Participating or Preferred: Scoble and Segal on VCs

Segal responds to Scoble.  This is worth a read, including all of the comments.  Scoble commented that he had heard a lot of stories where the VC’s and founders made a ton of money on the company, and the employees got nothing.  Segal disputes that assertion, saying that good VCs make sure the employees participate in the upside too.

Certainly, my experience has been that every VC wants to see a cap table with employee stock options part of it.  The size of the option pool varies, but there’s always an option pool.  And, they always want to see that option pool topped-up before every new round of investment to ensure that there’s a budget of stock options to incent employees as well as a budget of money to run the company.

I’m very glad to see that JL Albright seems to be such an enlightened investor. I don’t believe that Rick’s refreshing viewpoint is commonly held by all VCs, though. 

There’s one common way that employees get screwed on exit, and that’s a beast called a "participating preferred share", more commonly known as a double dip.  This feature of many term sheets says that the fund gets paid back their investment before any profits from the sale or IPO are divided among the common share holders. 

A preferred share is a convertible instrument — it’s like an interest bearing note convertible to common shares, but unlike a true debt instrument it votes as a shareholder, and is entitled to dividends.  On liquidation, the holder has to choose interest, or participation as a common shareholder.  Preferred shares are an effective way to ensure, in the case of a small exit, that the VC gets a return on investment.  A participating preferred share is BOTH an interest bearing note, and convertible to common shares.  The VC doesn’t have to make a choice, because the debt comes due, and then the note is converted to common shares. 

Particularly egregious are the multiples — 2x and 3x dips — which some VC firms ask for. This perversion of the participating preferred says that the VC is guaranteed a minimum of 2 or 3 times their investment before the conversion.  What this does is wipe out the common shareholders in a small or even medium sized exit scenario. The firm asking for this will tell you that the impact is minimal if you hit a home run, which is true.  Most exits aren’t home runs, though. They’re singles, and doubles.  My advice: when you encounter a multiple dip, walk.  There’s a very real risk that neither you, nor your employees, will ever see any return.

Bookmarking:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us
  • digg
  • Reddit
  • TailRank

3 Responses to “Participating or Preferred: Scoble and Segal on VCs”

  1. del.icio.us: How Much Did the Employees Get? -- Alec Saunders .LOG Says:

    [...] I will preface this by saying I know NOTHING about the actual deal between Yahoo and del.icio.us.  Om Malik’s posting, in which he speculated about the buyout price, set me thinking about the various scenarios for employees in this buyout.  You may recall a couple of weeks ago I wrote about participating vs preferred shares, and how they could impact employee stockholders and founders at exit, especially in the case of a small exit.  If the numbers are as Om speculates, then this seemed like a perfect opportunity to illustrate that impact. [...]

  2. will Says:

    Liquidation Preference + Participating Preferred is even scarier :)

  3. Peter Rip: Venture Capital is Broken -- Alec Saunders .LOG Says:

    [...] Peter Rip’s Venture Capital Sure Seems Broken - It’s About Time is the latest in a whole series of introspective pieces from VC’s on what’s wrong with their industry.  For entrepreneurs, there’s a very valuable lesson in this post.  High valuations can work to your disadvantage.  As I have written previously, planning for an early exit is smart planning.  Peter writes: Lots of cheap capital, available at high valuations seems great, until you do the exit math. Raise $8M at $12M pre-money and your post-money valuation is $20M. Your investors want to sell for $200M. Raise $2M at $4M pre- and your investors get the same rate of return at $60M. But a $60M exit is 10X more likely than $200M. Few VCs will write the $2M check these days, precisely because a $20M return doesn’t move the needle in a $500M fund. That’s why valuations are moving up – the need to invest more money – not the intrinsic value of startups. Higher valuations and high venture rounds may feel good in the short term, but with IPOs as scarce as they are, they can price you out of the very exit you seek. [...]

Leave a Reply