Angel Investing

Wednesday, May 30, 2007

A Wealth of Data on Angel Investing

Don Dodge shares a lot of great angel investing data in a detailed post worth reading if you are on either side of the investing/entrepreneur fence.  A highlight:

The Angel Capital Association did a survey of its members and got data on 590 deals that achieved an "exit".

  • 47% lost money

  • 26% returned 1X to 4X multiples

  • 15% returned 4 to 6 times their investment

  • 8% returned 6 to 30 times

  • 4% returned 30X or more

Don observes that: "One big winner can cover lots of losers. Angels do 10 times as many deals as VCs, but on average the success rate is about the same."

Looking for Seed Funding or Angel Investors Outside of Silicon Valley?

Scott Burkett has a great write-up with ideas for entrepreneurs seeking early stage funding.  He writes with a geographic focus on Atlanta, but much of what he writes applies regardless of where one is located.

Raising money is rarely easy. It is even harder in Atlanta. The good news is that software/IT is a sector in which Atlanta is very strong. There are a lot of people in this city that get information technology.

Whenever the “panels” and “luminaries” are asked this question, they usually throw out the two stock answers: the 3F’s and Sig Mosley. The 3F’s being friends, family, and fools, and Sig Mosley being the unwitting godfather of early-stage technology investing in Atlanta.

If you take out Atlanta and Sig Mosley, Scott could be talking about New England as well (or many other non-Silicon Valley parts of the country for that matter).  As the managing director of a small angel group (AOS Ventures)

Last year I interviewed Matt Rightmire of Borealis Ventures (formerly of Yahoo!) and he discussed VC life outside of Silicon Valley.  He had a lot of good insight for anyone looking for funding and not located in California.

On a related note, Will Price shares some thoughts on the question "Does Geography Matter?"  There's also an Atlanta nexus in his analysis:

The most important insight for me is that the modern economy competes on innovation and that operating within a cluster shortens the cycle time to identifying, resourcing, and realizing areas of need and opportunity.

The genesis for this post was a conversation I had with two founders, currently based in Atlanta, about the merits of moving to the Bay Area to start their company. Michael Porter's thoughtful analysis helps me better understand why the Bay Area "cost premium" is well worth it. Market cap is a function of innovation and growth, and innovation is a function of access to ideas, talent, and supporting resources that eliminate frictions and catalyze connections and progress.

Personally, I waver a bit on the geography question.  Maybe I'll do a more thoughtful post on this soon, but my quick take is that while Silicon Valley offers clear benefits to Internet entrepreneurs, it also makes it harder for companies to differentiate themselves.  Does one outweigh the other?  As always, it depends!

Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Asking for Money

Nobody I've ever met likes asking for money.  Whether it is a politician seeking election, a fundraiser working to cure cancer, a college kid trying to hit up mom and dad, an employee seeking a raise, or an entrepreneur trying to raise capital, everyone seems to hate the process.  Yet it is a necessary thing for most people at some point in their lives.

Interestingly, some overcome this problem better than others.  Politicians who win clearly do what it takes to raise campaign cash.  The ones I have worked for in the past haven't liked it -- and some came up with every possible excuse to avoid it -- but at the end of the day they did enough to generate the money they needed to run for office and win.

And kids generally still have little enough shame that getting cash from their parents isn't that challenging.  Successful entrepreneurs who have businesses that can't be bootstrapped similarly find a way to get it done if they are going to succeed.

Unfortunately, I frequently find that too many organized fundraising efforts lack good money asking skills.  I have contributed to a number of charities, non-profits, schools, and campaigns in the past, and I have found that more often than not they don't do a good job of working to raise more.

For instance, in a recent election cycle I was never asked by a candidate for office to contribute to his campaign.  I had contributed to this individual in the past, but never heard anything.  Until he lost.  And then I received the autoprinted campaign holiday card.  So apparently my name was still on the house list, but I can't explain this glaring oversight.

Non-profits typically have been much worse.  There are two that I give to that send me about one contribution request by mail every week.  Yet there are others that I give to that rarely if ever follow up to ask for more.  And there are a number with which I have a personal relationship either because of past giving or other connections with key individuals that fail to ever ask for any additional gifts.  That's simply inexplicable to me. 

It's not that I want to be hit up all the time -- I don't.  But it would seem to me that even a once a year ask from some of these groups would be a wise move.  And if they're overlooking the opportunity they have with me, no doubt there are countless others on their lists that fall into the same category.  Imagine how much more good these organizations could do if they were more effective at fundraising.

And entrepreneurs aren't completely off the hook here.  I deal with quite a few who are seeking angel investments in their startups.  They're great about getting the first meeting -- most are pretty dogged about that.  But most have a hard time figuring out how to follow up.  Some do so very aggressively, but most seem to take a very passive approach. 

One could chalk that up to belief in the soft sell.  Or perhaps their belief is that any investor who is really interested wouldn't let a good idea just slip through the cracks.  But if I were in their position, I would want to have a better sense as to where my funding request stood.  Just a periodic check in email would be smart to see if a final decision has been made so that the limited resources of a startup can be better directed.  And I can't speak for most angel investors, but at least in my own case the pace of my "first job" can often lead me to leave business plans on the back burner.  It's not that I'm trying to ignore them or not interested, it's just there are only so many hours in the day.

Ultimately, the individuals and organizations that achieve the best balance between aggressiveness and passivity will do the best at raising whatever money they are asking for.

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Demo 2007

I am writing this on a plane headed to Demo 2007, being held in California this year.  For those of you interested in the latest offerings from cutting edge companies, stay tuned to this space in coming days for the same sort of coverage that I have offered in the past.  I'll try to make sure I share a good sense of what I'm seeing and what I find especially interesting.

I find Demo to be the most valuable conference I attend.  Over the past few years it is really the only conference that consistently finds a home on my schedule, and I have attended both the fall and winter editions.  Unlike so many other conferences, Demo does not submit attendees to a long list of tedious panels and speakers.  (Though they usually do have one or two of these, and I must confess that I have found them to be almost uniformly disappointing -- with the exception of the panel at the closing dinner which can be quite entertaining since you have a roster of tech journalists chatting after many have consumed some decent wine.)

I usually leave these conferences energized and full of ideas to bring home to the team at CustomScoop and with better insight about potential future investments for the angel group I lead.  And, of course, it helps me figure out which services and gadgets I just won't be able to live without.

Technorati tags: , ,

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Angels Banding Together in Greater Numbers

Go it alone or join a group? That's increasingly the question for angel investors, it seems. A recent press release offers some interesting statistics:

Individual angel investors continued to form organized investor groups with the number of angel groups increasing by nearly 60 percent in the past three years, from an estimated 150 in 2002 to 250 last year, according to an analysis by the Angel Capital Education Foundation (ACEF) and the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.

The survey of angel group members of the Angel Capital Association also revealed that the average angel group invested $1.45 million and that the average angel group invested $266,000 per round and $387,000 per company during calendar 2005.

Tags: , ,

Friday, June 23, 2006

New Angel Investing Blog

I came across EnablingAngels today, a new blog dedicated to the role of angel investing in entrepreneurship.  The most recent post, "What do Angel Investors Want," that explores some of the questions angels generally ask.

Obviously angel investing is a leading interest of mine, especially on this blog.  EnablingAngels is definitely worth a look if you share those interests.

The Founders' Piece of the Pie

Matt McCall over at VC Confidential offers an interesting post on how founders should allocate equity for themselves, early employees, and friends and family investors.  He explores a couple of different methods that can be used and suggests how one might value stock or options grants in those days when there's really no product or revenue yet.

He also looks at circumstances where VC money may be used to help founders "take money off the table."  He notes that most VC's are not fond of the practice and do so typically in cases where the company is already turning a profit.  The concern in this scenario is the founder losing interest because he has already made at least a partial score on the company. 

Finally, he talks about the notion of accumulating IOU's for founder salaries.  Naturally, VC's want to see their money go for future growth, while some founders may have special circumstances that may require them to recoup some salary before a liquidity event.  Many first time founders, for instance, may not have the same cushion that a serial entrepreneur may be able to lean on.  Waiting for an exit could be especially painful financially for a founder with a family and no pre-existing nest egg, for instance.

Obviously all of these decisions depend on specific circumstances, but Matt's post should help founders think through the issues a bit.

Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Biz Plans with a Side of NDA

Rick Segal notes that some entrepreneurs are getting more creative with NDA's.  As most know, VC's, angels, and other serious investors won't sign NDA's before looking at a business plan.  It's just way too complicated.  The message is: you want our money, you have to trust us.

Unfortunately, paranoid entrepreneurs don't like that.  So some are now including an NDA when they send a plan to an investor.

Last week I saw the most creative attempt yet.  After reading a business plan given to me by an entrepreneur last week at an angel conference, I note a page of gobbledygook at the beginning that effectively said "by reading this you have agreed to this NDA" -- no request for a signature even. 

Enough already.  Entrepreneurs need to understand that investors aren't looking to steal ideas, but we see enough that we'd be foolish to sign such a document.  Too much exposure.  And at the end of the day it all comes down to execution anyway. 

Advice for Angels

Jeff Cornwall from the Belmont University Center for Entrepreneurship in Tennessee provides a good summary of a Fortune Small Business article providing advice to budding angel investors.  In short:

  • Don't go it alone
  • Follow your passion
  • Locate the exit
  • Befriend the vultures (the VC's)

To me, all rules are meant to be broken, but there is some merit to each of these.  A few small points I'd make.  First, the FSB article suggests not investing alone or part of a small group because you can become too "emotional" about deals.  In my view, a healthy dose of emotion is good for angels.  Often angels bring more to the table than their wallets and to look at things purely from a financial investment standpoint overlooks this.

In fact, the next advice, to follow one's passion seems to contradict the author's point a bit.  Nevertheless, the point is well taken that small groups face challenges that larger groups do not.  It's a factor to weigh.

The other point I take some issue with is that of exits.  I believe that exit strategies are overblown when discussing investments.  The entrepreneur and the investor should be of like mind regarding an exit (you don't want to invest in a company to find out the entrepreneur is looking for a "lifestyle company" and you're looking to cash out big).  But the focus needs to be on growing a good business, making the right contacts, and not being afraid to take the right exit.  Making it all about the exit leads to bad decisions.

Questions Angels Ask

An entrepreneur who participated in the ycombinator winter program (for those of you not familiar with it, it's an interesting model that I'll likely write about more down the road), offers a list of the top 10 questions asked during "Angel Day."  Worth a read, though I don't agree with all of the conclusions about the merit of each question.

Advertisements

What Is Pardon the Disruption?

  • As founder & CEO of CustomScoop, I have a special interest in the intersection of technology and PR/marketing. In addition, as a serial entrepreneur and angel investor, I cover those topics, as well as an occasional post on the gadgets I love.