Ithaca Has Arrived – Ithaca Tech Meetup

Last night the Ithaca startup community held one of its periodic Tech Meetups. It was by far the best one yet in my mind for the simple reason that there were a lot of engaged people there!  The energy in the room was incredible.  My VC partner Jennifer and I are really proud that CVF sponsors these events.  We were really thrilled with the conversations.  The event put a big smile on my face.

The quality of the event meant many things, but one stands out – no one can argue the point that Ithaca is a startup haven and one that is growing.  Yes, it could grow faster.  Yes, we need a few more big exits.  Yes, we need some more experienced entrepreneurs to transplant here (organic growth of top talent takes too long).  But, Ithaca is awesome and a key part of the upstate New York startup scene.  Ok, I am little biased.

Also, speaking of growing a startup community, the following posts recently published on Steve Blank’s blog are worth reading.  For me, the comparison of Bend, Oregon to Ithaca is dramatic.  Enjoy:

Bigger in Bend

Early Stage Regional Venture Funds

Engineering a Regional Tech Cluster

And here is another one from Brad Feld:  http://uvc.org/feld-formula-in-ithaca-ny/

The Post Money of Your Series A is Not My Problem

I was giving some advice the other day on how to approach Series B investors in terms of valuation.  Here is the hypo (all $$ amounts changed):

1.  Company X raised its Series A at a pre-money valuation of $5mm and it raised $4mm dollars.

2.  So the post-money valuation after the Series A was $9mm.  And the Series A investors then owned 4/9s of Company X.

3.  The Series A round was taken by $2mm of institutional investors and $2mm of angel investors.

Easy facts, but note that because the Series A round was rather large compared to the pre-money valuation the resulting post-money valuation is substantial.

So now is the time to raise the Series B.  Company X has met its milestones.  It has received necessary approvals to sell its device.  It has built out the team.  It has just started to generate revenue.  The team is energized.  It expects revenue of $1.7 million in the coming year.

What should the pre-money valuation be for the Series B?  First of all, when receiving a pitch from an entrepreneur, I hate it when the slide deck has a bullet that says something like “we are raising our $5mm Series B at a pre-money valuation of $17mm”.  Last time I checked, the pre-money valuation was the #1 most negotiated term in a deal.  And you are now trying just to dictate it in a slide?  That makes no sense to me at all.  You might even be low balling yourself by accident.  I would much rather hear “we are raising our $5mm Series B and our pre-money valuation thinking is reasonable; and the next slide has a simple use of proceeds for the proposed raise.”   Now you have opened yourself up to a normal negotiation if in fact I am interested.

Second, and the real point of this post is that while the management team of Company X certainly wants the Series B to be at a higher pre-money valuation than the post-money valuation of the Series A, that in and of itself is rather irrelevant to the valuation discussion.   The fact that the Series A investors accepted to live with a post-money valuation of $9mm in this hypo does not mean that the pre-money of the Series B should be above that.

For example, in this hypo, Company X expects to do $1.7mm of revenue in the coming year.  Let’s assume that the Series B investors think that is reasonable.  The first question they are likely to ask or research (or both) is “what do companies in this space sell for stated as a multiple of revenue”.  I asked the Company X team this question and the response was “3X range”.  So, the Series B investor might take $1.7mm times 3 and get a number that is obviously less than the Series A post-money.  The gap is real.  And the arguments for the gap are valid.  “I hit every milestone,” says Company X so “how can we not be worth more than the Series A post-money?”   To which the Series B potential lead investor says “hey, your post-money is not my problem – why should I invest at higher revenue multiples than what the industry is seeing?  If I do, then I am taking a huge risk that my return will stink.”  Expect this discussion.

One good answer to this gap is that the Company X team must show the Series B investors that they are investing in the future of Company X (not just the next 12 months revenue) and can still make a great return (say 6X and above).  This is obviously true and works well if Company X does not anticipate needing another round of financing, expects to build the revenue ramp quickly and has good product margins.  But beware of the gap!

Lessons:  don’t try to dictate a pre-money valuation in a slide deck and don’t think that the Series B investors will care about your Series A post-money (and this applies to Series C looking at Series B post-money too…..obviously).  The best route to a high valuation is to get multiple term sheets….again obviously.

2013 in Review

Happy New Year everyone!!  The WordPress.com stats folks prepared a 2013 annual report for IthacaVC.  Has some funny facts in it.  My stretch goal remains Fred Wilson in terms of community :).

Here’s an excerpt from the report:

The concert hall at the Sydney Opera House holds 2,700 people. This blog was viewed about 12,000 times in 2013. If it were a concert at Sydney Opera House, it would take about 4 sold-out performances for that many people to see it.

Click here to see the complete report.

Enjoy your New Year’s Celebration!

Cap Table Clean Up

When raising money from investors (angels or VC), it is critical to have a presentable and clean cap table.   There are many reasons for this, but fundamentally, it is impossible to calculate a share price for the investment round unless you have complete agreement on how many shares are outstanding pre-money.  The share price is calculated by taking the pre-money valuation and dividing it by the number of shares outstanding pre-money.

So Share Price (SP) = Pre-Money Valuation (PMV) / Shares Outstanding (SO).  Example:

PMV = $3.5mm; SO = 2,456,758 shares; then SP for new round = $1.423 per share (and yes, often the share price is carried past 2 decimal places).

So having 100% accuracy on the 2,456,758 share number is critical (I used a wacky number purposely because usually the number is NOT nice and even).

So let’s talk about the components of the 2,456,758 share number.  They are typically pretty simple:  (i) shares owned by founders and (ii) shares authorized for issuance in a stock option pool, some of which may be issued to employees already and some of which will be available for future issuance.  The option plan shares available for future issuance typically represent the number of additional options needed for hiring planned up to the point of the NEXT financing (as in we are doing a Series A round now, how many options do we need prior to doing a Series B round).  Often times a plug is used around 10%.  VCs in particular typically insist on a slug of available options counting in the pre-money share total as they do not want to be diluted later by the issuance of those options.  I have posted on this previously.

Back to our basics.  Let’s assume that Founder X owns 800,000 shares of common stock and Founder Y owns 1,300,000 shares of common stock and that the option pool in total has 356,758 shares allocated (to make the total stated above).  On a fully diluted pre-money basis, that would mean the option pool represents 14.5% (356,758/2,456,758) of the cap table.  That is normal for a pre-money % as it will drop down to about 10% post money depending on size of round and valuation.

For Founder X and Founder Y, this means that with respect to each other ONLY Founder X owns 38% (800,000/2,100,000) and Founder Y owns 62% (1,3000,000/2,100,000).  This relative ownership is important to Founder X and Founder Y and should be on their minds from the beginning.  If no additional equity is ever granted to Founder X and Founder Y, then Founder Y will ALWAYS own 1.63 times more equity than Founder X.

QUESTION #1:  This leads to our cap table clean up question #1, namely is that the right allocation? Well, that is really up to Founder X and Founder Y. What drives smart investors nuts is when Founder X and Founder Y try to re-allocate their ownership after a deal is in due diligence. Reallocating is not impossible, but often not easy because of tax issues. Founder Y just cannot give shares to Founder X to reallocate after a pre-money valuation has been agreed on (or heavily discussed) because the reallocation would be a taxable transaction (Founder X is getting something of value in the shares and your lawyers and accountants will squawk loudly). LESSON: best to approach investors after you have your share allocation amongst the founders FULLY settled.

QUESTION #2:  If you have not allocated the way you want from the beginning, then what can you do?  The most common way to reallocate is to grant one of the founders a stock option with a “real” strike price based off the financing round price (typically a discount).  This will obviously change their relative ownership.  So, yes, you can fix, but I can safely say that the founder who ended up with options (to avoid tax issues) would have rather had actual stock instead (better tax treatment upon sale typically).  And don’t forget that the options granted would come out of the available option pool.

QUESTION #3:  What if Founder X and Founder Y issued themselves some sort of preferred stock instead of common stock?  Well, that would be a hugely embarrassing mistake and a type of cap table clean that I really hate to see as it shows the complete naivety of the founders or the incompetence of their legal counsel or both.  Exchange the preferred shares for common shares and start again.

QUESTION #4:  What if the founders want to grant equity so some advisors that have been working with the company?  That is fine, and should be in the form of option grants vesting over time.  For the same reasons as expressed above, giving advisors actual stock (even if vesting restricted stock) will be taxable to the advisor if done when the company has a negotiated value.  So, options with a strike price reflective of the negotiated value solves that problem (again, typically at a discount).  Of course these options grants will also come out of the available option pool (remember that in our example the pool is 356,758 shares).   If a whole bunch of that pool goes to advisors or to a founder under question #2 above, then MORE shares will have to added to the pool to assure that there are enough shares AVAILABLE for future grants after the financing closes.  S0, being able to clearly state how many options you want to grant at the time of the financing is KEY.  That will enable you to negotiate the number of options in the pool available for issuance post-money (i.e., after the financing closes).  Again, that number is typically around 10%, as in 10% available on a fully diluted basis post-money.  You might grants 25% pre-money to clean up your cap table issues, but the investors will still want a slug of available options post-money.

QUESTION #5:  what if I have convertible debt outstanding that will convert into the Series A financing?  No problem as this happens all the time.  BUT, make sure you have a very clear listing of the debt, who owns it, when it was issued, interest rate and any applicable conversion discount.  Typically, the debt plus accrued interest converts at a discount to the Series A price (10 – 30% typical).  I like the call the dollar value of the debt plus interest factoring in the discount the “Purchase Power” of the convertible debt.   For example if the debt holder has $223,000 of debt and accrued interest, with a 20% conversion discount, and the Series A price is $1.423 a share, then the debt holder would by Series A stock at $1.138 per share (.8*$1.423).  That means the debt holder would buy 195,958 shares (rounded up) of Series A.  So the debt holder Purchase Power is actually $278,848 (195,958*$1.423).  This clearly illustrates the power of a conversion discount.   Why is this important?  Because most sophisticated investors will SUBTRACT the total Purchase Power from the negotiated pre-money valuation to avoid being diluted by the conversion of the debt.  This will drive DOWN the Series A price (so no longer $1.423 a share (yes, this gets iterative but Excel can handle it).  This make complete sense (at least to me).  LESSON:  make sure you understand your complete convertible debt picture and understand how it will impact your pre-money valuation.  Too much convertible debt on your cap table is a pain in the butt to deal with as it will drive down your valuation.

QUESTION #6:  What if the company has already issued some preferred stock to early angels (often Series Seed stock).  No problem, this is also normal.  But, the problem comes in when the Series Seed was issued at a share price above the new Series A share price (and with all the option clean up discussed above this is not unusual).  The Series A investor in this situation will likely NOT want to give the Series Seed investors any anti-dilution protection.  What we at CVF typically do is to pull the Series Seed stock into our Series A round on a one for one basis.  So the Series Seed investors get Series A stock (which is typically better), but do not get price protection.  They simply exchange EACH share of Series Seed (which for example they might have paid $1.75 a share for) for ONE share of Series A (which in this post’s hypo is valued at $1.423 a share).  The problem is that IF the Series Seed had a liquidation preference equal to share price ($1.75) they end up with Series A stock with a liquidation preference of $1.423, so the Series Seed loses some liquidation preference protection (which might not make them too happy).  This problem is another source of cap table clean up and one that the Series Seed investors have to eat usually.  But it takes a good and long conversation between the founders and Series Seed holders.

I have covered a bunch of cap table clean up issues.  This is probably the longest post I have written and the only one that I have written and posted from an airplane.  So, I am going to stop, but will be happy to answer any questions in the comments or future posts.

Signed Term Sheet

We (Cayuga Venture Fund) just signed up a term sheet with a new company (Company X).  No need to disclose the company name or industry for purposes of this post.  Rather I want to briefly comment on the process leading up to the term sheet and next steps.

First, the process:

1.  We first engaged with Company X in mid August. It is now mid December.  So our diligence and exploration process took us 4 months.  That is normal for us.

2.  The diligence involved us learning a great deal about Company X’s industry because we have not done a deal in this space previously.  It involved calls with 4 or 5 parties in the space.  It involved a ton of back and forth with Company X’s CEO.  It involved Company X finding a technology lead during our process.  It involved a lot of work by Company X (and by us).

3.  Critically, during the process, we came to trust the CEO and the team.  The CEO was hyper responsive to requests.  He struck the right balance between “salesman” and “information provider”.  This is not always easy.  I loved the fact that the CEO was the person feeding us the answers.  No delegation.  And they were typically good answers.

4.  Also, during the process, we had to clean up the company’s cap table and make sure that we all agreed on who owned what on a pro forma pre-money basis.  Without having a complete pre-money cap table, it is impossible to calculate a share price.  I use the term “pro forma” as often there are equity issues that need to be resolved prior to the deal closing that are NOT currently reflected in the company’s current cap table (like planned grants to advisors, co-founder true ups, etc.).  Sometimes those issues take extra time to resolve.

5.  We presented our first draft of the term sheet to Company X about a week ago.  I told the CEO that I was presenting a basic Series A term sheet with very normal terms.  I called him prior to delivery to point out a few things to purposely draw his attention to them.  No surprises.

6.  He came back with very few comments after reviewing with legal counsel and some of his others advisors.  Perfect.  Fair all around.  The way it should be.

Now for the next steps.  Here is how I outlined them to the CEO:

1.  Line up the balance of the investors.  We are doing $400K out of $1mm, so we need to get commitments from about $600K of additional investors.

2.  Once the $600K is lined up or mostly lined up then I will ask our fund’s lawyers to draft the deal docs and we will engage IP counsel to do an IP review (high level).   It is important to “turn $$on$$” counsel only after we feel good about the deal closing.

3.  Company X will respond to our “boring” diligence request list items by setting up a file sharing box.   We will then review and get our lawyer’s input on items as necessary.

4.  Get the investment documents all negotiated and close the deal in January.  Hopefully there won’t be much to do on the documents, but there are always issues.

I am writing this all down as I think it is important to understand the process at a granular level.  There are a lot of steps and they take time.

Let me know what questions you have.  And Happy Holidays!