Texas Startup Blog has a post about the lack of any IPO exits for venture backed companies this quarter. In fact, there weren’t any IPO exits this quarter which apparently hasn’t happened in 30 years. I decided to join the discussion and my comment trying to explain the lack of IPO exits is re-published below:

Like the article suggests, there are a couple different factors for the zilch IPO exits in 2Q 2008. 3 reasons for the lack of IPO exits (besides SOX stuff) are:

(1) Recent IPO exits have not done well - I think the statistic I remember from a couple months ago (NVCA presentation) was that only 28% of IPO exits (from 2007?) were trading above their IPO price.

(2) Cleantech/greentech takes a long time - Although keep in mind this, while a hot field, only comprises about 10% of funding. So there’s a bunch of capital going here the past 2 years (3.5B) that isn’t looking to exit anytime soon.

(3) Natural VC pattern - The number of first time fundings has increased every year since 2003, with 2007 being the best year post-bubble. Maybe the industry is just stuck between the not-a-lot-funded exit time/a-lot-funded early stage time?

It’s also worthwhile to look at the M&A exits, considering they have outnumbered IPO exits a little greater than 4:1 since 2004. While some of these exits were “fire sales” the quality of these exits is increasing every year. For first fundings from 1991 to 2000, M&A exists outpaced IPOs by a little more than 2:1. Currently, M&A exits are having a slow go of things. But there were still 56 M&A exits in Q1 2008.

While the venture capital market becomes increasingly global thanks in part to Europe, China, Israel, India, and Canada, the United States remains the leader in venture-backed financing. Although some American venture funds are willing to invest in foreign startups, the lion’s share of U.S. venture funds are not going overseas.

Most U.S. venture capitalists believe ROI from domestic deals will be superior to foreign ones. Investing in a foreign company exposes the U.S. venture fund to a new set of legal rules, compliance issues, and risks, leading to increased uncertainty and transaction costs for the American venture fund. Additionally, trying to replicate typical American VC terms, such as anti-dilution and redemption provisions, can be difficult to accomplish in a foreign market.

Does this mean my international (i.e., Non-U.S.) startup will be shut out from a majority of U.S. venture capital funding or from being acquired by a U.S. company?

Potentially–unless your international startup performs a Delaware Flip Transaction.

What is a “Delaware Flip Transaction?”

A Delaware Flip Transaction is the process of creating an American holding company for an international company. The end result is that the international company will be owned entirely by the new American company. Thus, the U.S. venture fund will invest in the new American company.

What are the mechanics of a Delaware Flip Transaction?

The basic mechanics of a delaware flip transaction is to create a U.S. holding company and insert it above the international company. Next, the shareholders of the international company execute a share-for-share exchange by exchanging their shares of the international company for the shares of the U.S. holding company. (Note that this share-for-share exchange may require some additional legal maneuvering depending on the jurisdiction of the international company. For example, it will likely be necessary to use a “scheme of arrangement” or other court-approved process to accomplish the exchange in the UK and other jurisdictions.)

Why Flip to Delaware?

Delaware provides the most comprehensive set of corporate law in the United States. No matter which American state the venture fund is located in, such a fund will be comfortable with require Delaware law. Additionally, foreign companies are likely most comfortable with Delaware law, as Delaware provides a good neutral ground or “playing field.”

I previously wrote a post about why you should consider incorporating in Delaware here.

Final thoughts on Delaware Flip Transactions

Even if an American venture fund is willing to invest in (or purchase) your international startup, it still may be beneficial to perform the Delaware flip transaction. The reduction of legal uncertainty and the ability to replicate typical U.S. venture capital terms should dictate an increase in valuation and could facilitate a NASDAQ or other listing (although IPO exits for venture-backed companies are not very common). Alternatively, Delaware may provide neutral ground for funding or acquisition by a non-U.S. company or fund.

And finally, there are important tax implications that may result from performing a flip transaction, thus such a deal requires both U.S. and foreign accountants.

Thus, the Delaware flip transaction may not be for every international startup looking to be funded or acquired, but it should at least be considered.

The Securities Act of 1933 provides companies with a number of exemptions from registration with the SEC. Two distinct but related exemptions, Rules 505 and 506 of Regulation D, provide that a company can sell its own securities to an unlimited amount of “accredited investors.” (Please keep in mind there are several other requirements your startup company must follow to properly obtain an exemption from registration under the securities laws.)

The definition of an accredited investor is found in Regulation D’s Rule 501 of the federal securities laws. An accredited investor is:

• a bank, insurance company, registered investment company, business development company, or small business investment company;
• an employee benefit plan, within the meaning of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, if a bank, insurance company, or registered investment adviser makes the investment decisions, or if the plan has total assets in excess of $5 million;
• a charitable organization, corporation, or partnership with assets exceeding $5 million;
• a director, executive officer, or general partner of the company selling the securities;
• a business in which all the equity owners are accredited investors;
• a natural person who has individual net worth, or joint net worth with the person’s spouse, that exceeds $1 million at the time of the purchase;
• a natural person with income exceeding $200,000 in each of the two most recent years or joint income with a spouse exceeding $300,000 for those years and a reasonable expectation of the same income level in the current year; or
• a trust with assets in excess of $5 million, not formed to acquire the securities offered, whose purchases a sophisticated person makes.

In addition to accredited investors, Rule 505 and 506 permit raising capital from up to 35 non-accredited investors (i.e., anyone that does not fit the accredited investor definition above). But that doesn’t mean your company should raise capital from non-accredited investors, and for a good few reasons:

(1) Non-Accredited Investors Trigger a Larger Disclosure of Information - If you raise capital from non-accredited investors in a Rule 505 or Rule 506 registration-exempted financing, you must provide a huge amount of information about your startup company. Think IPO-registration huge, thereby leading to larger legal and accounting costs. Such additional costs may not be prudent if your startup company is tight on capital.

(2) Non-Accredited Investors Tend to be More Hostile Than Accredited Investors - Implied by the definition of a non-accredited investor, the investment a non-accredited investor makes to your startup company will mean much more to him or her than an investment an accredited investor makes. A non-accredited investor will be much more emotional. Thus, non-accredited investors are much more likely to sue your company if things don’t go according to plan.

(3) Non-Accredited Investors can Hinder an Acquisition - It may be difficult for your startup company to be acquired after it has completed a registration-exempted financing with non-accredited investors. Non-accredited investors trigger additional rules in the context of an acquisition (e.g., a purchaser’s representative). Sometimes the acquiring entity will require a startup company to perform a buyout the non-accredited investors pre-acquisition.

Therefore, if at all possible, your startup company should refrain from raising money from non-accredited investors. They simply create too many problems during and after your financing.