Articles Posted in Start-Ups & Financing

hands.jpgA strategic alliance is a fairly simple concept. Two companies with similar interests join forces to produce favorable outcomes for all involved. An everyday example is the Starbucks inside of Barnes and Noble bookstores. This move helped Starbucks expand, but it also kept people in the bookstore, perhaps reading the first few pages of a book they were thinking of buying. A strategic alliance is good for business, but you’ll need to take the proper steps to make it work.

1,2,3 – The Steps to Creating a Strategic Alliance for Your Company

Step 1: Choosing a Partner

scale.jpgWith any luck, you or your business will never end up the subject of a lawsuit. Since this isn’t a perfect world, it’s best to start thinking about what to do if the unforeseen happens. Like most things, business litigation is an involved issue. We can’t go through the entire process in one post, so we’ll start with three basic steps to take if you find yourself in legal trouble.

Step 1: Purchase Liability Insurance

This step should happen long before trouble starts. In reality, this is one of the first things you should do as a business owner. Liability insurance protects the purchaser from the risks of liabilities imposed by lawsuits and similar claims. Say a customer slips on a wet spot in your store; your insurance would step in and handle the costs. You may want to add extra protection such as errors and omissions coverage. For businesses that have a Board of Directors it’s a good idea to have directors and officers coverage. This type of coverage protects the corporation as well as the personal liabilities for the directors and officers of the corporation.

llc.jpgLimited liability companies combine parts of both corporations and partnerships. Because they’re a hybrid, LLC’s can be more difficult to setup. One part of this process involves choosing a management structure to fit your specific LLC.

Single Member or Multiple Member LLC

The difference here is implied in the name. Single member LLC’s have only one owner, while multiple member LLC’s have at least two. Choosing one over the other typically comes down to financing. Starting a single member LLC comes with a higher level of risk as the profits and losses are reported on the individual’s tax return. However, as the sole owner, you don’t have the stress of running a company with another person.

Starting a business can feel overwhelming. Whether you’re opening a brick and mortar store or an online business, there are a lot of steps involved in turning your idea into reality. Creating a business plan and securing funding are a solid beginning; at this point you’ll also need to do a few things to make sure your business is legal.

Steps to Legally Starting a Business: It Takes More Than a Business Plan! 

Picking a name is a fun element of starting a business. A name not only tells potential customers what you sell but it also reveals something of your personality. Before you jump into the next activity on your business plan and start advertising your store front or online business, make sure someone else isn’t already using the name. Fortunately, most states offer a searchable database through the Secretary of State’s Office. Also, be sure to do a national trademark search to find out if another company owns the rights to the name.

I spend a lot of time talking to founders of Silicon Valley start-ups about the stock they will receive in exchange for their contributions to their new company, and then preparing restricted stock purchase agreements for the founders. In the last couple of blogs, I have discussed the issues surrounding how founders’ stock could vest.

The concept of vesting is usually intertwined with the concept of repurchase rights. Simply put, for founders’ stock, vesting is where the repurchase rights held by the company disappear or change. In a typical scenario, when a triggering event occurs, a company can repurchase unvested stock for its original purchase price. A company may not, however, repurchase any vested stock or may only repurchase vested stock at the stock’s then fair market value.

What kind of triggering events might allow a company to purchase unvested stock? One common trigger is anything that results in the shareholder not working for the company. Most often, this means a termination of employment.

Working with start-ups in San Jose, I have often had to counsel founders on the intricacies of business law as it relates to issuing stock. A large part of initial discussions with the founding group involves the funding needs of the new corporation, how shares will be divided, and the best way to provide equity incentives to founders, advisors, and new employees.

As I discussed in my last blog, one of the key issues involved in issuing stock to founders is how to incentivize them to stay with the new corporation. One mechanism discussed is reverse vesting, where the corporation can repurchase a founder’s shares of company stock at their original purchase price when certain events specified in a contract occur.

A typical reverse vesting structure is to allow the corporation to purchase a declining number of a founder’s shares at their original purchase price as time goes on. Typically the number of shares the corporation can repurchase will reduce on a straight-line basis over the course of three or four years.

Practicing business law in Silicon Valley over the past year, I have seen start-up activity pick up. We are in that part of the cycle where the survivors of the not so great recession have decided that they are better off on their own and have decided to make their dreams come true by forming their own companies.

Because many of these companies hope to become a welcome opportunity for outside investors, their choice of entity is the corporation. From the legal end, the process of incorporation is fairly straightforward and can be accomplished relatively quickly. Founders have a number of decisions to make, such as how much they want to each contribute to the new venture, and who will have which role.

Where a group of founders is involved, one of the most difficult issues, relatively speaking, is the issuance of stock. The first issue involves what percentage of the corporation each of the founders should receive. There are few, if any, rules of thumb as to whom should get what, and the decision is typically made by the founders assessing each of their respective strengths and weaknesses, and their contribution to the new venture, and deciding on a split. If the new corporation never expects to issue any new stock, and each founder will be actively involved in the business with profits being split at the end of each year, there may be little more to do with the stock other than to create a suitable buy-sell relationship.

I have always known that Silicon Valley is home to many innovative companies and has a lot of entrepreneurial talent, but I was still amazed to read that start-ups in Palo Alto, Mountain View, Redwood City, Sunnyvale and San Jose received a combined $980+ million in funding in Q2’13. [Source: Silicon Valley Business Journal, July 16, 2013]. As a business lawyer in San Jose, I have seen a number of attempts to make fundraising for start-up companies easier. Recently, a new technique has come into favor.

The new buzz word for start-ups looking for funding is crowdfunding (sometimes known as crowdsourcing). In this type of deal, a group or entrepreneur will receive contributions from a large number of people for a project. The process started with artists raising money for their projects. Their success led for-profit companies to look at crowdfunding to raise money. Websites like kickstarter.com and indiegogo.com are just a few that provide crowdfunding opportunities.

To encourage crowdfunding, Congress passed the JOBS Act a year ago last September. In response, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) released new regulations intended to encourage crowdfunding. One of the new regulations relaxes the public solicitation limitations that had been imposed for certain types of private financing deals.

In Silicon Valley, home to many large technology corporations and thousands of innovative startups, businesses need to move quickly to stay ahead of the competition. As a small business attorney in San Jose, I have formed countless of limited liability companies (LLCs), partnerships and corporations with the Delaware and California Secretaries of State over the years. And one of the first questions my eager small business clients ask me in our initial meetings is almost always, “How long will it take to form my company?”

For many years my answer was that we could have the filed Articles of Incorporation (for a Corporation), Articles of Organization (for an LLC), or Certificate of Partnership within about a week. When the California Secretary of State slowed down a few years ago, I had to tell clients that it could take as much as several weeks. However, in the last year or so the delays crept up to three months or more for the California Secretary of State to process and return a business filing.

Of course, California does provide a 24-hour expedited filing option, for an additional $350 over the usual filing fees. In my more cynical moments I have had to wonder whether it was the California budget crisis that was causing filing times to slow down because of lack of resources, or if the Secretary of State was purposefully taking longer to return routine filings in order to force virtually everyone to pay the “rush” fees.

In my last blog concerning market entry into Silicon Valley by foreign companies, I discussed some of the basic issues and tasks surrounding the effort. As an attorney practicing corporate law and representing technology startup companies, I am often asked to assist in designing and implementing the legal structures that enable a foreign-owned company to access the US market.

There are a number of factors that guide a company’s decision to enter the US market. First, what is it trying to sell? Second, does the company hope to generate its return on investment through a cash-flow from sales, or by building value and ultimately selling the company or taking it public? Third, does it need funding from US private investors? Let’s look at how each of these factors guide entity form.

The first factor focuses on the best method for product distribution. If the company is trying to sell simple, commodity type products using an established distribution network, it may be able to get by with no entity at all. In other words, it can sell its products directly into the US through a distributor or independent sales representative. Even if the product is complex, but does not require a sophisticated domestic marketing, sales, or support organization, an independent sales representative could be used.