Term sheet is to be signed. In order to determine equity for my investors, what step-by-step approach for valuating the company would you recommend?

I'm a single founder who was raised angel and venture capital. If your business is compelling enough, you could raise angel funding. But there is little chance you can raise venture funding without a team in-place. It's a negative signal to institutional investors that you haven't been able to lock down a committed team. That said, depending on the nature of your product and traction, it sounds like you might be past the stage of recruiting a cofounder and more into hiring a great team of employees. The differentiation being less title and more the amount of equity. It sounds like you are selling a physical product so the question is whether you have built the capacity to scale. If not, the importance of having someone on your team who has done that at scale, even at the angel level of funding, could be helpful if not required. Happy to do a quick call and give you more contextual advice.

If you want information that matters in "Creative Financing Techniques" find a person with the experience/insight. Most of what is in books is dated. Many of the more creative methods are a function of current tax code and market factors (like QE).

The more important first impressions to leave a VC with are: 1) That you both are credible and inspire confidence that you can execute the plan you're fundraising on. 2) That there is good chemistry and a great relationship between the two of you; 3) That you can adequately address the concerns/objections/questions the VC raises. The CEO is expected to do most of the talking because the CEO should be the best person in the company at articulating the vision and value of the product and company you're building. If your CTO is comfortable presenting part of the pitch, it would be ideal for the CTO to speak to the product slides. The most important thing is for the CTO not to be a "bump on the log" meaning that you don't want them sitting there for most of the presentation with nothing to say. If you feel that's the case, you really shouldn't bring your CTO. Most VC meetings will not get technical and under the hood. Each question answered should be answered by the person best qualified to speak to that question. You should make eye-contact with your partner and use subtle body language to find a way to cue the other person to speak to that question or simply offer "CTO, would you like to answer that?" Bottom line, make sure that the CTO can speak confidently enough about the product and vision, otherwise -unless specifically asked by the VC - come alone. Fundraising is a big distraction to building and a good VC will always respect that in a first meeting, the CTO can be excused from attending in priority of building product. Happy to talk to you both on a call about helping get you feeling a bit more confident and prepared before your meeting. I was formerly a VC associate for a $500m fund and have raised money from VCs as a serial entrepreneur.

Here is a link to a basic model - http://monetizepros.com/tools/template-library/subscription-revenue-model-spreadsheet/ Depending on the purpose of the model you could get much much more elaborate or simpler. This base model will help you to understand size of the prize. But if you want to develop an end to end profitability model (Revenue, Gross Margin, Selling & General Administrative Costs, Taxes) I would suggest working with financial analyst. You biggest drivers (inputs) on a SaaS model will be CAC (Customer Acquisition Cost, Average Selling Price / Monthly Plan Cost, Customer Churn(How many people cancel their plans month to month), & Cost to serve If you can nail down them with solid backup data on your assumption that will make thing a lot simpler. Let me know if you need any help. I spent 7 years at a Fortune 100 company as a Sr. Financial Analyst.

We have used Fundable.com successfully for two rounds of financing both oversubscribed. Here is what I can tell you. Basic info: Fundable.com's platform connects accredited investors to startups seeking investment capital. Startups have a public facing profile that includes general information about the companies product, team, press accolade, etc. If you are raising funds claiming SEC Reg D 506(b) the public profile has no information about your securities offering. If an interested investor wants to view more information about your startup and or your offering, he/she would request access to your full profile. The investor must self accredit on the Fundable site before they are allowed to view your non-public profile. The startup is notified and you have the opportunity to conduct some due diligence on the investor (LinkedIn) and elect to invite them into your deal. Your private page includes the offering (terms). All communication from this point is done outside of the platform, meaning you have the investors email address ( a good thing to have). Fundable charges startups a flat monthly fee to post a profile on the site. In addition you can opt for additional services (help) with your campaign. For a flat fee, Fundable will assign resources to help build your profile, consult with you on your raise, and assist with PR or Marketing. This includes a blast to their investor base of over 40K if my memory serves me correctly. I am sure it is higher today. Our experience: For our first round on Fundable, we elected to use the premium service. Fundable did a great job in helping with our profile. We received 50+ views per day (quite often 100+) and on days we were included in their newsletter we received 200+ views. 10 - 20% of views requested access to our full profile. and 10-20% of those responded to my request for a call. Our close rate was very high. Both of our rounds were oversubscribed in less than 4 months taking averaging $50K per investor. These are high quality investors that have not created additional work (outside of normal investor updates). Many of our investors regularly share news and information about our industry. Several have re-invested in subsequent rounds. Disclaimer: Our startup is in the consumer hardware space which I believe tends to attract high net worth individuals. Obviously results may vary, thus I cannot speak to how well a SaaS play would do crowdfunding in general. Fundable.com's premium services offering may have changed since our campaign. I am not affiliated with Fundable.com. In fact we have been successful on other crowdfunding sites as well. In Closing: I am a proponent of crowdfunding in general. It is disrupting angel investing, providing investors with greater deal flow and exposing startups to an exponentially larger audience, increasing their chances to get in front of investors who understand and appreciate that company's solution and opportunity. Most importantly it is moving capital and driving innovation! Keep in mind, securities laws have changed and continue to change due to the Jobs act of 2012. Before you offer any securities to local investors or choose to try crowdfunding, you should consult with an attorney, and take the time to learn and understand what regulations apply to your circumstances.