Very interesting. Looks like a great option for those who understand and need it. For the founders 85% of something is better than 100% of nothing... Or, 85%

Very interesting. Looks like a great option for those who understand and need it. For the founders 85% of something is better than 100% of nothing... Or, 85% * some risk of Kima behaving 'badly' (from the founders' perspective). Having read the term sheet, I'll say that the desire to get for Kima the post-acquisition excess benefit of any acq-huire exit seems a reasonable request in concept ("Equalization of financial terms") but it does make the 15% more expensive if there are others who would invest similarly without it and figure that N % will acq-huire instead of failing, stalling, or growing. And it potentially goes a bit too far if one of the founders grows to be a business unit head at a large company. Would need to see the actual document language that addresses that though. Also, sorry to be OCD - to be consistent, "financial terms" should be capitalized in the section title. The biggest issue I'd have is the "Important Decisions" clause. Incubators and many (but not all) angels don't typically look for this level of ability to control that can block the company from growing. There is some evidence that Kima doesn't use their rights maliciously but that's the clause to think carefully about - if there is any disagreement, the IP is in the company and you can't raise money, give distributions, or sell the company (among other things) without consent. However, they invite you to talk to other Kima family companies, so I'd definitely do that and talk about business operations and decision making in the context of those Kima rights with them.