Loading...
Answers
MenuWhat would be a good initial share structure for a new startup that will definitely be approaching VC's?
This is a Digital Media Institute. We are considering offering a fair share and partnership/director position to an extremely high profile music industry legend. What in your opinion would be a fair allotment?
Answers
Fair Share is good but a partnership or even a director position is something you may want to think about based on the value add the legend will do to your business apart from lending his name.
However if your business is going to piggy back on his name & reputation and he is not offering any investment in cash , its a good idea to offer him anywhere between 10 to 15 % of the equity with clearly defined expectations from both sides.
I am making an assumption that you are going to be a high value startup.
You may go up to 8% of Equity for the industry legend. Generally celebrities don't have time to actively participate in a startup's day to day activities or management, however, they may add up a huge value by endorsing the startup/brand. Therefore, 8% is a fair share. In case the celebrity is also putting in money or is ready to share his/her network and actively participate in the management, then you may go for up to 15% Equity.
I will be happy to talk to you if you need my help. Feel free to setup a call through clarity.
Thanks for reading
Shishir Gupta
CEO of StartupLanes
This all goes back to what's the value they are bringing? They are a high profile music executive but does that mean when the company needs money they can help raise or provide it themselves, are they going to provide connections to accelerate your growth, are they going to bring in education you could not readily find? Always remember to think past titles and think about what they will provide for the company, now and in the future.
Call me if you need more help.
Hello I am Priyanka.
Many people call me everyday for consulting, most of them tell me that they have a million dollar idea that can change the world, but they don’t have the funds to develop it. I am writing this post for them to understand the funding of idea in a better way.
MILLION DOLLAR IDEAS DON’T MAKE SUCCESSFUL STARTUPS
Startups fit Edison’s ratio: 1% inspiration, 99% perspiration. You have some inspiration, so now you need to do the real work. The good news is that a lot of that work is setting yourself up for future inspiration, so it’s not all a grind.
As background, almost nobody invests in just an idea. You may get very lucky, especially if you are seeking money among the 3 Fs (friends, family, fools). But professional investors are looking for a solid team (one with a track record), a proven market, and demonstrated traction. The more of that you have before you go looking for money, the better off you are.
You should also know that patenting the idea is probably not worth it. If you really want, go talk to a patent lawyer. If your idea looks to be patentable, you can spend months and tens of thousands of dollars trying to get a patent. And what then? Well, that gives you the right to sue somebody who uses the idea. Can you afford a lawsuit against a company making millions? If not, what good a patent will do you? I know a lot of startup people, and very few have bothered with patents. Better to spend the time and money on being first and best.
So what next?
Prove that there’s a market. Yes, you believe there is one. Lots of people believe that. You don’t want belief, you want proof. For an app, for example, you could bring in test users for market research. Show them a half-dozen app pages, including a mock-up of yours. Tell them you’ll pay for them to install any one app. Do they click on yours? Then you might be getting somewhere.
Discover who your early adopters are. The great book Crossing the Chasmexplains that successful high-tech products usually start out in a particular niche, some small audience that gets a lot of value and is willing to put up with a rough initial product. Who are those people for you?
Understand how they are solving their problem now. You may have no direct competitors, but you still have competitors. Before video games existed, people were still entertaining themselves. What’s the equivalent for your product?
Figure out the minimum viable product. Founders tend to imagine the world-domination version of their product. Instead, you have to figure out the smallest thing that your initial audience is willing to pay for.
See if you can test your hypotheses further without building and shipping a real product. For example, is there some way you could fill the need with a lot of manual intervention? Or is there a rough solution that you could cobble together from existing tech?
Figure out an initial marketing plan. Will you be buying ads? Is this a viral product? Before you make it, know how you think you’ll sell it.
Test your marketing plan. There is no sense building a product that you can’t sell. If your plan is ads, run some ads against a fake landing page. Do people try to buy?
Build and ship your MVP. Ship the minimal app to a minimal market. For example, you might put your app only in the Canada app store.
Iterate, iterate, iterate. Now that you have users, iterate until you are happy with the user experience, with the marketing yield, and with everything else youv’e done so far.
Scale up. Once things are working well in the small, go big. Release to the US app store. Buy plenty of ads. Try to get mentions in the press. And keep iterating, so that the product and the company continue to get more awesome.
When do you get investment? Take as little as possible and as late as possible. For the average app, you should certainly try to get through step 7 before taking significant cash.
I would like to share with you.
Source:https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-get-VC-or-angel-funding-for-a-start-up-idea
For further queries you can consult me.
Related Questions
-
What is the average series A funding round at pre revenue valuation for a enterprise start up w/cutting edge tech on verge of our first client.
With all respect to Dan, I'm not seeing anything like that. You said "pre-revenue." If it's pre-revenue and enterprise, you don't have anything proven yet. You would have to have an insanely interesting story with a group of founders and execs on board with ridiculous competitive advantage built in. I have seen a few of those companies. It's more like $3m-$5m pre. Now, post-revenue is different. I've seen enterprise plays with $500k-$1m revenue/yr, still very early (because in the enterprise space that's not a lot of customers yet), getting $8m-$15m post in an A-round. I do agree there's no "average." Finally, you will hit the Series A Crunch issue, which is that for every company like yours with "cutting edge tech" as-yet-unproven, there's 10 which also have cutting edge tech except they have customers, revenue, etc.. So in this case, it's not a matter of valuation, but a matter of getting funded at all!JC
-
What does it mean to 'grandfather you in' in the tech world?
It stands for allowing someone to continue doing or use something that is normally no longer permitted (due to changing regulations, internal rules etc.)OO
-
What percentage of VC funded startups make it to 100m+ revenues in 5 years or less?
100M+ in revenues in 5 years or less does not happen very often. As an example of one sector, here is an interesting data visualization (circa 2008) of the 100 largest publically traded software companies at that time that shows their actual revenue ramp-ups from SEC filings (only 4 out of these 100 successful companies managed this feat, which themselves are an extremely small percentage of all of the VC-funded software companies): How Long Does it Take to Build a Technology Empire? http://ipo-dashboards.com/wordpress/2009/08/how-long-does-it-take-to-build-a-technology-empire/ Key findings excerpted from the link above: "Only 28% of the nation’s most successful public software empires were rocketships. I’ve defined a rocket ship as a company that reached $50 million in annual sales in 6 years or less (this is the type of growth that typically appears in VC-funded business plans). A hot shot reaches $50m in 7 to 12 years. A slow burner takes 13 years or more. Interestingly, 50% of these companies took 9 or more years to reach $50m in revenue."MB
-
For every success story in Silicon Valley, how many are there that fail?
It all depends on what one decides to be a definition of a "success story." For some entrepreneurs, it might be getting acqui-hired, for some -- a $10M exit, for some -- a $200M exit, and for others -- an IPO. Based on the numbers I have anecdotally heard in conversations over the last decade or so, VCs fund about 1 in 350 ventures they see, and of all of these funded ventures, only about 1 in 10 become really successful (i.e. have a big exit or a successful IPO.) So you are looking at a 1 in 3500 chance of eventual venture success among all of the companies that try to get VC funding. (To put this number in perspective, US VCs invest in about 3000-3500 companies every year.) In addition, there might be a few others (say, maybe another 1-2 in every 10 companies that get VC investments) that get "decent" exits along the way, and hence could be categorized as somewhat successful depending on, again, how one chooses to define what qualifies as a "success story." Finally, there might also be companies that may never need or get around to seeking VC funding. One can, of course, find holes in the simplifying assumptions I have made here, but it doesn't really matter if that number instead is 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10000. The basic point being made here is just that the odds are heavily stacked against new ventures being successful. But that's also one of the distinguishing characteristics of entrepreneurs -- to go ahead and try to bring their idea to life despite the heavy odds. Sources of some of the numbers: http://www.nvca.org/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ven... https://www.pwcmoneytree.com/MTP... http://paulgraham.com/future.html Here are others' calculations of the odds that lead to a similar conclusion: 1.Dear Entrepreneurs: Here's How Bad Your Odds Of Success Are http://www.businessinsider.com/startup-odds-of-success-2013-5 2.Why 99.997% Of Entrepreneurs May Want To Postpone Or Avoid VC -- Even If You Can Get It http://www.forbes.com/sites/dileeprao/2013/07/29/why-99-997-of-entrepreneurs-may-want-to-postpone-or-avoid-vc-even-if-you-can-get-it/MB
-
How can I become an idea person, as a professional title?
One word: Royalties This means you generate the idea and develop it enough to look interesting to a larger company who would be willing to pay you a royalty for your idea. This happens all the time. Rock stars, authors and scientists routinely license their creative ideas to other companies who pay them a royalty. Anyone can do it. Your business, therefore, would be a think tank. You (and your team, if you have one) would consider the world's problems, see what kinds of companies are trying to solve those problems, and then develop compelling solutions that they can license from you. You have to be able to sell your idea and develop a nice presentation, a little market research and an understanding of basic trademark and patent law. The nice thing about doing this is that if you develop enough cool ideas you will have royalties coming in from a lot of different sources, this creates a stable, passive revenue stream that requires little or no work to maintain. Start in your spare time and plan on the process taking 3-5 years. Set a goal to have a few products in the market that provide enough revenue (royalties) to cover your basic living expenses. Then you can quit your day job and dedicate more time and increase the momentum. A good idea business should have dozens, if not hundreds of license contracts generating royalties. It's possible to pull this off. And it is a fun job (I'm speaking from experience).MM
the startups.com platform
Copyright © 2025 Startups.com. All rights reserved.