jalonso510

6 ms·

1.
by jalonso510 4y ago
I don't think it's as nefarious as that. What people are calling the "public" position here is the value of preferred stock sold in a financing, and the "internal" valuation is the value of common stock. They
2.
by jalonso510 4y ago
A new Lands or Lore. Or, a remake of Tie Fighter.
3.
by jalonso510 4y ago
The classified board structure is available for you to read about in their public filings and the Twitter investor relations site. It's not fanciful or nonsense - it's a commonly used takeover defense that Twitter put into effect
4.
by jalonso510 4y ago
The shareholder's control over Twitter is not as direct as you are suggesting. Even if 100% of shareholders were supportive of Elon's deal, they could not immediately force the board to accept the offer. If the board refused to
5.
by jalonso510 4y ago
This is not correct. The board negotiated a deal with Elon after putting the poison pill into effect. If Elon had made a deal directly with the stockholders, that would have triggered the poison pill. He surely spoke with and lobbied the
6.
by jalonso510 5y ago
seems like the springing requirement to negotiate a paid license after $1m in revenue is just destined to be forgotten. it will come up two rounds later in diligence and be a minor pain to deal with. I'd probably avoid using somethin
7.
by jalonso510 5y ago
I think the article is overstating the scope of the coalition a bit. If I understand correctly, it's talking about the format and transportability of the cap table, but not doing anything to change how broadly a company will choose to
8.
by jalonso510 5y ago
Small point only the lawyers will care about - they say they are using Goodwin form documents instead of Orrick form documents. Will make it much nicer to work with companies incorporated on Stack than the others.
9.
by jalonso510 6y ago
The Privacy Shield framework that was just declared invalid by the EU included a requirement that US companies make themselves available for arbitration of disputes brought by EU data subjects. GDPR by itself doesn't include that conce
10.
by jalonso510 7y ago
When term sheets say they are non-binding, they will usually say "except the sections about confidentiality and exclusivity". So those will be the only parts that actually are enforceable promises. But the exclusivity period is t
11.
by jalonso510 7y ago
Term sheets do away for the need to speculate about whether there is a binding obligation or not - they always explicitly say that they are not binding, and then both parties sign and agree to that. Industry standards are though that once t
12.
by jalonso510 7y ago
Even in deals where there is a breakup fee, it's not a part of the LOI. It would be negotiated as a part of the Merger Agreement or Asset Purchase Agreement, to cover what happens if the deal signs, but then one party breaks off befor
13.
PG&E files for bankruptcy(businessinsider.com)
1 points by jalonso510 8y ago|0 comments
14.
by jalonso510 8y ago
No dispute from me that you can save a little bit on taxes by forming a California corporation if you're in California. Specifically the ~$400 of Delaware franchise taxes. But my point is that any company doing typical startup activi
15.
by jalonso510 8y ago
For a traditional startup, that will (i) raise money from investors or (ii) give equity to employees, you should just be a Delaware c-corporation. Those are streamlined, known, and easy processes with a Delaware corporation. Every lawyer
16.
by jalonso510 9y ago
Early stage would be plain Restricted Stock, as opposed to Restricted Stock Units, which are what is typically granted later on once the company gets large. RSUs are "units" not actual shares of stock with associated ownership ri
17.
by jalonso510 9y ago
I don’t think it’s fair to say he’s just looking out for his self interest here. If you read his post, he’s not advocating for or against the tax bill, just talking about this one particular term that affects startups.
18.
by jalonso510 9y ago
Sounds pretty unfriendly, but no, no suggestions really - it's up to the company what they want to give you and some companies are just stingy like that. Wish I had something more for you.
19.
by jalonso510 9y ago
Only a couple or reasons they'd deliverately do that. Most common is if the employee is outside the U.S. and not a U.S. taxpayer, making the distinction irrelevant. Or, if you plan to early exercise immediately upon receipt, you actua
20.
by jalonso510 9y ago
"It is not the strike price or the exercise price. It is more-or-less the fair market value of the options when they vest, but if you need to compute your taxes, consult an accountant" This is not correct. The $100k threshold is
21.
by jalonso510 9y ago
That's one place where the SAFE is better than a convertible note - a note will have to have a specific term for maturity, usually 18 or 12 months, but a SAFE can just sit there outstanding indefinitely until an event causes it to conv
22.
by jalonso510 9y ago
VC's typically get to charge fees on capital they deploy, not just what their institutional investors have committed to their fund. So in theory, while they could be more transparent by reducing the amount of their investment by the a
23.
by jalonso510 10y ago
Couple of things that are not correct in the article: (1) a $50,000 fee for a valuation is crazy- early stage companies pay less than 1/10th that. (2) companies typically do not get a valuation done more than once per year. the articl
24.
by jalonso510 10y ago
My usual advice is you want to incorporate when you either have (i) contracts with third parties, or (ii) other people working on the business with you. It's a spectrum of risk, with coding alone with no customers on one end and a full
25.
by jalonso510 10y ago
This hack is not a good idea. In most states you have to pay that year's franchise tax (the $800 in CA) before you are allowed to dissolve the company or surrender your qualification, and there are also filing fees for each of these t
26.
Hacker house blues my life 12 programmers 2 rooms and one 21st century dream(alternet.org)
2 points by jalonso510 10y ago|0 comments
27.
by jalonso510 10y ago
It's all about the relationship. If Zuckerberg keeps even a small portion of his wealth at this bank or managed by their advisors, that's a huge win for them as they've increased their capital base available to lend to other
28.
Europe Approves New Trans-Atlantic Data Transfer Deal(nytimes.com)
2 points by jalonso510 10y ago|0 comments
29.
by jalonso510 10y ago
Who's writing the checks really depends on what's in the contract between Walgreens and Theranos. I haven't seen it, but it wouldn't be out of the ordinary for Theranos to have agreed to indemnify Walgreens against clai
30.
by jalonso510 10y ago
Well if they ever IPO at all, it sounds like these guys get 20% off the IPO price so have a decent gain built in no matter what Spotify is worth at that time. Assuming the description in the article is correct.

More ›