csentropy

5 ms·

1.
by csentropy 6y ago
It's early, but lifestyle companies are <10% of our applicants. Mostly clustered around series A/post seed.
2.
by csentropy 6y ago
Agree. Founders contribute a percentage of the equity they would fully own, if fully vested to the pool, not a fixed percentage of the equity of the company.
3.
by csentropy 6y ago
Good analogy.
4.
by csentropy 6y ago
Fair point. That dates back to the panic period weeks ago when people were refreshing the "RIP" good times" deck from sequoia, putting their name on it and sending it off to their portfolio companies :)
5.
by csentropy 6y ago
You will be surprised at the spectrum of companies that are interested in doing pooling, as were we.
6.
by csentropy 6y ago
If they want to take it upon themselves, they should. Having said that, there is a reason coop pools like insurance are managed by third parties.
7.
by csentropy 6y ago
Maybe, just may be a realistic assessment of the chances of success is an under appreciated entrepreneurial trait. Maybe this trait can co-exist independently with the ability to forge ahead DESPITE knowing how low the odds are, because you
8.
by csentropy 6y ago
Cool reference. Thank you!
9.
by csentropy 6y ago
Entrepreneurs free riding on the VC model is the opposite of what really happens: VCs free ride on founder risk. We see VCs themselves encourage founders to take money off the table with a secondary sale in rounds as early as series A. They
10.
by csentropy 6y ago
Hard transfer ban clauses are rare, usually they are ROFRs. Some boards may push back, but they do see the benefit of the founder having an aligned support network and we believe many will let this happen. We believe that this exception to
11.
by csentropy 6y ago
Great questions, it will be on our FAQ page
12.
by csentropy 6y ago
I've heard that some YC founders approached them about it, but the management of this structure may be more work that distracts YC from it's focus. We hope every accelerator and VC film does this eventually, we want to power as m
13.
by csentropy 6y ago
All valid questions. We are adding more information about the company, the people and the business model of Founderpool. Founderpool does take a share of the pool of equity as platform fee, it will be transparent and will be publicly availa
14.
by csentropy 6y ago
Exactly the response I wish every founder has ready, when they hear this line of objection from their VC.
15.
by csentropy 6y ago
Because of the condition for participation in the pool is that your stock should continue to vest, for the membership shares in the pool to continue to vest.
16.
by csentropy 6y ago
Exactly correct
17.
by csentropy 6y ago
Founderpool is based on peer selection. The belief is people are better able to pick companies in their vertical better. But it is true that larger pool across sectors is more diversified
18.
by csentropy 6y ago
I LOVE hearing stories like yours, and they inspire us everytime. You hit the nail on the head. The sad fact is that as an entrepreneur grows and matures, his risk tolerance goes down. Founderpool's mission is to maintain the entrepren
19.
by csentropy 6y ago
I believe founder institute does as well, but in their case they divide uo the pool into 4 parts, 3 of which go to FI, they local chapter, mentors and one back to founders if I remember right
20.
by csentropy 6y ago
We decided it is of interest to the founders in the audience and not necessarily as a show HN (which is in our mind a tool specific people like to play with) Only three people are with Founderpool. me, manoj and geoburke
21.
by csentropy 6y ago
Founderpool are not affiliated with YC in any way. I am not sure who suggested that. I am part of the founderpool team.
22.
by csentropy 6y ago
Priced round is for indexing the value of stock being assigned to the pool. If the founder has liquidity, before joining the pool, he would be joining the pool right? Or did I misunderstand?
23.
by csentropy 6y ago
It does. In a verticalized approach, if you pick the right sector (biotech for ex) and other founders see the value in your work, you can get rewarded even if your company fails for reasons to of your control. Even in a shock scenario, ther
24.
by csentropy 6y ago
That is a great point. We spent a lot of time thinking about the adverse selection issue.We narrowed in on Peer selection with stable matching, which seems to mitigate this issue. We are learning..
25.
by csentropy 6y ago
Thank you. One more risk founders and entrepreneurs need to brace for : Regime uncertainty. Political uncertainty added to market risk, macro, pandemics, on and on...
26.
by csentropy 6y ago
It is similar. The market segment and pool construction ton mechanism as well as the legal infrastructure is different. We believe this scales beyond startup founders to education, athletics, and any domain where the outcome distributions f
27.
by csentropy 6y ago
Thats a very nice sentiment. It is nice to hear from investors like you who have a portoilfio for diversifying your own risk, but deny that explicitly for founders, who also have no management fee as a fallback. Have you heard of founders g
28.
by csentropy 6y ago
It is a complex structure under the hood. There is a master LLC, holding c corp and an investment advisor. Tax implications for the founders are similar to their founder stock obligations, when liquidation happens
29.
by csentropy 6y ago
we make it really easy to get the nuggets of information you need at a glance. You can only rank your top 10.
30.
by csentropy 6y ago
It is the only way to go for bootstrapped companies. There is a pool for bootstrapped companies

More ›