3 ms·
I think the problem with this type of argument is that all the things you mentioned will have to be reconsidered if the pool of potential investors widens to in
by gfodor 12y ago
I think the problem with this type of argument is that all the things you mentioned will have to be reconsidered if the pool of potential investors widens to include the general public. For example, if I have to live with a large cap table in order to have a chance to fund my venture, then of course I'm going to live with it vs not starting my company. The admission fee is a fair point but at a high level if there are tens of millions of potential "investors" out there now for startups who market themselves well enough then the market will find a way around the admission fee.
- rdlecler1 12y agoEurope has had a structure in place for awhile and these companies are accepting smaller dollar amounts. Still, raises tend to be a couple hundred thousand dollars when they are successful, and it's not going to be a common avenue for a company to raise large amounts of money. If you're doing something esoteric but popular you can go to Indiegogo/Kickstarter and resell without dilution and without SEC oversight. If the SEC provides a way to pool together smaller investments in a fun structure they would have be able to invest in opportunities like Uber. Probably the safest path (albeit venture investing is very very risky) is when investors get to invest alongside professional VCs because the company will have been better diligences, better capitalized, and there will be management oversight.