« Kerry/Edwards | Main | Valuation (Continued) »
Valuation
There’s this dance that entrepreneurs and venture capitalists do when it comes time to negotiate the economic terms of an investment. And it all revolves around valuation.
The question is what is the fair value of the business? This supposedly establishes how much of the company the venture capitalists will own for their investment.
But I think the concept of valuation is often misunderstood by the people engaged in this process. And it’s particularly true in early stage investing.
I do not believe that negotiating a valuation on an early stage venture investment has much to do with the current value of the business. If it did, why would a venture capitalist agree to a $10 million value for a business that will lose money for the next 2-4 years and has little, if any, revenue?
The fact is that almost all venture capital deals are done as convertible preferred stock investments. That means that the money we invest is more like a debt instrument in the event the business doesn’t work out very well. We get our money out before the entrepreneurs do if the deal goes sideways or down.
It’s only in the event that the deal works out that the percentage of the business (the thing that valuation is supposed to determine) matters in terms of how much money we make.
Another important factor to consider is that only a relatively small portion of early stage venture investments really work out in the way they were supposed to when the investment was made. In my experience, which is based on 17 years in the business and over 100 different early stage investments over that time period, there is a 1/3 rule.
The 1/3 rule goes as follows:
1/3 of the deals really work out the way you thought they would and produce great gains. These gains are often in the 5-10x range. The entrepreneurs generally do very well on these deals.
1/3 of the deals end up going mostly sideways. They turn into businesses, but not businesses that can produce significant gains. The gains on these deals are in the range of 1-2x and the venture capitalists get most to all of the money generated in these deals.
1/3 of the deals turn out badly. They are shut down or sold for less than the money invested. In these deals the venture capitalists get all the money even though it isn’t much.
So if you take the 1/3 rule and add to it the typical structure of a venture capital deal, you’ll quickly see that the venture capitalist is not really negotiating a value at all. We are negotiating how much of the upside we are going to in the 1/3 of our deals that actually produce real gains. Our deal structure provides most of the downside protection that protects our capital.
I think it is much better to think of a venture capital deal as a loan plus an option. The loan will be repaid on 2/3 of our investments and partially repaid on some of the rest. The option comes into play in a big way on something like 1/3 of our investments and probably no more than half of all of our investments.
There is more to this whole issue of valuation because there are often follow-on rounds where the deal between the venture capitalists and entrepreneurs gets renegotiated. I’ll save that for another post.
July 6, 2004 in Venture Capital and Technology | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/5934/898363
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Valuation:
» To VC or not to VC from Marketing a start-up in the 21st century
AVC talks about the intricacies of valuing a business for funding. A very interesting and honest post, especially for a company like ours. We've been debating if we should approach VC firms for funding. On the one hand, like most [Read More]
Tracked on Jul 7, 2004 1:03:02 AM
» Venture Capital Deal Algebra from Feld Thoughts
Fred Wilson wrote a useful post on valuation today. It reminded me of a document I had Dave Jilk write when he was doing some work for me. I decided to write this "bladon" (Blog Add-on) post - inspired by Fred. Please read Fred's post first - it lays t... [Read More]
Tracked on Jul 7, 2004 2:29:20 AM
» VC valuation from rtwodtwo
http://avc.blogs.com/a_vc/2004/07/valuation.html nice success ratio...... [Read More]
Tracked on Jul 7, 2004 7:47:46 AM
» Valuation Explained from Business Opportunities Weblog
Fred Wilson, the venture capitalist, explained valuation today on A VC: The question is what is the fair value of the business? This supposedly establishes how much of the company the venture capitalists will own for their investment. But I... [Read More]
Tracked on Jul 7, 2004 1:04:23 PM
» To VC or not to VC from Marketing a start-up in the 21st century
AVC talks about the intricacies of valuing a business for funding. A very interesting and honest post, interesting especially for a company like ours. We've been debating if we should approach VC firms for funding. On the one hand, like [Read More]
Tracked on Jul 8, 2004 3:53:57 AM
» Valuación de la empresa y capital de riesgo from Nada importante sucedió hoy...
Navegando por weblogs del mundo del Venture Capital he podido encontrar algunos comentarios interesantes, principalmente porque los mismos están escritos por gente que está vinculada a esa industria directa o indirectamente, con todo lo que esto signif... [Read More]
Tracked on Jan 15, 2005 3:33:09 PM
» Dissecting the VC deal from Greek Complexity
Read an old-ish post on A VC about how to value a company. The post doesn't really go into specifics of how to value a company but I came across a comment that I found really interesting as a financial [Read More]
Tracked on Mar 20, 2005 10:02:43 PM
Comments
Nice to see these rough numbers. I would have said that the last part would comprise more than 1/3 and the first part would comprise less than 1/3. But maybe that's just my 2001-2 nightmares.
Posted by: Randy Charles Morin | Jul 6, 2004 8:35:02 PM
That's a really interesting post, thanks.
We're currently debating if we should approach VC firms for our own start-up. Part of me is being sick of being poor and underfunded, part of me wants to build the business slowly and keep total control.
We attended 'Show me the money' in London a couple of weeks back and got a lot of attention. Unfortunately all that did was to make me feel like a sheep surrounded by wolves.
I, and this is not a statement meant to cause offence, still have to meet a VC I trust to have my best interest in mind.
Posted by: Andreas Duess | Jul 7, 2004 12:49:05 AM
Hi Fred,
Just started trawling the VC/entrepreneur blogs as my co's in the midst of a raise...looking for useful info. and I've found much thanks to you, Brad Feld, Matt Blumberg and Ed Sim!
Anyway, I came across something interesting not too long ago that relates to this Valuation post you wrote last July.
An analysis of by a local (Chicago) F500 consumer products company of its most recent 26 strategic investments yielded the following metrics (these are multiples on investment):
* MAX = 7.4
* MIN = 1.3
* MEAN = 3.2
* STD DEV = 1.7
What seems noteworthy to me is that they never wound-up underwater. True, you don't see any Google-like gains, but -- at least over the time period / basket analyzed -- still seems like returns with which, were this a VC versus SI, the LPs would be happy.
So, my question is: Why aren't there any VCs pitching prospective LPs on a lower fallout model; i.e., why stick with 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 always going/hoping for the outsized gains?
I must be missing something, because I'm sure I haven't thought of anything that hasn't already been considered; e.g., are these stat's an aberation -- or do strategics have more influence to keep things from going sideways/down so as to make these numbers inapplicable to a VC model?
Sorry for the long response, but I sadly enjoy spending my Saturdays thinking about such questions :)
Posted by: Robb Hendrickson | Sep 24, 2005 12:04:43 PM
Do you know of any good public sites with average multiples for early-stage investments listed by sector? I'm a student and trying to value a tecnology company that in the early stages. Thanks.
Posted by: Tyler Jones | Apr 6, 2006 11:21:03 PM
We are in the midst of raising funds from a VC for our auto classifieds portal and this post has given us an insight into the valuation for an early stage startup like ours.
Posted by: Anil Tandon | Jul 16, 2006 1:18:54 PM
I was wondering if you could send me information or direct me where I could find some information with venture capitalism with the video/computer game industry. A couple main questions I choose to address is:
1. What entry/exit strategies are most common for VC's investing in game vendors?
2. How do VC's in the US invest in European/Swedish game vendors? (directly, via partners, not at all, ect.)
Posted by: James P. | Mar 30, 2007 6:30:30 PM
I really like the idea of looking at VCs proffering a Debt Instrument or a Loan + Option. This is the most realistic approach to evaluating VC investment.
One difference, though, is that early stage companies rarely, if ever, qualify for debt or lines of credits (much less loans) so VC amounts are usually a few orders of magnitude higher than what a "conventional loan or debt instrument" could have ever been.
Debt and loans+options, are usually sub-$500k (more often in the sub $150k) for early stage companies. Series A and even Seed investments can easily be in the $500k - $1.5mm range. These are amounts that start-ups could never raise with debt with just an idea.
So, its not entirely an apples to apples comparison.
Not to mention that....with the exception of fraud, VCs don't normally ask their founders to personally guarantee their capital ("loan"). At least, not yet they don't.
Posted by: IsaacGarcia | Apr 2, 2008 11:22:13 AM
