Ycombinator has forever changed the landscape for entrepreneurs for the better =D
Tech VCs Promise to Never Disagree with Founders
11–20 of 22 posts
Re: Tech VCs Promise to Never Disagree with Founders
#12Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article doesn't clearly say board votes. It actually says "vote the shares", which, I'm not all that clear how often or with what significance shareholder votes happen in a pre-ipo company.
I'm not gonna save never because I'm sure there have been bizarre exceptions but....basically there are never shareholder votes. Only board votes.
When the composition of board itself is changed, I think that has to be agreed by shareholders. There can be differences between legislations though.
Re: Tech VCs Promise to Never Disagree with Founders
#13So...what happens when the next Gurbaksh Chahal[1] gets funded by Felicis Ventures?
[1] http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/gurbaksh-chahals-ugly...
Re: Tech VCs Promise to Never Disagree with Founders
#14"“We’ll be voting unconditionally with the CEO,” Senkut said in an interview. “It’s time for bold moves.”///"
spoken like a true believer
Re: Tech VCs Promise to Never Disagree with Founders
#15Personally, as a CEO, I would like to have an investor questioning my moves so that I am forced to consider my choices from different perspectives.
If I'm constantly being told I'm the golden boy then I'm doomed.
Re: Tech VCs Promise to Never Disagree with Founders
#16Theoretically, if there is trust between the founders and the VC's shouldn't both of them have one seat?
Re: Tech VCs Promise to Never Disagree with Founders
#17At first I thought this title was a poorly timed April Fools Joke.
I would imagine there are only a few decisions the founders make that ever come down to votes based on shares. Off the top of my head: Selling the company, firing the CEO, electing a new board, diluting existing shareholders, dividends.
The impact of this decision is probably heavily based on how often Felicis has a big enough stake to be a factor in shareholder voting.
Re: Tech VCs Promise to Never Disagree with Founders
#18At first I thought this title was a poorly timed April Fools Joke. I would imagine there are only a few decisions the founders make that ever come down to votes based on shares. Off the top of my head: Selling the company, firing the CEO, electing a new board, diluting existing shareholders, dividends. The impact of this decision is probably heavily based on how often Felicis has a big enough stake to be a factor in…
Minority protections probably already cover the cases you describe (eg veto rights).
Re: Tech VCs Promise to Never Disagree with Founders
#19Great move.
If you just want to invest, and take your hands off, this is great. It means you have less work managing, so you can make smaller 'bets'... err, I mean investments.
Also means the team can get on with it, and have to spend less time managing investors. Yes, some start ups do spend a lot of time doing stuff just to present nicely to investors. From taking days off working on product preparing the office so it looks more professional, to preparing speeches, and developing further pitches.
Re: Tech VCs Promise to Never Disagree with Founders
#20At first I thought this title was a poorly timed April Fools Joke. I would imagine there are only a few decisions the founders make that ever come down to votes based on shares. Off the top of my head: Selling the company, firing the CEO, electing a new board, diluting existing shareholders, dividends. The impact of this decision is probably heavily based on how often Felicis has a big enough stake to be a factor in…
Minority protections probably already cover the cases you describe (eg veto rights).
Shareholder agreements typically cover even more of them (drag-along, tag-along, first right to refuse and so on).