Part of a convertible note.
Q: Take 5% of company?
Yes. Slightly higher valuation. Follow on of $450K was at a higher price.
Q: What does that mean?
Q: $1 m to something else?
$1.5 m. Rationale for that is. $1 m premoney, with $350K, should be worth $1.35 m
Q: So additional equity?
By end of transaction, 50% held by outside investors. 50% held by founders.
Q: What is desirable state?
You target 20% stake for initial investment. Want to avoid getting too diluted later on.
Driven by the math. You are anticipating later rounds of investment. Later investors will also take a piece of the company. Don't want to take so much that others can't enter. Don't want to take too little, since 5% is just a small piece.
Each round effects everybody else.
Q: Usually cash injection - in order not to be diluted, they have right to participate.
Yeah. So with conversion notes, you get a set percent of series A round, at a discount.
For dilution in general, a number of situations:
1/ option pools. Very important. Basically given to later employees to incentivize them to get a piece of the action.
Create options out of thin air.
Polite to do dilution before next round.
Create 20% pool before next offering round.
In addition to that is
2/ anti-dilution clauses given to outside investors to prevent against the following situation.
$2 m invested. Another investor comes in with $500,000 when company is doing much less. You get super crammed down:
If down round, weighted average to reset price paid for it. Paid $10. Now it is $5. Change it to $7.5
OR full ratchet. Now at $5. So I get it at $5. Twice as many shares. Bad thing. Would scare off later investors. Later investor gets diluted because you get more shares.
Q: For SU option - 1% non-dilutive to SU. As VC, which would you prefer.
Depends on company. Situation.
doing startup = realistically believe could be $20 m company.
Probably not raise more than $1 m of outside capital.
If you invest more, not enough potential upside for outside investor.
Done in 2 rounds.
Friends and family kick in $100K.
Second round for $900K.
Would want to have a non-dilutive 1%.
Value entity at $400K - 20% dilution with that.
5% ownership stake becomes a 4%, once it has been diluted.
Do $900K at $3 m pre. Let's just say another 25% dilution of that 4% - becomes 3%.
So you can give 3% versus 1%.
Quick swag calculation.
Unless you have a company you could realistically sell for $100 m bucks.
That's how I'd think of it.
Q: Depends on valuation at the time you give the 5% away.
Haven't seen the true documentation of the 1% and the 5%.
Q: No one has.
Q: It may not exist.
Q: The story.
So, quick story: they get Marvel to distribute. Before just had indies.
Close to 2010. End of 2009. Interested in eBooks.
Real interest is in killing Diamond Distributors - doesn't have an e-Book strategy.
Now, and for next couple years, no meaningful revenue from eBooks.
Deal - any startup can license Marvel comics, just pay $150K fee.
Great. You get a free $1 m from all the startups there.
Until you have complement of digital comics, you'd have to sell $3 m in digital - which has happened now.
Official Marvel - very different reception. Good comic book app. Number of players in the space. Good to have meaningful brand names.
You feel uncomfortable relative to Marvel.
Took off like hotcakes.
Very much so.
The did $400K. Sorry $250K in first month. continued building off there.
Then DC. Into fold. More money.
Closing out $1 M per month. Becoming very interesting. Trying now to raise serious VC capital.
After Apple takes piece. About 25% left over.
What is that $200K of cash coming in. They have additional expenses. Bringing in $50K a month in profit. Interesting amount. Can continue cruising as you are.
To make a new move in this space - say Android in 3 months - would take $500K.
Would like to raise $4 M at $16 M valuation.
Raises new issues.
Given their current traction, might be viable.
But what is upside?
$1 bn comic sales stateside.
Japan is locked up.
Potential market - $1 bn.
That ends up being relatively small market for $16 M price.
Become $200 M company in 5 years? Much tougher sell. Personally, I think that is BS.
General flavor of how the process works.
Interest in doing a particular thing.
Can help with those.
Define market opportunity.
One on one or in small groups.
Alex: Or by mail?
Emem: When do you stop raising money?
When do you stop talking?
Talking from entrepreneur's perspective, in general you want to maximize your profit in the event of a sale. Typical exit.
Balance between dilution and value of additional money.
Investors will always give you more money, but you would end up with such a small stake, you'd get nothing.
Would be nice to raise money, but instead continue to eat Ramen, and bootstrap.
Sell now, make $3 m. Or continue riding to make $10 m. Or that could blow up and you'd lose everything.
Investors always say, keep riding it. It is profit maximizing.
It may make sense to sell at much lower price.
$3 m means a lot to me. Marginal benefit of $10 m is not worth risking everything.
I can talk endlessly about mundane details.
Quick evaluation of an idea.
Break down market opportunity.
Alex: Opposite of philosophy -
don't go to VCs at all. Totally contingent on particular market.
Most internet businesss. Bajillion entries.
Initial costs are really low.
Everything I invest in, look at 5 all doing the same thing. Pick best one.
In those circumstances, if you think you've got the right mix, try to control the entire market. Only if you have the money to clear everybody else.
Deals do not get made.
Number of companies ready to turn down VC -
about 3-4 per year.
Very few people can do that.
Nah, I don't like the terms.
Don't go in with that mindset.
VCs are all friends with each other.
I see an idea I think is kind of interesting. I will always ask all the other VCs.
What do you think?
Anything I am actually doing - I will ask.
Vast majority of investments are shared with other investors.
Rose only invests when others are on board.
Not ballsy enough to take naked investment.
Always want others to invest alongside them.
Not courageous enough in their convictions.
Also benefits to that because, eventually, say company needs 4 rounds of capital.
For exit of $200 m or more, not that uncommon.
If you are a seed stage guy, making $1 m investments.
Don't have $20 m.
social networks as well.
Pass the baton to them.
Q: Would you be able another time to walk through Getaround?
Yes, absolutely do that.
I can talk about them since I've heard their pitch.
In process of raising now/ closing.
Can't give super juicy details.
All the specifics of their deals.
I can go into hyperdetail since I am an investor in comixology. I can show you MY docs.
Not RTV docs.
Don't share notes with everybody else.
Prepared to by hyper-frank.
Investors looking at 30x return.
company needs to grow to certain size to be worth my time.
50% of VC funds will die in this cycle.
Angel seed fund.
All his own money.
Smart guys have halved their fund sizes for internet stuff.
For cleantech - still need megafunds.
Used to be first angels, then VCs. All start playing in early stage.
For seed - be very careful who you get it from.
Here's $100K. For 5% stake. They treat it as an option.
Biggest issue is when they pass on series A.
They are fluffing out small checks.
VC will only invest in one out of 10 of those things.
Can be kiss of death.
Be sceptical of certain seed stage VC funds, particularly if they don't specialize.
first round capital - in their core.
Outside capital - non trivial part of money is from the VC partners.
Sorry this is not an exciting this, per se.
Never covered in talks because it is so boring.
Hours and hours of nuance for each thing.
Can have extended talks.
Alex: What kind of questions by mail?
In general, always welcome to e-mail me your pitch deck.
After end of summer, won't guarantee you'll get input.
Until end of summer, I will go into mind numbing detail with you guys.
Powerpoint of what - 15 min presentation to an investor - all important facts about company.
I can tear through that with you.
That should be your home document.
I don't read business plans - maybe only if we are truly interested in investing.
We don't look at them.
Alex: Like resumes.
Much more worth my time. Not expert on business idea.
Can do 30 second skim.
Alex: 3 minutes to say something.
For first engagement - one sentence what company is. What the heck you are doing and how far into it.
Then 3 sentences.
Then 3 min conversation.
Then 15 min pitch level.
Should cover 4 things I talked about in detail.
VC guys will do back of the head calculations and tear through stuff super fast.
3-5 year projections why BS for 50 different reasons.
Always say revenues will take off when you invest.
If so, you could have held out for 3 more months.
Whole art of gaming.
VC guys get really good at that. Always pass along. Pass the baton. At certain point, become entrepreneur.
I know how to massage numbers and he knows how to massage numbers.
Vincent: ITunes U.
Amazing people talking.
Jon: Over course of summer, you will get good general advice. I tried to cover the details of what you would not be told. Management rights contract.
I think my recommendation if truly serious, walk through salient points.
General definition of your market.
Q: How available are you?
About 50% of the time. Probably be here for the next few weeks.
The Millennium Project was founded in 1996 after a three-year feasibility study with the United Nations University, Smithsonian Institution, Futures Group International, and the American Council for the UNU. It is now an independent non-profit global participatory futures research think tank of futurists, scholars, business planners, and policy makers who work for international organizations, governments, corporations, NGOs, and universities. The Millennium Project manages a coherent and cumulative process that collects and assesses judgments from over 2,500 people since the beginning of the project selected by its 35 Nodes around the world. The work is distilled in its annual \"State of the Future\", \"Futures Research Methodology\" series, and special studies.
9:16 Jose: Good morning
Jerry Glenn - U of Mass, just back from Korea
Korean Industrial Association
Fantastic recognition award - the CEO participants - pivotal contributions to the Korean economy
Also, Peace Corp in Africa.
Workshop - Jerry and I will talk about Global Energy for 2020.
Split into groups. Coffee break 10:45.
Will present \"State of the Future\" collective intelligence
Raise your hands for question.
- Millennium Project
Basically and idea.
We needed a think tank on behalf of humanity.
WHO for health
World Bank for economica
Nothing for human family future.
Put together by NGOs, governments, corporations.
Should be influenced and be able to act through those organizations
- May become a TransInstitution.
Representatives for many, but not a majority of any one.
Value added goes to all, but not a majority of any one.
Need to be clever about politics,
Tech, economic - but not enough governance.
Q: I would think that religion also needs to be included.
Didn't do that, couldn't figure out how to hold it together.
Religion says, \"I'm right and everyone else is wrong.\"
I couldn't figure out how to do that.
Just died, head of Suni Islam.
I just couldn't figure out yet how to have religion in it without
ripping the system apart.
But thank you for the question.
- 35 Millennium Project Nodes
A node -
You get like-minded.
Each node should have people from institutional categories.
- End of env backlash - hit value. Start of high tech ...
- Political Turmoil
Al Queda 3.0, two or three things at once
Dirty bombs in Paris, New York and shipping area all at once.
Without recovery, difficult
Env backlash PLUS political turmoil
- Caucasus pipelines down, Armenians-Azerbaijani
No more pipelines
- NW China civil war. pan-Islamic movement
- East China Sea conflicts
Q: NW China - least promising place for Islamic - find it very difficult to imagine.
Good. Homework assignment for you.
Q: I spent time in NW.
In political turmoil, the ability to handle a variety of conflicts simultaneously is damaged.
Q: Anyone remember Tibet 50 years ago.
They signed the UN charter.
This is a scenario.
You can delete that part if you want to.
Al Queda - becomes more sophisticated, joins organized crime.
Coordinated as not before.
NW China may have dirty bombs.
Uranium smuggled in lead containers.
Americans have civil rights ..
I'm saying some money of Al Queda goes into that area.
- Conflict over N Pole.
Go back a decade. Standard military posture of Russia included this. It said, \"this is the next conflict\"
Test for human beings. Everybody knows this. If we don't prevent this, shame on us.
- Nigerian Instability continues
OK, so imagine what is going on - whole lot more money going through. Another Crimean[?] war.
Emem: US removed cap - when you sue people - $75 m.
Bring all oil spill losses to the US.
Like Gulf - we have 10 of those every years.
Military gov't killed guy. Son came to US and settled for $10 m.
Few separatist movements of Islam.
Do the older north see themselves as quasi-Islam.
Emem: Christians in south.
Purpose of scenarios is not to speak the truth, but to uncover the
unknowns of the unknowns.
Emem: Probability - 10%
What is probability of all these? 0%.
What is the chance that organized crime - which may have twice
the budget of all the militaries in the world ...
A Nigeria conflict is higher than a Texas[?] conflict.
Emem: Possibility - about same.
We don't have people firing guns and blowing things up yet.
Bus as Usual
Jose: We are basically under schedule.
Review methodology quickly.
Over 1 year project.
Japan, Canada, Kuwait, Ven.
Extensive bibliography and country energy scenarios.
Example: Shell scenarios. 2050, latest.
Different ways. Matrix, Peter Schwartz.
Jerry: Shell and Herman Kahn. Shell was coached by Kahn.
Peter Schwartz worked for Shell, just like Emem.
Delphi round 1.
Energy experts from around the world.
Lot of participation from the private sector.
Divided by scenario.
Confusing the theatre critics comments with the original play.
Jose: Sent students the link
Jerry: Current dynamics are changing.
Tons of surprises in the future.
What is surprise-free is no new dynamics, extensions.
Jose: Methodologically important.
Average answers when disagreement.
2.13 very high agreement - artificial bacteria 74% agreed.
- Energy Sources
Coal liq in 2020, Tar sands - mix does change, but not radically.
Real Time Delphi
Ted Gordon - founder of technique. Gives immediate survey responses, able to compare trends.
Barry Huges, U of Colorado - Denver
Used for National Intelligence Council 2020.
Free on internet.
Did simulation, Delphi survey
Five output variables - including water usage.
- \"Fill in the Blanks\" new method.
Scenario 1 = Business as Usual.
Scenario 2 = Env Scenario - thongs are proof of global warming
Scenario 3 - High Tech
Contrast with Limits to Growth (1970s)
Jay Forester - father of systems dynamics.
Herman Kahn: The Next 200 Years. In 1976. Future was incredibly bright.
Buckminster Fuller = the Energy \"Internet\"
Eric: BP rebranded, back to petroleum
Jerry: Point Fuller was making - world peace wasn't possible until electric grids were interconnected. That grid may be in orbital space.
Pun on energy - \"Fuel-er\"
Venter funded by Exxon. To the tune of half a billion.
All the plants make gasoline.
We call it food normally, but it is fuel.
fossil hydrocarbons = carbs.
\"The Stone Age did not end for lack of stones\"
Power content of different sources.
We are in 20-50 MJ/kg
Others are much more intensive.
Here, Russian cosmologist
*Type I \u2014 a civilization that is able to harness all of the power available on a single planet \u2014 has approximately 10^16 or 10^17 W available. Earth specifically has an available power of 1.74 \u00d7 10^17 W (174 petawatts, see Earth's energy budget). Kardashev's original definition was 4 \u00d7 10^12 W \u2014 a \"technological level close to the level presently attained on earth\" (\"presently\" meaning 1964).
*Type II \u2014 a civilization that is able to harness all of the power available from a single star, approximately 4 \u00d7 10^26 W. Again, this figure is variable; the Sun outputs approximately 3.86 \u00d7 10^26 W. Kardashev's original definition was also 4 \u00d7 10^26 W.
*Type III \u2014 a civilization that is able to harness all of the power available from a single galaxy, approximately 4 \u00d7 10^37 W. This figure is extremely variable, since galaxies vary widely in size; the stated figure is the approximate power output of the Milky Way. Kardashev's original definition was also 4 \u00d7 10^37 W.
So, we are babies.
- The \"world\" according to Bush
- Some Interesting Idea
Subjective pulling out of 4 scenarios
Things that jumped out at me.
Apollo - like energy program
US and China signed deal
Idea to have 10 year target, like moon, to coordinate
Q: Economic incentives for cheap energy very different from moon.
Would think economic system would develop.
Whole business of moon was political.
So is this.
US/China is potential long term conflict.
Only US/Russia agreements were Soyuz.
Because of GHG, might as well use that as a target.
Env/Energy agreements with US/China.
Happened within the last year.
Turns out it is plausible.
Q: I'm impressed. Actually convinced. Wow. OK. Cool.
If no futher questions, that's all I have to say.
Drove first all electric car.
Told by GM - three batteries, each cost $10K.
China - Thunder Sky - brought price of battery to $2K.
Now have plant selling to military
Lithium ion - Prius price coming down due to batteries.
Japan plans to launch solar power station. Capability - 1st say they are going to do it.
Jose: $20 b for 15 years.
What they got this year is not the full allocation.
- Ocean based wind. Microwave back to Earth.
- Thin film solar. Use on buildings as much as possible
- Algae bio
- Nano tech efficiencies in general - make a vacuum cleaner,
but imagine if you had nano particles collecting dust.
Resources for that are very small. Energy efficiencies of nano are
- Remaining oil - like a woman in a men's locker room.
West sees MidEast with big power.
Their view is they've got this wonderful thing. Big powers will
come mess around. They are nervous wreck.
- Efficiencies - pioneered in China. Urban systems econology
Wu San Wong [?]
Sensors around environment - so people of the city can
help manage the city as a whole system to get better efficiencies.
China now 2010 is world's largest energy consumer.
Jose: But China does not want to be #1 due to Kyoto.
Have already passed US in CO2.
- Sea water agriculture - Carl Hodges. Very nice design.
Water tables are falling. Pollution in China.
Water used for animal production.
Animal production has more GHG emissions than cars.
Idea is to use sea water as much as possible rather than fresh.
Use water to separate it. End up with this liquid form of oil you could pull up.
Try Venter's biological in situ - let them separate and refine.
That would be very interesting.
Mitigate usage - huge ramifications for land usage and water.
What Venter is doing is very interesting.
Coming up to our area.
Max: So, came with questions.
Do we mean high tech in terms of energy, or rest of world.
Adam: We write the scenario. I see a lot of crossing.
I'm with the smart gird. Smart demand. Able to cause need, collaborative - to force peace. Starts being so interdependent.
Max: More meta-level. Instead of trying to figure out specific areas.
Quickly find right paths as they develop - funnel to them as they come up. Difficult to predict before the fact. Try a lot of diversified means. Decentralized - most efficient. As opposed to one centralized push - solar from space.
If that wasn't the answer, the other options will be underexplored.
Candice: Limit on batteries. Very much tied to usage matching generation.
Need advanced batteries - store whatever we get.
That is core core.
You bring up really good point - awareness that move to centralized grids - will be decentralized in developing world. Too much investment in centralized.
Developing have capacities - without billions and trillions.
Adam: Energy to the village.
Max: Small nukes, self contained. Store underground.
Candice: Microgrids. Various technologies. Parts of India/China/Africa.
Within 20/50 years - webbed in same sense?
Advances in storage huge.
Other core - in policy end. Fix CO2 pricing. Huge problem.
Such a low price ...
Max: Easier in this country than globally.
Candice: Fluctuates $10 to $13. Need at $65-70 per unit.
We are way out.
Push energy platform companies.
Max: In decentralized way.
Candice: Need to
Max: Greg Mankiw
Candice: If we woke up and agreed that carbon was $70.
Max: Leads in very decentralized way. Do it gradually.
Find what alternative works best.
Adam: Like the micro idea. Once you develop a strain.
Candice: Syn bio. IGEM out of MIT.
Harnessing biological systems in bio and non-bio sense.
Process wastes to produce energy.
Just started playing with them.
Actual - externality pricing.
Jose: Should be on Energy.
Adam: Optimizing for water or energy, a very thin wall.
[Jim Hurd arrives]
Candice: If you check out
Incenting in pharma.
Environmentally as well.
I'm just picking and choosing. Now quite ubiquitous.
Hind: I'd agree. Cost of solar going way down.
Solve the storage problem.
Candice: Any intermittent. Wind. Utilize, that's great, but it does fluctuate so much. Huge problem.
Adam: Biggest battery we have is water. Pumping water up into LA hills. That's the best we have until we build ultracapacitors.
Max: Things discussed:
storage will be useful
externality pricing -
multiple or just ours?
Candice: Pardon my bias.
Say you got externalities or storage. Would work in all scenarios,
Look at energy-centric. Dilute that out. Share that.
Adam: Look at Maslow - water and food issue.
Forces you to synthesis methods.
Doesn't preclude space based solar or mineral harvesting.
Max: Problem with externality pricing.
Candice: Kicking terms around.
Max: Their pathway - from developing to what we have now - involves path through dirty energy. But what do they care. Need food on a plate.
All countries go through this stage.
If you price it, no cheap energy phase, are they cut off?
Can they not afford energy?
Not fond of that method.
Jose: Reconvene in the center. Teams present.
Candice: Transformative - storage area. Efficient, effective - enormous. Change the way we think of energy. Complete fundamental shift. Fundamentally different. Policy would be different.
Adam: Is bang for buck likely to be for storage?
Until we go truly nano or quantum.
Candice: That's where the technological Achilles' heel.
Jerry: Scenario group 1.
Erika: So we are representing business as usual.
Basic assumptions we made:
first, centralized power production > decentralized
No radical disruption in status quo
second, fossil prices relatively stable and low
Favor established players.
Carbon capture and sequestration
Invest in Nuclear
One across all scenarios - PV - but not strong enough to uproot
Jerry: Depressing isn't it.
Mercy: Looking at env backlash - both env supported and env itself.
Tech - clean - solar/wind/tidal/hydro
Invest in waste/ better storage. Off peak.
#3 Early detection of backlash from crowd sources.
#4 Carbon capture and sequestration.
Incentives for reforestation.
Institutions should have free, unfettered research
Policy in this area.
Jose: No more comments.
Q: Tidal backlash.
Jerry: Two sentences:
Backlash from env to human.
What env kicks back to human.
What people do relative to movement.
Jose: Ran last Sunday.
We crossed the Golden Gate. Then crossed the finish line.
Eric. 300 out of 20,000 [applause]
Next week 100 out of 50,000.
High tech pushes.
Core platform, Achilles' heel
Storage - not adequate currently
What we generate we have to use
Can't time shift
For other categories - would premeate through all of them.
Change the way we deal with the issue.
Interesting to change global dynamic of energy distribution.
Side step - externality of CO2 pricing. Glossing over complex situation. Would be intersting to move to $65-75 pricre range.
Price Carbon- ramifications would be substantial.
Synth bio - if I take oil sands back home - use less water. In situ.
Geobacter - degrade human wastes to produce electricity - for decentralized.
Last topic: central vs decentralized. We have huge investment in existing systems, developing countries might do better with distributed.
Jerry: When you taked about storage in high tech.
Thought to consider - imagine an alternative future where indeed, we have 1000s of solar panel sets. You manage your baseload electricity on a global basis.
Send variable amounts.
Storage in that is much different.
Jose: Team 4.
Eric: Turmoil in 2020
Michael - no decision or policy would make sense if China was
Also, US will not be so relevant with respect to China.
Italy has always been irrelevant [laughter]
Something not already mentioned - as of now,
100 energy input - 10 energy service
china already and will even more aggressively eliminate waste.
Michael pointed out - meat production could be more impactful.
China mandates making meat more expensive, reduce production.
Accelerate storage. To store solar and make more decentralized.
Transfer from meat - cows to batteries.
Michael: Major things but also talked about the automated mfg
of small scale wind systems. More desirable when you have storage.
Increase economies of scale of small mass produced wind turbines.
Favor approach with battery or post-battery storage.
Highly profitable. Especially in turmoil - way to make profits.
Jerry: Homework. Go on-line.
Francesco: No open wars between states.
None against US. No direct threat to American territories.
Jerry: Starts with dirty bomb attack.
Over 1000 deaths per year = UN definition of war.
Transnational definition of war.
Also nation state wars.
F: Book that has at least in the title.
The Next 100 Years - George Friedman
Jerry: When you mention Herman Kahn and wars.
Sometimes you describe these things to prevent them.
We hope Friedman is also wrong.
Important that we consider these things.
Jose: Since Herman Kahn was mentioned.
Jerry was his friend, mentor.
Paul Saffo coming.
Introduce Jerry in 2000.
When millenium edition was released.
Based on work 2 years earlier - 1998
15 global challenges.
I became involved in 2000.
Consider him my mentor.
Release latest version.
Considered one of the 10 top futurists in the world.
So now, we have here the chair of the Silicon Valley node
Chairman of board.
Jack: Don't know what is left.
Always like to be introduced by Jose. Sterling example.
Jerry Glenn and I have been friends for 30 years.
Always been a leader in the futures movement
and particularlly with Ted Gordon, did feasibility study in early 90s.
1996 - delphis
Key product of the millenium project.
So, Jerry - welcome and glad to see you.
As I explained to the SU students,
for those coming in now.
Raise your hand.
State of the Future has an executive summary
that I would like you to read.
In German, Spanish, 10 or more languages.
About 9 pages long.
General summary about 6 pages.
If you don't think those are the most important 6 pages to read,