Unfortunately, too often I hear founders say things like “I promised her options for 2% of the company,” or worse, we see statements to that effect in employee offer letters or other agreements. In the worst cases, founders will even expressly agree to issue an investor or service provider a “fixed percentage” of the company’s ownership going forward.
Nearly every start-up begins in a garage, basement or home office. Some of today’s largest technology companies fall into that category, including Google, Apple, Hewlett-Packard and Amazon. But, at some point hopefully, the start-up outgrows its humble beginnings and needs to lease office, retail or storage space in order to meet consumer demands.
The passing of the JOBS Act created much fanfare, especially given the relaxation of the securities laws with respect to the use of “general solicitations.” Notwithstanding the excitement from the blogosphere, the revised rules also come with some hidden costs that make using a “general solicitation” in fundraising less attractive.
In a prior Founder Tip of the Week we discussed how the Internal Revenue Code (the “Tax Code”) characterizes unvested founder stock as not being purchased until it has vested, and that this characterization can have adverse tax consequences for the founder because the Tax Code treats as taxable income the excess, if any, of the fair market value of stock at the time it vests over the purchase price of the stock (the “spread”).
A new Delaware law, signed on July 17 by Gov. Jack Markell, allows companies to be formed as public benefit corporations (PBCs), which balance stockholders’ returns, the impact on other people affected by a company’s business activities, and the creation of an overall public benefit. Starting on August 1, Delaware companies will be able to form or reincorporate as PBCs, or merge with PBCs.
Whether a financing, merger or other acquisition, or other major transaction, parties often outline the major provisions in a non-binding term sheet or letter of intent. A principal benefit of this approach it to help the parties identify major areas of disagreement early to avoid wasted expense on additional diligence and drafting of the definitive agreements.
A corporation is a separate entity with its own liabilities for which the individual owners cannot be held personally liable. It is a concept that is old as dirt and right as rain, right? Surely everyone accepts this basic premise of doing business as a corporate entity? Well, perhaps everyone but the plaintiff’s attorney seeking to hold someone with deep pockets financially responsible for his client’s injuries.
Dilution is a term that is frequently discussed in the context of preferred stock financings. However, it is important to understand that there is a difference between dilution in the general sense and the type of dilution with respect to which preferred stockholders receive protection.
“Pre-money” or “pre-money valuation” is a term that entrepreneurs will hear and use a lot in the context of securing equity financing, so I thought it would be a good idea to make sure entrepreneurs have a clear understanding of it.
The date of an agreement is an important part of most business transactions and M & A is no exception. Many acquisition agreements begin with an “Agreement between” the parties “effective as of” a given date. Does it matter if this effective date is prior to the date the parties actually entered into the agreement? And if so, is this ‘backdating’ problematic or even potentially illegal?
