get a document with a clean style. If you stay in chat, you can copy and adjust. Either way, you are not stitching together old templates. What changes in practice You can drop the bloated “master DDQ” that tries to cover every scenario. Each questionnaire matches the deal in front of you. Industrial value add does not read like core office, and a development program does not read like a stabilized fund. The questions reflect that without hand curating every section. You also get better coverage where it matters. The task asks for what the pitch left out. That includes controls, conflicts, and references, areas that are easy to underweight when you are moving fast. With those sections filled in every time, you are less likely to miss something because it was not top of mind. You get time back. Manual assembly takes about an hour once you factor in edits and formatting. This runs in about ten minutes and gives you a stronger starting point. Spend the time reading answers, not formatting questions. Inputs that make it sharper Deal or fund context (required): Be specific. Asset class, strategy, and known details improve calibration. Focus areas (optional): Call out what you care about for this situation. Vic will weight and flag accordingly. Output format (optional): Choose Word if you plan to send as is, or chat if you want to iterate inline. This is a simple swap. Instead of editing a legacy template, you generate a purpose built DDQ each time. The questions line up with the risk you are taking, and the priorities are clear before you hit send.