3 ms·

In this day and age of high-quality, freely available information and education online about taking investment, do you have data to suggest this level of relati

In this day and age of high-quality, freely available information and education online about taking investment, do you have data to suggest this level of relationship/terms is common? My assumption would be that CEOs are getting savvier and things like open source term sheets/agreements are helping level the playing field. Some companies might be forced to take investment, some founders might be greedy, some might be uneducated. Some ultimately feel that the combined funding, connections, and experience they can tap is the only thing that will let them beat out the competition to being the 800lb gorilla in a hot new market.

graycat 11y ago
> do you have data to suggest this level of relationship/terms is common? Read the on-line stuff about standard term sheets. E.g., pay attention to some of the details that a founder, say, one that was just fired, can encounter in handling the options where they are already vested -- net, they may come away with zip, zilch, and zero or nearly so. IIRC there was a lot at Fred Wilson's AVC.com, especially part of his MBA Mondays posts. Long, broad advice has been, don't take VC money unless you really need it. As soon as you sign that term sheet, take that check, etc., you are now reporting to a BoD that can fire you and, with the usual terms, leave you with little or nothing while the investors just walk off with your company and all its software, customers, value, etc. The OP is giving various reasons why "Really, Ms. Product Founder, you didn't really want to be CEO, did you? Of course you didn't. So, just let us find a really good professional manager to handle that terrible, 'incredibly difficult' work of CEO while you move on to a better quality of life" and the VCs get total control, e.g., with their puppet CEO, and essentially all the financial value. It's Star Wars III with young, naive, angry, afraid, gullible Anakin Skywalker listening to the Sith Lord about how Anakin really doesn't want to be a Jedi Knight.

graycat 11y ago

> do you have data to suggest this level of relationship/terms is common? Read the on-line stuff about standard term sheets. E.g., pay attention to some of the details that a founder, say, one that was just fired, can encounter in handling the options where they are already vested -- net, they may come away with zip, zilch, and zero or nearly so. IIRC there was a lot at Fred Wilson's AVC.com, especially part of his MBA Mondays posts. Long, broad advice has been, don't take VC money unless you really need it. As soon as you sign that term sheet, take that check, etc., you are now reporting to a BoD that can fire you and, with the usual terms, leave you with little or nothing while the investors just walk off with your company and all its software, customers, value, etc. The OP is giving various reasons why "Really, Ms. Product Founder, you didn't really want to be CEO, did you? Of course you didn't. So, just let us find a really good professional manager to handle that terrible, 'incredibly difficult' work of CEO while you move on to a better quality of life" and the VCs get total control, e.g., with their puppet CEO, and essentially all the financial value. It's Star Wars III with young, naive, angry, afraid, gullible Anakin Skywalker listening to the Sith Lord about how Anakin really doesn't want to be a Jedi Knight.