15.1 Entrepreneurship: Early-Stage Financing and Venture Capital
All firms need capital, either through debt financing or equity financing. For new, high-risk ventures, a key source of funds is the venture capital (VC) market. Venture capital typically refers to financing for new and often high-risk ventures. Angel investors are individuals who invest their own money, while venture capital firms pool funds from various sources like pension funds, insurance companies, and university endowments.
Venture capitalists often provide financing in stages, investing enough money at each stage to reach the next milestone. This staged financing serves as a powerful motivating force for a firm's founders. The stages of financing include:
- Seed/Angel Round: The initial investment, often from friends, family, or angel investors. This stage is used to prove the product's viability.
- Early-Stage VC (Series A, B): Used to cover salaries, market research, and finalize the product (Series A) and then to ignite growth, expand production, and increase market share (Series B).
- Late-Stage VC (Series C, D): Used for greater market share, acquisitions, or to set the company up to go public. Bridge financing is often used to cover IPO expenses.
- Growth Equity: Provides funds for mature companies that wish to stay private longer. These are often unicorns (private companies valued over $1 billion).
Venture capitalists also actively participate in running the firm, providing expertise and experience. However, gaining access to venture capital is difficult, with many proposals going unfunded. The process can also be very expensive, with VCs often demanding significant equity and board seats.
Figures and Tables
Figure 15.1 Cash Flows for a Startup
This figure illustrates the cash flow for a startup over time, showing a period of negative cash flow during the idea and development stages, followed by a positive turn during growth and maturity. The corresponding investment stages are also shown.
Table 15.1 Venture Capital Deals by Round
| Angel and Seed | Early VC | Later VC | Growth Equity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 1,746 | 2,129 | 1,588 | 551 |
| 2011 | 2,618 | 2,453 | 1,751 | 643 |
| 2012 | 3,557 | 2,630 | 1,771 | 670 |
| 2013 | 4,668 | 2,852 | 1,893 | 695 |
| 2014 | 5,491 | 3,172 | 2,057 | 891 |
| 2015 | 5,783 | 3,250 | 2,040 | 1,001 |
| 2016 | 4,790 | 3,016 | 1,888 | 885 |
| 2017 | 4,956 | 3,384 | 2,052 | 1,021 |
| 2018 | 4,622 | 3,731 | 2,295 | 1,217 |
| 2019 | 4,760 | 3,882 | 4,717 | 1,217 |
Table 15.2 Venture Capital Investment by Funding Stage in 2019 (billions)
| Angel and seed | $9.6 |
| Early VC | 43.2 |
| Later VC | 80.7 |
| Growth equity | 66.4 |
Table 15.3 Venture Capital Flow by Sector in 2019: First Round
| Number of Deals | Capital Raised (millions) | |
|---|---|---|
| Commercial services | 317 | $1,097.7 |
| Consumer goods and recreation | 161 | 521.6 |
| Energy | 31 | 54.0 |
| Health care devices | 105 | 551.1 |
| Health care services | 205 | 538.3 |
| IT hardware | 70 | 205.8 |
| Media | 110 | 239.9 |
| Other | 820 | 2,608.1 |
| Pharma and biotech | 208 | 2,893.3 |
| Software | 903 | 2,585.9 |
Table 15.4 Largest VC Funds Launched in 2019
| Investor Name | Fund Name | Fund Size (M) | Close Date | Fund State |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TCV | TCV X | $3,200.0 | January 31, 2019 | California |
| Andreessen Horowitz | Andreessen Horowitz LSV Fund I | 2,238.9 | July 17, 2019 | California |
| Norwest Venture Partners | Norwest Venture Partners XV | 2,000.0 | November 14, 2019 | California |
| Founders Fund | The Founders Fund VII | 1,496.4 | November 20, 2019 | California |
| Vivo Capital | Vivo Capital Fund IX | 1,430.0 | October 30, 2019 | California |
| Sapphire Ventures | Sapphire Ventures Fund IV | 1,400.0 | December 18, 2019 | California |
| Lightspeed Venture Partners | Lightspeed Venture Partners Select III | 1,361.8 | June 21, 2019 | California |
| Bond Capital (San Francisco) | Bond Capital Fund | 1,250.0 | May 1, 2019 | California |
| Sequoia Capital | Sequoia Capital US Growth Fund VIII | 998.5 | December 6, 2019 | California |
| Andreessen Horowitz | Andreessen Horowitz Fund VI | 840.0 | July 17, 2019 | California |
Table 15.5 Top States by VC Raised in 2019
| Number of Funds | Capital Raised (millions) | |
|---|---|---|
| California | 123 | $31,513.4 |
| Massachusetts | 28 | 7,515.5 |
| New York | 40 | 4,583.5 |
| Connecticut | 2 | 910.0 |
| Ohio | 7 | 894.1 |
| Illinois | 10 | 721.1 |
| Washington | 10 | 689.1 |
| Texas | 9 | 546.3 |
| Pennsylvania | 4 | 417.0 |
| District of Columbia | 2 | 365.0 |
15.2 Selling Securities to the Public: The Basic Procedure
The process of selling securities to the public is regulated by federal laws, primarily the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, both administered by the SEC. The key steps in a public issue include:
- Obtain Board Approval: Management must first get approval from the board of directors.
- File a Registration Statement: A detailed registration statement must be filed with the SEC for all public, interstate issues over $5 million.
- Waiting Period: The SEC examines the registration statement. During this time, a preliminary prospectus (or "red herring") can be distributed to potential investors.
- Price Determination: The final price is determined, and a final prospectus is issued. The SEC does not pass on the economic merits, only the factual accuracy.
- Selling Effort: The full selling effort begins on the effective date. Tombstone advertisements are often used by underwriters to announce the issue.
Figure 15.2 An Example of a Tombstone Advertisement
This figure shows a tombstone advertisement for the World Wrestling Federation Entertainment, Inc. IPO. It lists the issuer's name, the number of shares, the price per share, and the names of the investment banks involved in the offering, categorized by their level of participation (brackets).
15.3 Alternative Issue Methods
When a company issues a new security, it can be a public issue (registered with the SEC) or a private issue (sold to fewer than 35 investors without registration). For public equity sales, there are two main types:
- General Cash Offer: Securities are offered to the general public.
- Rights Offer: Securities are initially offered only to existing shareholders.
The first public equity issue for a company is an initial public offering (IPO). A new issue for a company with existing securities is called a seasoned equity offering (SEO).
Table 15.6 The Methods of Issuing New Securities
| Method | Type | Definition |
|---|---|---|
| Public | Firm commitment cash offer | The company negotiates an agreement with an investment banker to underwrite and distribute the new shares. |
| Best efforts cash offer | The company has investment bankers sell as many shares as possible at an agreed-upon price, with no guarantee of the amount raised. | |
| Dutch auction cash offer | The company has investment bankers auction shares to determine the highest price obtainable. | |
| Privileged subscription | Direct rights offer | The company offers the new stock directly to its existing shareholders. |
| Standby rights offer | A direct rights offer where the net proceeds are guaranteed by the underwriters. | |
| Nontraditional cash offer | Shelf cash offer | Qualifying companies can authorize and sell shares over a two-year period as needed. |
| Competitive firm cash offer | The company awards the underwriting contract through a public auction. | |
| Private | Direct placement | Securities are sold directly to a purchaser, who generally cannot resell them for at least two years. |
15.4 Underwriters
Underwriters are typically investment firms that perform services such as formulating the issue method, pricing the securities, and selling them. They often form a syndicate to share the risk. The difference between the price the underwriter pays and the offering price is called the gross spread.
Types of Underwriting
- Firm Commitment: The underwriter buys the entire issue from the issuer and resells it to the public, bearing the risk of not being able to sell all shares. This is the most common type.
- Best Efforts: The underwriter only promises to use its "best efforts" to sell the securities, with no guarantee of the amount of money raised.
- Dutch Auction: The underwriter does not set a fixed price but instead conducts an auction where investors bid for shares. The offer price is then the highest price that results in all shares being sold. All successful bidders pay this same price.
Other important provisions in underwriting include the Green Shoe provision (an overallotment option for underwriters to buy additional shares to cover excess demand) and lockup agreements (which prevent insiders from selling their shares for a specified period, typically 180 days, after an IPO).
15.5 IPOs and Underpricing
Underpricing, or selling stock below its true market value, is a common phenomenon in IPOs. While it benefits new shareholders, it is a significant indirect cost to the issuing firm and its existing shareholders. This can be seen as "money left on the table."
The extent of underpricing can vary dramatically over time, with "hot issue" markets showing severe underpricing. Underpricing tends to be more significant for smaller, more speculative issues. It also correlates with offers priced above the initial file range, a pattern known as the "partial adjustment" phenomenon.
Possible reasons for underpricing include:
- To attract investors, particularly for risky issues.
- As a form of insurance for underwriters against lawsuits.
- To reward institutional investors for providing truthful information during the bookbuilding process.
- The "winner's curse" phenomenon, where an average investor gets all they want only when a smart investor avoids the issue.
Figures and Tables
Table 15.7 Number of Offerings, Average First-Day Return, and Gross Proceeds of Initial Public Offerings: 1960-2019
| Year | Number of Offerings* | Average First-Day Return, % | Gross Proceeds, Billions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1960-1969 | 2,661 | 21.2 | 7.99 |
| 1970-1979 | 1,536 | 7.1 | 6.66 |
| 1980-1989 | 2,048 | 7.2 | 53.99 |
| 1990-1998 | 3,614 | 14.8 | 226.38 |
| 1999-2000 | 856 | 64.6 | 129.47 |
| 2001-2009 | 918 | 11.6 | 227.30 |
| 2010-2019 | 1,172 | 17.1 | 526.25 |
| 1960-2019 | 12,805 | 17.3 | 1,178.04 |
Figure 15.3 Average Initial Returns by Month for SEC-Registered Initial Public Offerings: 1960-2019
This figure shows the average first-day returns for IPOs on a month-by-month basis, demonstrating that underpricing is highly variable over time and can be very dramatic, exceeding 100% in some months.
Figure 15.4 Number of Offerings by Month for SEC-Registered Initial Public Offerings: 1960-2019
This figure illustrates the number of IPOs issued each month, showing pronounced cycles that tend to follow periods of significant underpricing.
Table 15.8 IPO Underpricing and File Price Range
| A: Percentage of IPOs Relative to File Price Range | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Above | Below | Within | |
| 1980-1989 | 30% | 57% | 13% |
| 1990-1998 | 49 | 24 | 27 |
| 1999-2000 | 44 | 18 | 38 |
| 2001-2019 | 45 | 33 | 22 |
| 1980-2019 | 49 | 28 | 23 |
| B: Average First-Day Returns Relative to File Price Range | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Below | Within | Above | |
| 1980-1989 | 0% | 6% | 20% |
| 1990-1998 | 4 | 11 | 31 |
| 1999-2000 | 8 | 26 | 122 |
| 2001-2019 | 3 | 12 | 38 |
| 1980-2019 | 3 | 11 | 50 |
Table 15.9 Average First-Day Returns, Categorized by Sales, for IPOs: 1980-2019
| Annual Sales of Issuing Firms | 1980-1989 Return | 1990-1998 Return | 1999-2000 Return | 2001-2019 Return |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $0 ≤ sales < $10m | 10.3% | 17.4% | 68.9% | 10.6% |
| $10m ≤ sales < $20m | 8.6 | 18.5 | 81.4 | 13.1 |
| $20m ≤ sales < $50m | 7.8 | 18.8 | 75.5 | 16.8 |
| $50m ≤ sales < $100m | 6.3 | 12.8 | 62.2 | 21.3 |
| $100m ≤ sales < $200m | 5.1 | 11.8 | 35.8 | 19.9 |
| $200m ≤ sales | 3.4 | 8.7 | 25.0 | 12.3 |
| All | 7.2 | 14.8 | 64.6 | 14.8 |
15.6 New Equity Sales and the Value of the Firm
Contrary to what might be expected, the announcement of a new equity issue often leads to a decline in a firm's stock price. This can be attributed to several factors:
- Managerial Information: Management may be issuing new stock because they believe the firm is currently overvalued.
- Debt Usage: The equity issue may signal that the company has too much debt and cannot take on more, which could be seen as a negative signal about its future prospects.
- Issue Costs: The stock price drop is an indirect cost of selling securities.
15.7 The Costs of Issuing Securities
The costs associated with floating a new issue are called flotation costs. These can be broken down into six categories:
| Cost Type | Description |
|---|---|
| Gross Spread | Direct fees paid to underwriters. |
| Other Direct Expenses | Direct costs to the issuer not part of the underwriter's compensation (e.g., filing fees). |
| Indirect Expenses | Costs not reported in the prospectus, such as management time. |
| Abnormal Returns | The stock price drop on the announcement of a seasoned equity offering. |
| Underpricing | The loss from selling stock below its true value, especially in IPOs. |
| Green Shoe Option | The cost of the overallotment option to underwriters. |
There are significant economies of scale, with costs being much lower (as a percentage) for larger issues. The costs of selling debt are also substantially less than those of selling equity.
15.8 Rights
A rights offering gives existing shareholders the right to buy a specified number of new shares at a specified price within a given time. This ensures that existing shareholders can maintain their proportionate ownership in the company. Rights offerings are generally cheaper than cash offers as they can be done without an underwriter.
The Mechanics of a Rights Offering
The key questions in a rights offering are:
- What should the subscription price be? It must be less than the current market price for the rights to have value.
- How many new shares will be sold?
- How many shares will each shareholder be allowed to buy?
The value of a right is the difference between the rights-on price (the stock price before the offering) and the ex-rights price (the price after the rights have been detached). For an investor, exercising the rights or selling them leaves their total wealth unchanged.
Example: Valuing a Right
Suppose a company's stock sells for $40, and a rights offer allows shareholders to buy one new share for every four they own at a subscription price of $30. The value of a right can be calculated as follows:
Initial value of 4 shares: $4 \times \$40 = \$160$.
New investment to buy 1 new share: $\$30$.
Total value of 5 shares: $\$160 + \$30 = \$190$.
New price per share (ex-rights price): $\$190 / 5 = \$38$.
Value of a single right: $\$40 - \$38 = \textbf{\$2}$.
Figure 15.5 Ex-Rights Stock Prices
This figure illustrates the timing of an ex-rights date relative to the announcement and record dates, showing that the stock price drops by the value of the right on the ex-rights date.
Table 15.10 National Power Company Financial Statements before Rights Offering
| NATIONAL POWER COMPANY Balance Sheet | |
|---|---|
| Assets | Shareholders' Equity |
| Assets | $15,000,000 |
| Total | $15,000,000 |
| Income Statement | |
|---|---|
| Earnings before taxes | $2,531,646 |
| Taxes (21%) | 531,646 |
| Net income | $2,000,000 |
| Shares outstanding | 1,000,000 |
| Earnings per share | $2 |
| Market price per share | $20 |
| Total market value | $20,000,000 |
Table 15.11 The Value of Rights: The Individual Shareholder
| Initial Position | |
|---|---|
| Number of shares | 2 |
| Share price | $20 |
| Value of holding | $40 |
| Terms of Offer | |
| Subscription price | $10 |
| Number of rights issued | 2 |
| Number of rights for a new share | 2 |
| After Offer | |
| Number of shares | 3 |
| Value of holding | $50 |
| Share price | $16.67 |
| Value of one right: Old price - New price | $20 - 16.67 = $3.33 |
Table 15.12 National Power Company Rights Offering
| Initial Position | |
|---|---|
| Number of shares | 1 million |
| Share price | $20 |
| Value of firm | $20 million |
| Terms of Offer | |
| Subscription price | $10 |
| Number of rights issued | 1 million |
| Number of rights for a new share | 2 |
| After Offer | |
| Number of shares | 1.5 million |
| Share price | $16.67 |
| Value of firm | $25 million |
| Value of one right | $20 - 16.67 = $3.33 |
15.9 Dilution
Dilution refers to a loss in existing shareholders' value. There are three main types:
- Proportionate Ownership: A loss of control when a firm sells shares to the general public and existing shareholders do not participate.
- Market Value: The true dilution, where the market price per share falls because a new project has a negative net present value (NPV). This is the most important type of dilution.
- Book Value and EPS: An accounting dilution where the book value per share and earnings per share fall. This is a common misconception and is not necessarily a bad thing if the new project has a positive NPV.
True dilution of market value only occurs when a firm undertakes a project with a negative NPV, regardless of the book-to-market ratio. The drop in stock price is a direct result of the value-destroying project, not the share issuance itself.
Table 15.13 New Issues and Dilution: The Case of Upper States Manufacturing
| Initial | After Taking on New Project | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| With Dilution | With No Dilution | ||
| Number of shares | 1,000,000 | 1,400,000 | 1,400,000 |
| Book value | $10,000,000 | $12,000,000 | $12,000,000 |
| Book value per share (B) | $10 | $8.57 | $8.57 |
| Market value | $5,000,000 | $6,000,000 | $8,000,000 |
| Market price (P) | $5 | $4.29 | $5.71 |
| Net income | $1,000,000 | $1,200,000 | $1,600,000 |
| Return on equity (ROE) | .10 | .10 | .13 |
| Earnings per share (EPS) | $1 | $.86 | $1.14 |
| EPS/P | .20 | .20 | .20 |
| P/EPS | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| P/B | .5 | .5 | .67 |
| Project cost $2,000,000 | NPV=-$1,000,000 | NPV=$1,000,000 | |
15.10 Issuing Long-Term Debt
The procedures for issuing long-term debt publicly are similar to those for stocks, including SEC registration and a prospectus. However, a significant amount of long-term debt is issued privately through term loans or private placements. These methods avoid SEC registration costs but may have more restrictive covenants. The flotation costs for debt are also substantially lower than for equity.
15.11 Shelf Registration
Shelf registration (SEC Rule 415) allows a company to register an offering it expects to sell over a two-year period and then sell the issue whenever it wants. This provides flexibility and speed. To be eligible, a company must be investment-grade, not have defaulted on debt in the last three years, and have a market value of outstanding stock over $150 million.
Chapter Review and Critical Thinking Questions
Solution: In the aggregate, debt offerings are more common and larger because most companies prefer to finance with debt for two main reasons. First, interest is tax-deductible. Second, the cost of issuing debt is significantly lower than the cost of issuing equity, and the firm's stock price does not tend to drop on the announcement of a debt offering.
Solution: The costs are higher for equity because equity is generally riskier than debt. To attract investors, underwriters need to provide more assurance and expend more effort, which is reflected in the higher fees. Additionally, the indirect costs, such as underpricing and the negative market reaction, are much more significant for equity issues.
Solution: Noninvestment-grade bonds (junk bonds) have a higher default risk. This means they are more difficult to sell, requiring underwriters to spend more time and effort, leading to higher fees and spreads. Additionally, the potential for a negative market reaction is greater, which is another cost that must be compensated for.
Solution: Underpricing is less of a concern with bonds because their value is more easily and accurately determined than equity. The market value of a bond is based on its cash flows (coupon payments and principal) and its risk, which can be rated by an agency. This makes it less likely that a bond will be significantly underpriced.
Solution: Zipcar shouldn't necessarily be upset. While the underpricing meant money was "left on the table," it was a highly uncertain deal for Goldman. The underpricing was a form of insurance against potential losses from a failed IPO and also helped create initial market momentum. Given the company's lack of profitability and unproven business model, the underpricing was likely a necessary component of the deal to ensure its success.
Solution: This information reinforces the reason for the underpricing. A company with no track record of profitability and an unproven business model is a very high-risk investment. The underpricing was a rational way to incentivize investors to take on that risk. The alternative might have been a failed IPO with a much higher cost to the company and its venture capital backers.
Solution: This information provides even more context. The VCs and insiders owned a vast number of shares that would have been worthless without a successful IPO. A small amount of underpricing was a small price to pay to ensure the value of their collective 30 million shares was realized. The underpricing helped generate a "hot issue" market, which benefited the existing shareholders (insiders and VCs) by establishing a strong trading price for their remaining holdings after the lock-up period expired.
Solution: My recommendation would be a rights offering. A rights offering is generally cheaper because it avoids the underwriting fees associated with a cash offer. While a rights offering is not as common in the U.S., it can be a highly effective way to raise capital at a lower cost, especially if the company has a strong existing shareholder base.
Solution: The professor should have expected to do worse than the average. This is a classic example of the **"winner's curse."** When an IPO is highly underpriced, a knowledgeable investor (the "smart money") will swamp the demand, and the issue will be heavily rationed. The average investor, like the professor, will get very few shares of the successful, underpriced IPOs. In contrast, when an IPO is overpriced, there is low demand, and the average investor gets all the shares they want. The result is that the investor's average return is dragged down by a large number of fully-allocated, poorly-performing investments.