3 ms·
An informative video, especially the % given to cofounders/early employees but this is a very atypical startup (when they were starting up) with VC funding (ear
by terpua 17y ago
An informative video, especially the % given to cofounders/early employees but this is a very atypical startup (when they were starting up) with VC funding (early on) and seemingly everything going right. I mean they signed up Wilson Sonsini as if you just walk in, pitch and that's it. That wasn't my personal experience talking to Wilson Sonsini (via a referral).
I think most of us have a lot harder time in all departments (getting cofounders, early employees for cheap, legal, etc.).
- sachinag 17y agoI have never, ever, heard of a law firm turning down a new client. Now, WSGR can decline to defer expenses at their discretion, but surely anyone can engage WSGR to do the basic incorporation work for a reasonable fee.
- terpua 17y agoI was referring to engagement beyond basic incorporation but investor agreements, series A docs, etc. We were turned down (in 2000) by WSGR. We went with Orrick instead.
- BRadmin 17y agoJust for clarification as the above commenter brought up, were you turned down even with the offer to pay, or were you not given the option to defer expenses (did they offer the option in exchange for part of the company)?
- terpua 17y agoEven with offer to pay. At that time, there were too many startups and not enough partners/lawyers to take them all on. Maybe it was the sign of the times and things have changed.
- tptacek 17y agoMy experience with WSGR in 2005 was that they were ultra-interested in helping us despite a near total lack of any credible way of paying them in the immediate future. I'm guessing Mint is not atypical in this regard. Could it have been the Manila thing?
- terpua 17y agoI was in SV at that time. Perhaps it was the sign of the times and WSGR had their pick of startups. Luckily, we were able to raise VC money but at the time, it was a bit demoralizing to have a legal firm say no to your money.