TNNWC ENTREPRENEURIAL PUBLICATIONS

TNNWC Publications And Informational Products Division publishes The National Networker (TNNWC) Weekly Newsletter and The BLUE TUESDAY Report especially for entrepreneurs and early-stage venturers; free weekly subscriptions to these informative publications are available online to all entrepreneurial Members of TNNWC.

Membership in TNNWC is free (it's automatic for any subscriber to any TNNWC Publication) and available at our website. When you arrive there, just click on any of the JOIN US or BECOME a MEMBER buttons or links.

Showing posts with label angel investors. Show all posts
Showing posts with label angel investors. Show all posts

Sunday, August 01, 2010

A NOTE FROM THE FOUNDER: Are Angel Investors Saviors or Propagators of Dip$#!t Companies?

Are Angel Investors Saviors or Propagators of Dip$#!t Companies?


by Adam J. Kovitz

A recent article in VentureBeat mentioned a keynote by angel investor Ron Conway at AngelConf as saying that every entrepreneur with the "guts" to do their own startup should get funded.

Contrary to that opinion, TechCrunch Editor Michael Arrington, when interviewed, expressed concern from a Venture Capitalist standpoint that the growing angel investor movement is training "an entire generation of entrepreneurs who are building dipshit companies".

In today's economic reality where jobs are scarce, corporate ethics are practically non-existent, banks aren't lending and political corruption reigns supreme, I am more sympathetic to Mr. Conway's point of view. I also believe that a "dipshit" company is something that is very subjective and hard to properly define with an executive summary, business plan or P&L statement.

And while the reality is that there are many business models that are simply not viable or worthy of consideration, they might be with the proper training (by such organizations as CEO Space and the like), there is still an urgency, now more than ever to get startups funded.  We cannot take too conservative a point of view - I don't believe that business should be conservative - it is about taking risks.  Proper funding is the key to job creation, innovation and a healthy economy - if we don't make this investment now, we will be dying a very slow and painful death.

We at TNNWC are about Empowering Emerging Enterprises through Capital, Traffic Building, International Customers and unique services.  We stand in the corner of every entrepreneur and emerging enterprise worldwide, ready to assist them in their success.  Expect more rollouts of our unique services over the next several months as well as information on them in our sister TNNWC publication:  The BLUE TUESDAY Report.


In the meantime, our publications will remain free and will focus on your success.  It all begins this month...we know you'll like what you see.

All my best,


Adam


www.TheNationalNetworker.com
http://adamjkovitz.blogspot.com

Membership is FREE!The NATIONAL NETWORKER™The NATIONAL NEWSPICKER™LEFT, RIGHT and CENTER™Financing, Credit and Risk ManagementEmerging Enterprises Venture Capital Program™Merchant Payment Processing SolutionsNews Releases, Publicity and Public RelationsBUZZWORKS™ - Branding and Social Media DominationMarket Research, Surveys and PollsAssessment ToolsBLOGWORKS™ - Expand Your Search Engine Presence, Positioning and CredibilityAdvertise with Us!Selected Service ProvidersInternational Connections Service - Go GlobalIntelligence and Information OperationsInstant Mobile Communications, Applications and Training
Visit Our WEBSITE for more!http://www.TheNationalNetworker.com
Capital, Traffic Building, International Customers and unique SERVICES.
The National Networker Publications™ produced by TNNWC Group, LLC
Empowering Emerging Enterprises”

Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Sunday, April 25, 2010

SOUND INVESTING: Artificial Constraints: The Truth About Investing

Sound Investing with Jason Lampa, MBA


DALBAR’s update of its Quantitative Analysis of Investor Behavior (QAIB) study found that while the S&P 500 has returned 8.35% over a 20-year period ending in 2008, the average equity investor earned just 1.87%, which was less than the inflation rate of 2.89%. Bond investors fared no better. They earned returns of just 0.77% compared to 7.43% for the index. Using the rule of 72 (a simple method for finding out the number of years it will take to double your investment), we find the average equity investor would need 39 years to double their investment, while bond investors would have to wait 94 years, respectively. Something has to give.

As part of my mission to help investors generate the returns necessary to make the experience of investing worthwhile, I would like to begin by discussing asset classes, investment styles, and individual securities. Stocks, bonds and cash are the most common asset categories. These are the categories that most investors understand as asset allocation, and hence rely on to generate the returns that will provide them a comfortable retirement. Let's add a couple of more to the asset allocation mix that can benefit investors. Real estate, precious metals and other commodities, and private equity are four additional asset classes that should be added to an investor's wealth building strategy.

For many years, gaining access to these additional asset classes was difficult, only available to the ultra-affluent. Through advances in technology, and a growing interest among the mass-affluent for additional investment choices, the opportunity for investors to take advantage of these options is now a reality.

Investment style refers to the different style characteristics of asset classes within a given investment portfolio.

Active vs Passive
Active investors rely on the belief that they have the ability to outperform the overall market by periodically adjusting their investment holdings and by selecting professional mangers to generate returns. Taking a passive approach, other investors buy into the philosophy that investors can not beat the overall market. It's a philosophy that industry pundits use to convince the general public of their expertise, though this philosophy is a false belief system.

Growth vs Value
In an effort to bring additional confusion to the investment process, the industry has created labels such as growth and value companies. A mutual fund or individual security is either labeled a growth or value play based upon numerous measurements. The following are a few of the fundamental characteristics measured:
  1. Price to Earnings
  2. Sales Growth
  3. Return on Equity
  4. EPS Growth
  5. Dividend Percentage
Small Cap, Mid Cap and Large Cap
Based upon the market value of a publicly traded company, it is assigned an artificial "box." Companies that have a market value of under $1 billion are labeled small capitalization companies, those between $1 billion and $ 5 billion are labeled middle capitalization and those above $5 billion are put into the large capitalization "box." The prevailing belief system is that smaller cap companies are a higher risk than large companies.

Individual securities are placed into sectors in which their firm operates. Companies that make software are placed into the technology sector. Those companies that make items such as refrigerators, washing machines, and tractors are put into the consumer durable sector. Overtime these sectors have exhibited certain return characteristics which the investor community believes is a result of the sector they are in. This is yet another false belief system that restricts investors from looking at what is actually happening here.

In summary, we have discussed asset allocation, investment styles and individual securities. The artificial labels that are placed on individual companies has been a convenient way for large, institutional investors to take advantage of retail investors who are not provided the entire story. In my next article, we will discuss how to ignore these artificial barriers and give yourself the best opportunity to generate wealth utilizing equity and fixed income securities.


For more information, please visit Jason's TNNWC Bio.




The National Networker Companies™ and TNNWC Group, LLC
Empowering Emerging Enterprises”
Membership in TNNWC’s Global Interactive Cooperative Business Community is free of charge and entitles you to receive both The National Networker Newsletter and The BLUE TUESDAY Report, as well as access to our unparalleled Suite of Business Services.
Join Us! Simply click on http://bit.ly/JoinTNNWC
Visit our website at http://www.TheNationalNetworker.com
Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Saturday, April 24, 2010

LIVING OUTSIDE THE BOX: Angel and Venture Capitol - The Most Cost Effective Way to End the Recession

Living Outside the Box with Joe Wallace


As the Great Recession enters its third year with no solution in sight, numerous writers are finally beginning to analyze the problem of unemployment in America. The real problem: the failure of the American economy and our government to achieve any success in job creation. It seems as though we are nearly $1 trillion into programs designed first to “save” the economy that always seem to turn into programs that “avoided disaster” after the saving just didn’t happen. Thomas Friedman, a historically liberal democrat who writes for the New York Times, has actually become one of the leading evangelists for the capitalistic practice of promoting and investing in start-up and emerging technology businesses. In a recent column Mr. Friedman wrote the following:

“You want to spend $20 billion of taxpayer money creating jobs? Call up the top 20 venture capital firms in America… and make them this offer: The US Treasury will give you each up to $1 billion to fund the best venture capital ideas that have come your way.”

That is the profound kind of bold and proven action that has the capacity to not only solve the unemployment problem, but to have Tom, myself, and Steve Forbes holding hands and dancing around the campfire singing kumbayah. There are four ingredients that are both vital and necessary for an entrepreneur to have an opportunity for a significant commercial success. They are talent, ideas, ambition, and of course, money. Venture capital only solves one of those needs. Friedman goes on to attack our immigration policies in a way that would go far to solve the other three needs. He points out correctly that 25 percent of successful high-tech start-ups over the last decade were founded or co-founded by immigrants. Some of the more visible ones are Sergey Brin, the Russian-born co-founder of Google and Vinod Khosla, the India-born co-founder of Sun Microsystems. In Silicon Valley that number is close to 50%. So the obvious solution to the talent, idea, and ambition issues is to use some of the venture money to attract immigrants who are hungry to participate in the American dream. He goes on to state the following.

“What made America this incredible engine of prosperity? It was immigration, plus free markets. Because we were so open to immigration -- and immigrants are by definition high-aspiring risk-takers, ready to leave their native lands in search of greater opportunities -- we as a country accumulated a disproportionate share of the world’s high-I.Q. risk-takers.”

America needs smart immigration reform. Our country was once a magnet to many of the world’s “high-IQ risk takers” and they came in droves creating what has been the most successful business model for a country that has existed in the modern world. Today, we are not only denying talented college graduate work visas, but we are on a taxation path that is repulsive to people who are starving for freedom and commercial success. That must change and it must change now.

I got a call from a colleague this week who was sort of teasing me about living in a location that has all of a sudden become a leading-edge city. My current home, Evansville, Indiana, that I have groused about for the eleven years has NO ANGEL INVESTMENT NETWORK and NO VENTURE CAPITAL FIRMS. It shows.We have a very limited number of corporate headquarters and no garage-to-stock market technology companies that are still in vogue in my old California home. People who grow up in Evansville routinely move to the coasts and achieve great successes. Without the ability to form equity capital, their dreams do not happen here.

My friend had read a copy of the Wall Street Journal article, “Angels out of America.” What he was chiding me about was that the new Finance Reform Act has a provision that further reduces the pool of Angel Investors making entrepreneurial success even more difficult in this country. Specifically what his congratulatory critique said is that “soon the whole country will “be like Evansville.” It was not meant as a compliment and it was not an endorsement of the bill before the Senate. Quite the opposite, he told me, rather than elevate the fortunes of Midwestern conservative enclaves like Evansville, that our President has finally shown his plan to bring the rest of the country down to the entrepreneurial level that we know as rock bottom. Brain drainers will no longer go to the coasts, now they will go to other countries.

How $30B can save the Economy: My Proposal

I have often wondered just how much impact Angel and Venture Capital has on the economy. The Government “needs” job creation yet private investors are into the creation of wealth. The two are symbiotic. I do not know of any case where wealth has been created where jobs have not been created too. There are many cases, most of them within the halls of government where “make work” jobs are created without generating any wealth at all. It is also a widely accepted that it takes roughly 7 employees in the private sector to support 1 government job. That alone eliminates government jobs or government controlled jobs from consideration.

It has been documented that through a business incubator, $1B will create 50,000 companies that will in turn create 250,000 jobs. That is a respectable $4,000 per job created as opposed to the GM bail-out number of $1.4 million per job saved. That being accepted, it is easy to scale this number to conclude that $30 Billion will create 7,500,000 jobs, or approximately the number that have been destroyed in the Great Recession.

I have experience with business incubation as I was the founding CEO of Innovation Pointe. In early 2008, some people from now President Obama’s campaign asked for my advice about what they should be doing to help small businesses. My simple response was “leave them alone.” They stared blankly at me and wanted an explanation. My gut response would have been to speak very slowly and to say “leave them the @#&* alone,” but I reconsidered that approach. I explained how government paperwork and taxation both defocused small businesses from concentrating on their business and how labor laws basically are repellent to hiring that important first employee. It all fell on deaf ears. At this point there is more paperwork, less available money, and a myriad of new reasons not to scratch an entrepreneurial itch, at least not in the United States of America.

That said I would like to amend my previous advice. What the Obama Administration should do to create the jobs that they need to create to keep their own jobs is to allocate $100M to every American city with a population over 100,000 people. The last time I looked there were about 300 such cities, so $30B would be the total investment. This money should be managed by a private money manager of which there are plenty available now, and should be exempted from every federal rule for businesses funded including Equal Opportunity, Family Leave Act, Davis-Bacon Laws, and even reporting period until a business reaches a significant size. I would suggest that size be $5M per year in revenue. There should be no elected officials allowed on the boards of directors of any of these venture firms.

This bold program would solve the unemployment problem that America is saddled with right now. It would also solve the innovation deficiencies that always grow when money is scarce and people get into survival mode. Maybe it would even attract some of the talent from abroad to our shores as it has for the last century.

You’ve heard that saying: As General Motors goes, so goes America. Thank goodness that is no longer true. We cannot afford to have a dysfunctional business as a role model. As Silicon Valley, Austin, Boulder, and Route 128 have taught us, as entrepreneurs go, so goes the economy. If this is true for a handful of leading cities, it should be the new mantra for America.

What’s in it for America? As long as the venture money, core innovation, the key management and corporate headquarters remain here and pay taxes our economy will prosper. America is where the best jobs, top management, marketing, design, and shareholders will be. Where innovation meets ambition and capital is raised still matters.

Recently government has been so involved in the future of the business community that many people are either laid off, or have taken their eye off the ball. Americans get their news and base their decisions on the rants of talk-show lunatics, tea parties and politics that has become a blood sport. Fortunately, though, we still have risk takers who are not paying attention to any of this nonsense, who know what world they’re living in -- and are just doing it. We need many more and the distraction of a $30B Venture fund available all across the country has just the potential to do exactly that.

When the success of this program is realized and we are once again a nation of doers and wealth creators, I will revert to the advice that I gave the enthusiastic supporters of President Obama when he was just a candidate. What should government do for business, “not a damn thing, leave them alone!”

As the Great Recession enters its third year with no solution in sight, numerous writers are finally beginning to analyze the problem of unemployment in America. The real problem: the failure of the American economy and our government to achieve any success in job creation. It seems as though we are nearly $1 trillion into programs designed first to “save” the economy that always seem to turn into programs that “avoided disaster” after the saving just didn’t happen. Thomas Friedman, a historically liberal democrat who writes for the New York Times, has actually become one of the leading evangelists for the capitalistic practice of promoting and investing in start-up and emerging technology businesses. In a recent column Mr. Friedman wrote the following.


For more information, please visit Joe's TNNW Bio.




COMMENT/RATE/SHARE THIS ARTICLE; CONTACT THE AUTHOR, & MORE...

The National Networker Companies™

Empowering Emerging Enterprises”

Membership in TNNWC’s Global Interactive Cooperative Business Community is free of charge and entitles you to receive both The National Networker Newsletter and The BLUE TUESDAY Report, as well as access to our unparalleled Suite of Business Services.

Join Us! Simply click on http://bit.ly/JoinTNNWC

Visit our website at http://www.TheNationalNetworker.com


Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

VENTURE FINANCING - REALITY VERSUS RUMOR: Angel Investors - What They Are, Part II

Venture Financing - Reality Versus Rumors with Dick Brown


A few weeks ago, I read this request in one of LinkedIn’s discussion groups:
Does anyone know where I can find angel investors for our project that requires $500,000 funding?
It was at the end of a good week and I was in a winsome mode. I responded:
Go to NYC. Book a room in the Plaza. At cocktail hour go to the Oak Bar and order a beer. 90% of all the people in that bar can afford to fund your project. Bring your lawyer to cover the details.

After writing this, it suddenly struck me that it was literally true and if you were at the Plaza and could interrupt the noise and loud conversations and quickly throw up a PowerPoint presentation, you might get the funding right there.

According to Ask.com and Wikipedia, one in 125 Americans was a millionaire in 2004, or roughly 2.3 million people. In a later report, by 2008, roughly 1.0% of high-net worth individuals (HNWIs) are those who reside in households with a net worth or wealth of $30 million or more. There are approximately 95,000 ultra-HNWIs in the world with 61,600 or 64.8% residing in the United States and Europe.The report is compiled annually by Capgemini for Merrill Lynch.

Today, we’ll categorize all these as potential angels, discuss their characteristics, and, give some tips as to finding and capturing them.

Today’s Angels
Today, angel groups play a major role in financing smaller ventures. Many VC companies have moved upstream and only finance deals over $5 million. Angels have filled the gap the VC’s created by their upstream move, and many concentrate on start-ups and smaller, emerging companies. A detailed look provides some surprising and somewhat reassuring statistics.

In 2004, angel investing first totaled $30 billion in comparison to $30 billion to $35 billion in venture capital investments, depending on how you count them. Those angel investments also went into an order of magnitude to a greater number of companies: 50,000 versus fewer than 3,000 VC-backed companies.

One investor analyst argued that "angel core values are back in vogue" as people with industry experience take leadership roles in backing new entrepreneurial ventures. He also noted that the "capital gap" between high-end angel rounds and low-end venture capital has grown to between $2 million and $5 million in financing as venture capital firms continue to increase median deal size and angel investors hit an upper limit of what is practical in a single round of financing.

Another analyst argued that the 50,000 angel-backed firms fall in the same categories as VC investments, i.e., software, hardware, biotech. These are not restaurants and dry cleaners. Also, he underscored that the $30 billion figure is sound. But with these statistics, questions remain for more research, such as: what happens to the angel-backed ventures that don't receive VC funding? Many grow and succeed; others fail.

“In 2004, only 3,000 new firms were founded by VC’s, while an estimated 48,000 businesses received start-up capital from people that identified themselves as angels.”

This can get a bit confusing since many, many different kinds of organizations can qualify to be called angels. For example: “Clubs, Groups & Associations.” Almost every area of the US has associations meant to attract or help entrepreneurs.

In California’s San Francisco Bay Area, there are a number of such organizations. These would include general organizations such as The Churchill Club in Campbell and the Software Forum in Palo Alto. There are also “national” groups such as the Asian Business Association in San Francisco and Monte Jade in Santa Clara that promote the business interests of Asians, both those living in the US and Asia.

No matter where you live in the US, you’ll find groups whose charter is to nurture entrepreneurs. When in doubt for where to look, start at the business schools of your local universities or your local Chamber of Commerce. There are the pure angel associations, such as Rocky Mountain Angels and New York Angels.

Investment Clubs & Rank Amateurs
There are small, investment clubs that pool together a few thousand dollars from their individual members. These clubs usually invest in the stock market. A few dabble in start-ups and other risky ventures. From your view as an entrepreneur, they are amateurs playing with “anxious money.” They rarely make any significant investments, but drive you (or your CEO) crazy with constant naive questions and near-daily suggestions.

There are other amateurs: “Green Angels,” the noveau-riche that just made a killing on some deal or stock option and are investing for the first time. Having them in your company is similar in pleasure to a root canal.

A Real World Example: Once I was trying to raise second-round money for a venture. One of our directors said he had an investment group (5 people) of MIT faculty that was interested. He booked a private room in Locke-Ober’s for dinner. (This is still one of the most expensive restaurants in Boston and home to many of “Old- Boston’s Power Elite.” At the time, they still didn’t allow women in certain sections.)

When they arrived (late), the oldest looked to be 17-18. I found out they were all students at MIT, not teachers. They proceeded to order the most expensive appetizers, lobster entrees, wines and fancy liquors on the menu.

However, they had done their homework on our venture. I sat for hours while they asked an endless array of questions, ranging from the very basics to minor details. At a break, and going against the prior advice of my friend (not a very good salesperson), I finally asked them how big their fund was and how much they might invest in our venture.

They said they had a total pool of $10,000 and might go as high as $2,500 for us if they liked all my answers to their questions.

I don’t think it occurred to them that the cost of the night’s dinner would eat up a substantial part of their entire contribution.

As we were leaving, one had the balls to ask me: “What do the other members of your team do while you’re out having fun like this?” I was very proud of myself that I didn’t hit him. I made my friend pay for the dinner.

Still, you may find some potential in certain investment clubs. People that have common social associations such as friends, neighbors, colleagues or other persons who pool money for the purpose of making investments most often form these. If your business offers a potentially high ROI, and you are willing to trade off some of your ownership future for current cash, you might consider these. Beware of the fact that each of the individuals in these clubs will consider themselves to be your most important stockholder for very a long time.

Internet Investors and Networks
Against any/all current wisdom, I have never had any luck finding investors through “Listing Exchanges” over the Internet. I have met some interesting people and followed numerous opportunities, but have never been able to get a check from anybody.

I think there’s a basic underlying fallacy with the Internet or other such “matching” services. They all list entrepreneurs (mostly for a fee) and hope that investors will look at the listings contact the entrepreneurs and make a deal. Many of the services also ask investors for some personal information similar to that required in a “Sophisticated Investor” letter. Thus, the potential investor gives away some of their privacy before they even begin.

I would bet that the people looking for funding via the Internet matching outnumbers potential investors by at least 500 to 1. I have a tough time imagining an investor with loose-change spending hours searching for companies on the Internet. It’s a lot of work and it’s much easier for this person to invest in a stock, bond or VC fund. Also, I have found that many of the companies on the Internet that respond to investor inquiries are naive and incredibly ill-prepared.

To make matters worst, many of the “matching” home pages now beginning to charge both the companies seeking funds and the potential investors through a “membership dues” ploy. As a potential investor, I may now be further inconvenienced by having to spend my money just to look for investments. Further, I may have to wade through many “screening menus” to get to certain potential investment categories.

On the other hand, a few years ago, I had a business meeting with the principals of a venture in Fremont, CA. Their president swore he got $50,000 from an investor in Thailand after two e-mail exchanges. I didn’t see the check, but I have no reason not to believe him.

College Venture Networks
Stanford, MIT, UCLA, UNH and other universities have matching services that pre-date the Internet. I have tried them. My experience is similar to such services on the Internet.

Partnerships and Dependent Joint Ventures
Instead of looking for pure investment funds, you might consider forming partnerships or joint ventures with complementary companies. Generally, in these structures each partner puts up capital (or other assets) to form the company. Each partner agrees to hold a certain percentage of ownership in the company and is to be paid part of the profits, depending on the degree of ownership held.

Often, this structure initially seems attractive since the individuals bring complementary assets. For instance, a beef supplier or bun baker partners and invests in a hamburger shop.

The degree of ownership will usually depend on the money invested or individual experience, skills and/or effort. The original entrepreneur may own a larger piece than the pure amount of money invested. Or, sometimes they invest no money and become an equal partner for their concepts and expertise.

On the dark side, every dollar of profit has to be split between you and your partners. Further, partnerships have the very highest failure rates, since all the partners may not have the same goals. The result is often that the people don’t get along well and since they are partners, all share in the decision-making. Bad personal relations may end up souring the entire partnership with no easy remedy.

Be aware that actually choosing a partnership as the legal form, you may never be able to get new, outside investors. For instance, many partnership agreements automatically terminate upon the death or loss of a single partner and no outside moneyman will accept such arrangements.

“Entrepreneur Showcases”
The schools and organizations above also sponsor periodic “showcases” of new ventures and businesses. They are well attended by potential investors and the climate is very conducive to deal making. I would urge you to be an exhibitor at any of these you can find. Societies such as MIT, Asian Business Association and Monte Jade also host such meetings. The latter are fascinating since many VC’s from Taipei, Hong Kong and Singapore attended, actively looking for US investments. Where else can you make your pitch to a qualified audience (they have the money) that have also traveled some distance and paid to listen to you?

Family Investment Companies
A number of wealthy families in the United States and Canada have set up foundations and corporations for investment purposes. Typically, family members pool their resources into a company and have it managed by investment professionals. More and more family fortunes are being made available as seed capital for new and emerging enterprises.

Venture Capital Executives as Angels
Many of the senior managers of VC companies that I’ve known will take personal flyers on deals that they absolutely refuse to consider for their funds. Basically they like the people or the idea and may throw their own money into the deal.

Every time any VC ever turns you down, always ask him/her if they’d be interested personally and/or if there are any other VC’s that they know that might also be potential angels.


Other Alternatives and Variations
Thus far, we’ve discussed various sources of equity deals. A few variations:

Angel & Venture Capital Loans
In some cases, investors may loan entrepreneurs the necessary capital. These are sometimes only guaranteed by stock in the company as collateral. These deals sometimes work out very well for the VC’s.

In June of 1997, Benchmark Capital of Menlo Park, CA made two loans of $750,000 to a small, online auction company, eBay, Inc. The founder and another employee pledged 6.9 million shares each as collateral. In January of 1999, Benchmark called a clause in the agreement, gaining 13.8 million shares of stock. In April of 1999, the stock was worth $171.75/share or some $2.4 billion, a 160,000% return!

Venture Capital/Angel Guarantors (Loan/Line Guarantees)
Some venture capital firms or private investors will guarantee all or part of an entrepreneur's bank loan or line-of-credit in exchange for equity or other, non-cash, compensation.

This allows the entrepreneur to get a sizable bank loan while maintaining his business assets separate from his personal assets. He does not have to pledge personal assets or make personal guarantees. The actual investor may obtain the same equity share for a loan guarantee as for a direct investment of cash.

In these cases, the guarantee could be very costly to you in both in terms of ownership and the future profits. Further, you are assuming debt very early in the life of your company and this may lock out the possibility of bank or other debt financing later in the cycle. On the other side, guarantees are a more attractive form of investment for the venture capitalist because they have no immediate cash outlay and they also have a call on the assets that back your guarantee.

Venture capitalists may guarantee such loans in exchange for up-front fees, a percentage of the entrepreneur's future revenue, warrants on future stock, or any number of different combinations.

Venture Capital/Angel Lease Guarantees
In many cases, start-up ventures just need certain equipment to get a venture or expansion off the ground. This equipment could be vehicles, heavy construction equipment, data processing equipment, computers, machinery, laboratory equipment, and even real estate. An investor may guarantee your lease with a bank or leasing company to allow you to lease the equipment. You must ensure that you fully understand all the leasing terms and are able to handle the monthly commitment of the payback without any problem.

In exchange for their guarantee you give the investor a portion of the profits at the end of the year and/or you sell them shares in the business. There must be a binding agreement between you and it must be clear in the agreement how and when the money will be repaid. You’ll need a good lawyer.

The disadvantage in this example is that should you run into financial trouble you could very well find a bailiff at your door to seize your equipment.

The 3F's and Green Angels
Almost all new entrepreneurs take money from the 3F’s (Friends, Family, Fools.) Clearly, in the first two categories (family and friends), it’ll be very embarrassing if you lose all the money invested by your grandmother, favorite aunt or former co-worker. However, that’s your call, based on the love and stability of these relationships.

Having fools invest (family or unsophisticated outsiders) gets to be a more serious problem. Most have never been in a venture before and are the same kind of problem as “Green Angels.” They are playing with “anxious money” that they really can’t afford to lose.

They eat up an enormous amount of your time by constantly calling you, making naive (e.g., stupid) suggestions, conducting investigations or demanding changes. Your personal relationship with them may also make it very hard for you to abruptly cut them out. When in doubt, don’t take their money. Ever!

Angel Professionals (Doctors, Dentists, Lawyers & Accountants)
A great source of smaller funding. The first two, doctors and dentists, have money and tend to live on the outer fringes of the world of entrepreneurs. Often they will invest just to have the experience of being an “insider.” Unless your product or service is medically related, I suggest that you only approach medical people as “targets of opportunity.” Limit your list to people that you already know, or are “friends of friends.”

On the other hand, your lawyers and accountants depend on you to be successful so that you can continue to pay them. It’s only fitting that you ask them to be investors. One of the other reasons for having large organizations provide you with professional services is so you can “pass the hat” through the organization when you need funding.

I once was able to raise a very quick $500,000 through a friend of mine that was an investment banker. When we had the closing and received all the individual checks, I looked at the names on the checks and recognized that he had merely “passed his hat” (for me) amongst the people in his investment firm and to my own lawyers and accountants.


The type of financing finally accomplished is limited only by the characteristics of your investors and your mutual imaginations … and, your tax situations … and, an array of federal and state securities laws, meant to protect the naive and “widows and orphans."


- More Later on VC’s and Angels -

- 30 -



For more information, please visit Dick's TNNW Bio.





COMMENT/RATE/SHARE THIS ARTICLE; CONTACT THE AUTHOR, & MORE...

The National Networker Companies





Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Saturday, March 06, 2010

VENTURE FINANCING - REALITY VERSUS RUMOR: Angel Investors - What They Are, Part I


Venture Financing - Reality Versus Rumor with Dick Brown


These are not the Biblical angels that the Christians inherited from Jewish lore … nor are they necessarily creatures of good, spirits of love, or messengers from “above” - blissfully flitting “on gossamer wings”. Historically, they’re more closely related to the “angels” widely known as the financiers behind Broadway productions and Hollywood movies. Universally, they’re not in it for religion or bright lights, but bucks.

Investor angels provide a large percentage of the seed/growth capital to companies in the US. They typically invest their own funds, unlike venture capitalists who use OPM (Other Peoples’ Money). Although an individual makes the final investment decision, the actual funding may be from their trust, business, limited liability company, investment fund, etc.

Angel capital conveniently fills the gap in start-up financing between "friends, family and fools" and the VC’s. It is unusually difficult to raise more than a few thousand dollars from the 3F’s and even small venture capital firms will not consider investments under $1M to $2M. Thus, as the biblical ones, financial angels bridge a gap … not between heaven and earth, but between two of the most common sources of capital available to most entrepreneurs.

Angel investment is a common second round of financing for high-growth start-ups, and accounts in total for almost as much money invested annually as all venture capital funds combined, but into more than ten times as many companies ($26 billion vs. $30.69 billion in the US in 2007, and into 57,000 companies vs. the VC’s 3,918 companies).1

Of the US companies that received angel funding in 2007, the average capital raised was about $450,000. However, there is no “set amount” for angel investors, and the range can go anywhere from a few thousand to a few million dollars. Software accounted for the largest share of angel investments, with 27 percent of total angel investments in 2007, followed by healthcare services, and medical devices and equipment (19 percent) and biotech (12 percent). The remaining investments were approximately equally weighted across high-tech sectors. Angel financing, while more readily available than venture financing, is still extremely difficult to raise.1

Investment Criteria
Angel investments bear high risk and can be subject to dilution from future investment rounds. Angels use about the same ROI formulas as VC’s and seek investments that have the potential to return at least 10 or more times their original investment within 5 years - as well as those that can execute a defined exit strategy.

Their Community
According to the Center for Venture Research, there were 258,000 active angel investors in the U.S. in 2007. According to the US Small Business Administration, the number of individuals in the US who made an angel investment between 2001 and 2003 is between 300,000 and 600,000.

Gradually, angels started to coalesce into informal groups with the goal of sharing deal flow and due diligence work, and pooling their funds to make larger investments. One of the first (and the best known) of these was Hans Severins’ formation of the Band of Angels in 1994 in San Francisco, http://www.bandangels.com/.

Perhaps typical of angel groups, the Band of Angel’s track record is noted on their web page: “The Band has invested more than $186M into 200+ companies since 1994. Of these 45 have been acquired for a gain, and 9 have gone public on the NASDAQ. The cumulative IRR for all band investments since inception, including the losses suffered through the bust, is a positive 18%”.

Such angel groups are generally made up of 10 to 150 accredited investors interested in early-stage investing. The more advanced of these groups can have full time, professional staffs; associated investment funds; sophisticated web-based platforms for processing funding applications; and substantial operating budgets. Some such as the NY Angels, (http://angelsoft.net/angel-group/new-york-angels); founded by financial legend, David Rose; hand out more paperwork and forms to the new entrepreneur than comparable VC’s … and, have far longer waiting periods before being formally considered.

Today, there are dozens of angel groups, scattered across the US and other advanced countries, with varied charters and called a variety of different names. Even with the current recession, angel groups have grown like the Google’s cash flow. There’s hardly a city or university that doesn’t have an angel group. Just check on the Internet.

General Angel Characteristics:
  • They are business executives and owners.
  • The average age of an angel investor is 47. Few are younger than 35 or older than 65.
  • Most are white males and 72% have a college degree.
  • The average income is greater than $90,000.
  • The average net worth is $750,000.
  • Their average investment is $25,000 to $50,000 per deal.
  • Their acceptance of deals is around 20%. (They actually invest in 1 out of every 5 deals that they see.)
  • Only 1 in 12 is a lone investor. (For those weak in arithmetic, this means that 11 out of every 12 angels need someone else to invest in the deal with them.)

Types of Angels
Entrepreneur/Executives
These angels exist within the power structure of your industry or their own. They are most grateful for their success and often somewhat embarrassed by it. They are very willing to help newcomers to the game. Often they will devote almost excessive time, money and effort to help you succeed. They remember that early in their careers, someone once helped them. They rarely have “hidden agendas” and are close to your “perfect investor”.

Wealthy Individuals
There are many wealthy individuals who enjoy helping new businesses. The best candidates may also have an interest in the specific kind of business you are starting. Generally, they do not have formal investment evaluation criteria. They rely instead on instinct and on endorsement introductions from other successful individuals or advisors.

Most expect a handsome ROI over a relatively short period of time. Rarely do they intend to become permanent investors in the business. Wealthy individuals actively monitor their investments, and most frequently as board members.

They enjoy the social prestige of being benefactors to successful new businesses. Their personal contacts and business abilities are valuable resources.

“Corporate” Angels
There are many companies that are looking for new products and services to broaden their business markets. Depending on your venture, they may invest money, time, facilities, technical support and many other potentially valuable assets. They can move quickly … sometimes too quickly from the view of their own investors.

Biggest barrier? Political factions in their company playing “not invented here!”
Best advantage? Have the CEO like you.

What are the differences between the Executive/Entrepreneur and the Corporate Angel? The former invests their personal money. The latter uses company money.

The Entrepreneur/Executives and the Corporate Angels should be at the top of your list as sources of capital. In addition to money they have power, influence and many friends.

Even better, you can find them fairly easily. Every state has publications that list all the companies in the state, by region, by industry, by size, and other categories with the names of the executives and the phone/ fax numbers. Many of these publications sell the lists and in many cases on disks, already formatted for “lead tracking software”, such as Outlook or ACT.

Foreign Angels
If you can locate them, Non-US Citizens are perhaps the very best “pure” investors. They have no protection under most US securities laws. They live in another country. They rarely call you and usually don’t even bother showing up at the yearly stockholders meeting. The real ones are rich, usually naive, and simply trying to make money.

On the other hand, they are terribly hard to find and close, even over the Internet. And, you don’t know who they truly are … or, the real reason they want to invest in your company. And if they are “Bad Angels” or “Fallen Angels”, they are smart enough not to have their business cards read “Tijuana Drug Cartel, Mexico.”

Having opened this subject, the single largest problem for organized crime is what to do with all the cash. It is not uncommon for criminal organizations to form “front companies” that invest in interesting opportunities. They’re very good at hiding the real ownership. Legend has it that the Mafia started and owned the NY banks that gradually morphed into American Express. Be careful whose money you take!

1 Source: Wikipedia


- More about Angels Next Month -

- 30 -


For more information, please visit Dick's TNNW Bio.





THIS ARTICLE--THIS AUTHOR--YOUR FEEDBACK


(1) If you would like to post a comment on this article for this author and for other readers to see, or if you would like to read the comments which have been posted by others, simply scroll down to the very bottom of this article (where it says "Posted by...") and click on the small text hyperlink that says "comments": a pop-up window will open which shows all of the comments posted by others. At the end of the other posts, there is a textbox for you to post your own comment.

(2) If you would prefer to contact the author in confidence, or to write at greater length regarding reciprocal links, special projects or professional issues, simply click on the button in this box labeled "CONTACT AUTHOR," and a pop-up form will magically appear for your use. It even allows you to include web and blog urls, downloads and attachments of all sorts.

(3) If you have not yet become a Member of THE NATIONAL NETWORKER COMPANIES (there is no charge), you should do that using the buttons below. Click on FREE NEWSLETTER button to start the process; then choose either the RSS Feed or the Daily Email delivery option.


Contact Author
Join TNNWC
Free Newsletters
Daily Email Extra
Total RSS Feed
BACKTALK! ™



*Follow TNNW on Twitter at http://twitter.com/TNNW_BUZZWORKS
*Published by TNNWC. All rights reserved.
*Join our GICBC and receive Your TNNW Newsletter and THE BLUE TUESDAY REPORT! - Click HERE
The National Networker Companies





Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Blog Archive

BNI News Feed

The Emergence of The Relationship Economy

The Emergence of The Relationship Economy
The Emergence of the Relationship Economy features TNNWC Founder, Adam J. Kovitz as a contributing author and contains some of his early work on The Laws of Relationship Capital. The book is available in hardcopy and e-book formats. With a forward written by Doc Searls (of Cluetrain Manifesto fame), it is considered a "must read" for anyone responsible for the strategic direction of their business. If you would like to purchase your own copy, please click the image above.

Knowledge@Wharton













Site Credits:


Featured in Alltop
ALLTOP Business
News Wire. HOT.
Cool Javascript codes for websites
KeepandShare.com(R)  Fabulous Free Calendars

Create FREE graphics at FlamingText.com