siegel

15 ms·

91.
by siegel 9y ago
That 5% is deadweight on the cap table. The investors don't want 5% of the company owned by a founder who is no longer employed by the company.
92.
by siegel 9y ago
Small software businesses get sued all the time. Those types of lawsuits don't usually get big headlines. So, that's why you don't typically read stories about it.
93.
by siegel 9y ago
Well, if you can't decide, I would venture to say that you might want to stay within driving distance. Stanford is great, but you will not be able to visit home (or be visited by people from home) all that often. But you have great o
94.
by siegel 9y ago
mindcrime is correct - you hdon't need to register a mark to have rights to that mark as a trademark in the US. You just have to use it in interstate commerce in connection with the goods/services at issue. If you were using it i
95.
by siegel 9y ago
Until you move, you're doing business in California. Once you move, that'll be a different story. My guess is you're not going to move to a state based on the minimum corporate tax rate :) So, once you move, it'll be e
96.
by siegel 9y ago
A) Apply to more than 3 schools. You sound like you have great credentials, but these things are unpredictable. B) Why only these 3 anyway? You want a great engineering school? What about Caltech? Harvey Mudd? I can name others. C) No
97.
by siegel 9y ago
Are you doing business in California? If so, you're going to pay the California franchise tax anyway. So, might as well stay as a California LLC.
98.
by siegel 9y ago
I definitely will!
99.
by siegel 9y ago
(I don't mean to say it's good that you feel helpless and sad. Just that you take enough pride and ownership of your work that you care that your company succeeds. It will serve you well, as long as you don't let that be yo
100.
by siegel 9y ago
It's good that you feel that way. You take pride in your work and that invaluable. But you are not facing a technological problem you do not know how to solve. You are facing a business problem that is largely out of your control. D
101.
by siegel 9y ago
Regarding this: "Founders typically receive common stock, i.e. a class of stock with no special rights or preferences. Although there have been efforts by various organizations to promote the issuance of special classes of stock for f
102.
by siegel 9y ago
Having done this many times, this list is a bit of overkill until a later stage financing. But it's still useful to read to get an idea of what you'll be getting into.
103.
by siegel 9y ago
Other than the difficulty they'll have in replacing you, what other factors are keeping you there? It's nice that the business can stay afloat with its current revenue, as that gives you some stability while you are looking for an
104.
by siegel 9y ago
Whenever there is an earnout in the M&A context, the acquiring company will attempt to insert language in the transaction agreements relieving the acquiror from any liability if it does not help (or even hinders) the target (or the rele
105.
by siegel 9y ago
That's a sensible approach. Of course, then you won't be entirely equal in terms of your ownership in the company once the security converts.
106.
by siegel 9y ago
So, you've been working for 9 months with no agreements with the company? Did you even assign the rights to the IP you are creating to the company? If not, well, you likely have plenty of leverage. smt88 is right that it's hard
107.
by siegel 9y ago
Check your invention assignment agreement with your employer. The company may have the right to search and audit any device you use for work, even if it's your personal laptop.
108.
by siegel 9y ago
One more thing: So, you have a 33-33-33 split. That means you can be fired, unless you build in protections for yourself. You don't want to put in a bunch of money into a startup, get fired, and have nothing to show for it.
109.
by siegel 9y ago
So, essentially, you are looking for co-founders for a potential startup. And you're willing to put funds on the table. That can be very attractive to potential co-founders. So, great. But do you intend to put in funds so that your
110.
by siegel 9y ago
How do you intend to use your own money to fund this startup, then? Unless you intend to just give a straight loan to the company to be paid back with interest at some future date, then this will eventually be an unequal split. That'
111.
by siegel 9y ago
I'm a tenor, but used to be a bass-baritone. So, the opposite of you. The B Minor Mass is a favorite of mine, as well. I do enjoy Herreweghe. But have you ever listened to a one-on-a-part version? This is a landmark recording: htt
112.
by siegel 9y ago
So, if my math is correct, if this were a standard 4-year vesting, 1-year cliff scenario, after 16 months you'd be at about 11%. It would be very generous of you to offer to treat things as if you were on a 4-year vesting/1-year c
113.
by siegel 9y ago
Spend any time with the St. Matthew and St. John Passions and I don't see how anyone could deny Bach's music is passionate (no pun intended...really).
114.
by siegel 9y ago
Well, if you're a fan of Buxtehude, have you listened to any music by Franz Tunder (Buxtehude's predecessor in Lubek)? My knowledge is mainly of their choral music, not organ music. So, might not have useful recommendations for
115.
by siegel 9y ago
I've seen a lot of deals...and a lot of messed up deals. Multi-founder teams with no vesting does happen. I think that's a mistake and advise against it. Things go wrong way more often than people think. I differ from many folks
116.
by siegel 9y ago
Huge J.S. Bach fan. Curious why you posted this of all things.
117.
by siegel 9y ago
People are right that you would end up being seen as dead weight on the cap table. Not automatically disqualifying to a VC. But not a good thing. One option we've used in these types of situations: You can enter into an agreement wit
118.
by siegel 9y ago
Most investors do, yes. But the investors aren't there to tell founders what to do at the initial incorporation phase, when vesting decisions initially get made. Of course those decisions can be modified when investors come on board,
119.
by siegel 9y ago
The directors and officers have a fiduciary duty to all shareholders, including non-employee shareholders. The level of difficulty in legally challenging a merger on fiduciary duty grounds depends on other factors, most prominently whether
120.
by siegel 9y ago
I hate to be a downer here, but a lot of options you disclose above are breaches of fiduciary duty that would end up getting the remaining founder sued. I'd really be careful about creative workarounds like that. Your point about know

More ›