Investing Your Own Money in Your Business
Don't let outside investors think for a second that you're unwilling to take on some financial risk.
By David Newton
| March 24, 2003
URL:
http://www.entrepreneur.com/money/financing/selffinancing/article60518.html
Is there a formula or some kind of rule of thumb by which
business owners should abide in terms of their own personal
investment into their company, relative to outside funds invested
by others? The simple answer is that there is no basic measure for
gauging an owner's equity stake compared to investors'
equity in the firm. But there are two very important concepts about
business financing that do apply to the general topic of
owners' equity.
First, in virtually every funding deal that I've ever been
involved in as a business partner, consultant, investor or advisor,
the outside investors required that the founding team have a vested
financial stake in the enterprise. The rationale is that the owners
need to demonstrate a solid financial commitment to the business
plan, and having their own money at risk--alongside the outside
capital providers--provides a tangible assurance to outside
investors that the entrepreneur believes strongly in the merits of
the company's business model and strategy. I always tell my
clients and students to think about this logically. Would you want
to invest in a business knowing that the founding entrepreneur does
not have any of his or her own money also invested? Of course
not!
When term sheet proposals are being circulated along with a
company's executive summary, investors always focus their
initial attention on four major areas:
- What is the product or service concept, and how is it
differentiated from the competition?
- How large is the potential market for this product or
service?
- Who on the management team will drive the business strategy
forward?
- What do the business model and the financial structure look
like? This fourth area examines the way the company makes money, as
well as the debt-equity arrangement that capitalizes the assets
that will be employed to achieve success with that model.
When outside investors see that the company founders have
already invested significant time into the business, that's
well-received. But sweat-equity alone is not enough to persuade
investors to fund the deal. In addition to plenty of hours invested
working in the business, the owners must also be equity investors
with money at risk--otherwise, capital providers view the level of
commitment as being less than desirable.
The second important concept is the form of the founders'
capital commitment to the company. Some entrepreneurs will provide
a loan to their new venture, and it may even be secured by fixed
assets purchased with those funds. This is less positive than if
the founding team has stock in the firm.
The time frame for the company to pay off a loan can also be a
concern to outside investors. If the owners have a provision to pay
themselves back within a year or 18 months, the priority of payment
sends a signal to outside capital providers that the owners want to
be sure to cover their own personal financial positions first, and
this can cause concern. Outside investors would much rather see the
owners in a side-by-side position with them, where everyone has an
equity stake and no one is getting priority of payments from
operating cash flow.
In summary, equity stakes for the founders always look better
than short-term and/or secured loans to the company. When outside
investors do co-invest with the entrepreneur, the deal will go much
more smoothly if owners and founders are equity investors and
they're both in the same class of securities. For example,
outside capital providers will frown on the situation where the
founders have preferred stock, while investors have lower-priority
common stock.
The best way to put these two concepts together is to understand
the perceived risk of the venture. Investors will always look for
ways to mitigate certain risk exposure in order to reduce the
potential for capital loss. Some companies pursue financing
strategies that are entirely based on using "other
people's money" to grow the firm. That makes sense when
additional funds needed for expansion come in from outside
investors, as long as those are in addition to the founders'
initial capital invested. But when working with outside funding
sources, be sure they understand clearly your commitment to the
venture--and the reduced risk perception--by bearing some of the
company risks through your own equity investment. There are so many
other line items to be negotiated in doing a funding deal that the
question of an owner's equity participation should not be one
of them.
David Newton is a professor of entrepreneurial finance and
head of the entrepreneurship program, which he founded in 1990, at
Westmont College in Santa Barbara, California. The author of four
books on both entrepreneurship and finance investments, David was
formerly a contributing editor on growth capital for Industry
Week Growing Companies magazine and has contributed to such
publications as Entrepreneur, Your Money,
Success, Red Herring, Business Week, Inc.
and Solutions. He's also consulted to nearly 100
emerging, fast-growth entrepreneurial ventures since 1984.
The opinions expressed in this column are those
of the author, not of Entrepreneur.com. All answers are intended to
be general in nature, without regard to specific geographical areas
or circumstances, and should only be relied upon after consulting
an appropriate expert, such as an attorney or
accountant.
Copyright ©
2009 Entrepreneur.com, Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy