Loading...
Answers
MenuIs a 23,5% share for an early angel-investor, who is not contributing in the future, too much "dead equity" for raising a VC-backed seed round?
Answers
Mark is wrong. I personally know of a handful of companies in that exact same situation and most importantly that have good traction and the cap table NEVER came up once, and each of these companies have raised in excess of $1m in seed funding from great investors this year.
Especially if your shares are common shares and/or have no particular unique traits about a share class, and especially if you can document the time and resources your firm expended to build and maintain the service that now has traction, this will not be a problem.
Investors give many excuses when they don't want to do a deal but those excuses are rarely the reason for not pulling the trigger.
The issue is more likely to be that there are two business folks running a company without a technical founder, which is almost always a deal-killer but that has nothing to do with your equity share.
Happy to talk to you in a call if you'd like.
I agree with Tom. You and your share will be diluted with added rounds of capital. New investors will likely require convertible preferred shares with additional voting and conversion rights. If you hold common this should not affect them at all.
If you hold preferred (which is not likely), they will simply require that you modify some of your rights so that they can get the deal they need. This can easily be accomplished by a good attorney.
Bottom line is that if the company is attractive to potential investors they will work current equity holders to get a deal done. All of the founders will be diluted with successive rounds of capital.
If the company looks like an attractive investment, professional investors (i.e.: VC partners) will not let the drag on the cap table stop a deal from being done. Having said that, there are going to be three voices at the table when discussing this issue: yours, your co-founders, and the investor's. A big question is: do your co-founders feel the same way about your contribution as you do, or do they instead feel that "you got too much equity for the contribution you made". Note I'm not speculating about who is right and who is wrong, but if they feel that way, there are many ways they can cram your equity position down.
For example, they could arrange for a new company, newco, to be created and financed, and then to buy out the assets of the old company. All shareholders (including you) in the old company would receive some shares in newco, but it would be a much smaller percentage than any of you currently hold in the old company. But they will have arranged it so that they already hold a percentage of newco before the acquisition, as does the new investor. The result is that they end up with a larger percentage of newco than they used to have, and you end up with a smaller percentage. It turns out to be very hard to show that this kind of transaction is unfair, since newco brings a lot of new financing money to the table. Indeed, the other founders may feel that this is the fairest solution if they don't believe your contribution merited your current equity stake.
But if they feel really great about your contribution so far, the dominating question will be: Does the new investor feel that the ongoing management team is sufficiently compensated, and will they remain sufficiently compensated once future rounds of equity are incorporated into the cap table. If they feel that the answer to this question is "no", they will worry about having to dilute themselves later in order to properly compensate the ongoing management team. This is where the cap table drag concern comes in.
Sorry this is a bit complex, but hopefully I'm explaining it in a way that makes sense. In a nutshell, I'm saying that if your co-founders disagree with your assessment of the value of your contribution, there is a lot they can do to squeeze you out (or down) at the time of the financing. But if they agree with you, and if the company is really compelling, an investor will probably cope with the cap table, maybe by incorporating the future expected necessary dilution right now, by lowering the company's valuation.
Good luck with it. Too many unknowns to be definitive.
Dan
What I am hearing (and how I feel) is that the question as asked can be interpreted differently. Lets try to answer each interpretation.
1) Will it prevent the company from moving forward?
It is unlikely to be the cause of the companies demise and more likely the company's own shortcomings would cause the issues. That said, your ability to pivot is sometimes more limited with more substantial shareholders.
2) Will it affect me?
This it may. You could end up with less control than you would think and your co-founders and investor could push you aside.
3) Is it too much?
This is the true question you are asking. This also depends. Why 23.5% and what are you getting for this. This is the overall issue here. So if you are giving too much away, why are you doing this. In essence, if I give away 50% of my company in return for the first 25M in revenue, I won't get faulted for this as it is a lot of revenue. You need to balance growth at this moment with monetary needs to ensure that you don't end up giving away a lot now only to end up with several cram down rounds around the corner.
So, if it is about the company, it won't be a big problem (unless the investor is difficult or has too much control), if it is about you, it may be a problem, and if you are asking, then are you already feeling like it is too much to give away.
Related Questions
-
What happens to a convertible note if the company fails?
Convertible notes are by no means "earned." They are often easier to raise for early-stage companies who don't want to or can't raise an equity round. Equity rounds almost always require a simultaneous close of either the whole round or a defined "first close" representing a significant share of the raised amount. Where there are many participants in the round comprised mostly of small seed funds and/or angel investors, shepherding everyone to a closing date can be very difficult. If a company raises money on a note and the company fails, the investors are creditors, getting money back prior to any shareholder and any creditor that doesn't have security or statutory preference. In almost every case, convertible note holders in these situations would be lucky to get pennies back on the dollar. It would be highly unusual of / unheard of for a convertible note to come with personal guarantees. Happy to talk to you about the particulars of your situation and explain more to you based on what you're wanting to know.TW
-
What exit strategies do angel investors want/prefer for a service business?
Keep in mind that investors invest for returns. Telling a prospective investor that you want his or her money to grow your business but don't plan on ever generating a liquidation event that pays him or her a dividend is not likely going to work; angel or not. You may be better served with debt financing where returns are generated in the form of interest payments not equity value growth. BUT, if equity financing is the plan, you're going to want to develop a strategic exit plan right from the start. That means identifying prospective buyers, strategic channels etc and characterizing the value drivers for each right up front. You'll find prospective buyers come in a number of forms; competitors, bigger versions of you, strategic partners, private equity, etc. Each will value your business in different amounts for for different reasons. Understanding this is vitally important for you to navigate to securing the right money, from the right sources, with the most favorable terms. Once you've qualified and quantified each of them, then determine what (specifically) you're going to need to do to align your business with those prospective buyers generating the highest returns. This will drive your business model and go to market strategy and define your 'use of funds' decisions. This in turn result in a better, more valuable business whether you exit or not. Do it this way and you'll have no trouble raising money from multiple sources. You can learn more about the advantage of starting with a Strategic Exit plan here: http://www.zerolimitsventures.com/cadredc Good luck. SteveSL
-
What is the generally agreed upon "good" DAU/MAU for mobile apps?
You are right that the range is wide. You need to figure what are good values to have for your category. Also, you can focus on the trend (is your DAU/MAU increasing vs decreasing after you make changes) even if benchmarking is tough. Unless your app is adding a huge number of users every day (which can skew DAU/MAU), you can trust the ratio as a good indication of how engaged your users are. For games, DAU/MAU of ~20-30% is considered to be pretty good. For social apps, like a messenger app, a successful one would have a DAU/MAU closer to 50%. In general most apps struggle to get to DAU/MAU of 20% or more. Make sure you have the right definition of who is an active user for your app, and get a good sense of what % of users are actually using your app every day. Happy to discuss what is a good benchmark for your specific app depending on what it does.SG
-
What's the best visual format to display the size of the market when doing a pitch deck.
I like to take a rule from the Steve jobs playbook and use simple circles... one larger than the other but no more than 2. your most immediate target (realistic reachable) and one of the "enemy" competitor company. or overall untapped market cap. **for this to be effective you must provide as accurate projections as possible** no bar graphs and as little or no text as possible... remember that a deck is a companion to the speaker... avoid bullet points and use the deck to entertain rather than educate... is not a class is a pitch. :)HV
-
Among platforms for startup funding, AngelList is the 800 pound gorilla. Does it make sense to use simultaneously other platforms like Gust, etc?
Short answer: Of course! Many angel groups require you to submit through Gust because it offers a consistency and makes reviewing applications easier. But not all use Gust same as not all use AngelList... I haven't met an angel who frowns upon using multiple platforms. I would encourage you to leverage your twitter and Facebook or Instagram to meet angels and get in their radar (don't hassle or stalk) just try to get exposed a bit to them by being part of the same meetup group, follow the same blog, membership... Subscribe to their own blog.. And when you submit funding request considerations do please send a follow up email or a call or basket of fruits if you have contact them before.HV
the startups.com platform
Copyright © 2025 Startups.com. All rights reserved.