Hong Kong Government and Venture Capital

In the past few years, a growing trend of government involvement to boost entrepreneurship and innovation has been observed around the world. For example, key developments in the IT sector have risen from government funded R&D (Research and Development).

The Hong Kong government has also contributed a lot in this regard, especially via Venture Capital (VC) investments.

The ex-financial secretary of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Antony Leung, said in a speech in 2002 that their strategic position provides outstanding opportunities, and VCs in the country have ideally been placed to take these opportunities.

Development of VC in Hong Kong

Venture Capital investments started in the 90s with the change in attitude of the Hong Kong’s government, as various reforms were made to the policies of the country toward IT development and innovation. Today, Hong Kong is considered one of the largest VC centers in Asia.

The government of Hong Kong has always been aware of the opportunities created by VCs. This is why a number of initiatives were taken by the government to further enhance the growth and development in the sector. Some of them have been mentioned below.

VC Financing System

The financing system was formed by the government of Hong Kong to offer supplementary loans with a low rate of interest to VCs that are non-governmental and to provide guarantees for these loans.

Direct Investment by the Government – Innovation and Technology Commission (ITC)

The government formed ITC in 2000 in order to make Hong Kong the knowledgeable and world-class economy. Another reason was to harmonize the creation and implementation of policies related to IT and innovation and to make sure there is synergy among them. ITC formulated different programs over the years, including the Innovation and Technology Fund (ITF), the Applied Research Fund (ARF), and Small Entrepreneur Research Assistance Program (SERAP). Moreover, it also contributed toward the development of IT infrastructure and human capital by introducing programs like the Hong Kong Science and Technology Parks Corporation (HKSTPC), the Hong Kong Productivity Council (HKPC), New Technology Training Scheme, Internship Program and more.

Provision of Legal Support

The government extended their efforts for the development of VC in the country by envisioning legislations as guarantees for the VC sector. Hong Kong has its own VC laws and does its best to stay compatible with Chinese laws related to VC. Some of the measures taken include Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) Promotional Law, wherein, the government of China issued a number of opinions to guide and support the economic development of private and entrepreneurial businesses by introducing preferential measures for SME development; and Provisional Measures for the VC Enterprises Administration to make way for fund raising opportunities and to set forth several investors by offering a legal ground for VC firms to raise capital in a private manner.

Adoption of Preferential Taxation Treatment

The VC firms in the Hong Kong were weak in raising capital due to their high risk nature coupled with low success rate. This is why the government formed a preferential taxation treatment by providing exemptions and reductions to back the VC development. A number of steps were taken in this regard, including Profits Tax Exemption for Offshore Funds that helped in bringing new offshore capital to the country, and Avoidance of Double Taxation between China and Hong Kong that decreased rate of tax on passive income, such as, royalties, interest payment, capital gains, and dividends for strengthening Hong Kong as the gateway of foreign investment into Mainland China.

Although, the government of Hong Kong took a large number of initiatives in the region, yet, they were criticized by some specialists who believed that the government could do more to support and improve VC industry. They are of the opinion that the government has kept its focus on later stage startups and businesses while ignoring the startups that are in their early stages, which caused lack of governance. Also, a very small proportion of that money was being invested in Hong Kong.

Current Status of the VC Industry in Hong Kong

In 2016, the Hong Kong Chief Executive, Leung Chun-Ying, announced HK$2 billion worth of capital in his policy address in order to boost the inflow of money in IT and innovation. It was the Innovation and Technology Venture Fund that aims to encourage increased funding from private VC in IT startups via a matching process. According to the Vice President of the Hong Kong Business Angel Network and managing director of Radiant Venture Capital, Duncan Chiu, the fund was issued to provide backing to early stage companies that struggle to raise capital for their business.

To conclude, Hong Kong is known to have the largest population of VC professionals in the region that manage more than 30 percent of the capital, and the government has been making a continuous effort to further strengthen the VC industry for the betterment of the overall Hong Kong economy.

New Unicorn Wannabe

A number of Venture Capital (VC) investors are predicting 2017 to be the year when a large amount of money will flow into startups, especially if those startups have the opportunity to become “Unicorns”. Although, 2016 was not the best year for the startups as 70 percent reduction was observed in the companies that made it to unicorn status, 2017 seems quite promising.

For example, a number of VC firms, including Founders Fund and Andreessen Horowitz, managed to raise around $40.6 billion – a huge sum of capital needing to be deployed.

Rising Trend of Unicorn Companies

A rising number of unicorns from different industries have made it big.

Uber – Transportation service
Xiaomi – Consumer electronic
Airbnb -Lodging services
Snapchat – Social media
SpaceX – Aerospace

The marketplace for used goods has also picked up the pace during the last ten years as a number of startups have emerged in the market, such as OfferUp, 5miles and OLX.

Boom of the Unicorns in the Used Goods Marketplace

The online market for used goods has dramatically increased over the past decade as more and more e-commerce companies have made their entry. Encouraging the users to get rid of the items they no longer need, these companies have created a multibillion dollar market.

Recently, Letgo, a company that allows users to purchase and sell products secured $175 million in new financing. It has previously grabbed on to $325 million since it was initially launched and is currently approaching one billion dollars in valuation.

Moreover, some of the big unicorn names like Facebook launched a Marketplace Tab on the lower bar of its mobile application that allows quick access to shopping and selling on the basis of location. This goes to show how it is planning to penetrate in the e-commerce industry rather more aggressively.

LatAm Unicorns – Making it Big

On the other hand, in Latin America, some of the talented entrepreneurs are hosting five of the world’s biggest Unicorns ($1 billion in valuation). Although, the list of tech startups founded in Latin America is short, yet, these companies have made it possible for other new entrants to envision themselves as growing on a global scale. Argentina is the only country in Latin America with 4 (soon to be 5 with Letgo) out of 6 Unicorns. Those Unicorns are MercadoLibre, Despegar, OLX and Globant.

MercadoLibre is an online company from Argentina that is involved in online auctions and e-commerce. eBay made a strategic alliance with this company back in 2001. Apart from Argentina, the company currently has its presence in Colombia, Brazil, Costa Rica, Chile, Mexico, Dominican Republic, and a lot of other countries.

B2W is another name in the same sector. It was founded in 2006 and its headquarters are based in Rio de Janerio. B2W is a retail company that came into existence as a result of a merger between Americanas.com (holding a control share of around 53 percent) and Submarino.com (controlling the remaining percentage of share). The market-share of a company in the year it was founded was almost 50 percent of the online sales sector in Brazil.

Similarly, another renowned Argentine unicorn company from the e-commerce sector is OLX, which was founded by Fabrice Grinda and Alec Oxenford in 2006. Its headquarter is based in New York. The company is currently operating in more than 40 countries around the world.

The total number of internet users in Latin America is closer to the users in the U.S., but it has shown rapid growth in the past couple of years with the growth rate that is 8 to 10 times more than the U.S. rate. It means that the potential for new startups to make it big is huge in this region. Besides, there is a strong institutional and government support for entrepreneurial companies, which can further increase the expected number of unicorns in that area.

China Government and Venture Capital

In emerging nations, governments have greater influence over markets than ever due to regulations and political control. The ubiquity of a government can be seen in every economy through indirect or direct ownership of investment vehicles. China is no different.

The Chinese government started relaxing its grip on the economy during 70’s, which resulted in the escalation of investment and private entities. Since 1979, private and foreign investments have contributed a major role in making China one of the fastest growing economy in the world. Despite that, the country struggled to have standard financing mechanisms for businesses, including the availability of debt finance for smaller firms or presence of efficient equity markets. Although, it gave rise to a number of challenges, yet, it created opportunities for Venture Capital (VC) in China.

Rise of VC firms in China

The VC firms started making their way in the Chinese market during the early 80’s, and the impetus for this development was public policies, because the government still plays a dominant role in the country. The National Research Center of Science and Technology for Development suggested in 1984 that China should set up a VC system to encourage high technology market development. A number of local governments in the country supported and sponsored VC funds so that they could be invested in State Owned Enterprises (SOE) so as to level them up at a global standard in terms of quality and productivity. An example of such organization was China New Technology Venture Investment that was formed in 1985. Some of them were established for years, while others were formed only to make an investment in firms, especially the SOEs.

During 80’s, the primary focus of VC firms was to invest in property and infrastructure as there was an increasing popularity in hotel development and tourism sector. However, many of these investments couldn’t perform well and private equity investors lost interest in such investments. By the end of 1980s, interest in the Chinese market started brewing again. Due to steady economic growth and the government’s interest in such investments, VC was encouraged. But it wasn’t without a conflict as the government wanted to invest in high technology market and private investors wanted to keep their focus on low risk investments.

Evolution of VC in the Chinese Market

There was a lot of investment failure in the beginning as tourism and hotel development business couldn’t produce sufficient return. Moreover, a sudden proliferation of VC also turned out to be a failure, because the government officials and entrepreneurs didn’t have that experience.

As a result of such failures, a new body was formed in 2002, called the China Venture Capital Association, to improve the professionalism in this sector. Since then, the VC ecosystem has not only evolved but also shown tremendous growth.

Current Status of VC in China

While the investors in the developed nations are cutting their stakes in startups and golden age of unicorns is reaching the end, the venture capital fund backed by the Chinese government has brought together the biggest pool of startups in the world. It has reached 10 times the amount invested by VC in startups in 2015 ($32.2 billion).

Beijing Initiative

The country recently announced the formation of a $30 billion state-backed VC fund for encouraging the reform of SOEs and bolstering innovation. The fund is backed by the State Council and China Reform Holdings Corps, and it is established to find out the market-friendly ways to combine state assets and easily channel investments toward specific projects. It can turn out to be an effective move by the government in the long run despite the concerns regarding inefficient distribution and governance of assets. With the help of this initiative, if Beijing successfully upgrades its SOEs through effective investment in promoting high-tech companies, it can be helpful in rebalancing the economy of China by taking its reliance away from investments that focused on consumption based growth.

Other Investments Made by the Local Governments

China is struggling with economic difficulties as a result of ever increasing corporate debt, skyrocketing home price and reducing trend in exports. To combat such issues, local governments in China are also entering the VC sector, investing a total of ¥30 trillion. The purpose of this investment is to trigger the development of high-end manufacturing firms, internet and bio-technology so that it replaces the eroded economic growth of stumbling sectors.

Around 780 local government funds are competing to seed the upcoming multibillion dollar startups, including online emporium Alibaba Group Holding Ltd, Xiaomi, and SZ DJI Technologies Co. (Drone maker company), as China is striving to create at least one Silicon Valley in more than 20 provinces.

If China is able to achieve a desired outcome of such investments, it will not only enable the country to avoid the middle income trap, but also scale the entrepreneurship and innovation at a massive level.

UK Government and Venture Capital

New startup have a potential for high growth, and these businesses have been emerging at a fast pace since the recession of 2008. However, the success of these companies is based on a number of factors, one of which is the availability of an appropriate source of business finance. Due to the credit crunch, new businesses suffered a lot in the UK in terms of getting finance. Therefore, it was important to rehabilitate the economy of the United Kingdom by encouraging alternate sources of investments, such as, Private Equity or Venture Capital funds.

The main challenge faced by the government of the UK was not to create high-growth firms, but to take measures in order to ensure continued growth of these companies. Innovative ideas can only thrive if the right investment opportunity is available. The businesses with a potential of high-growth need a substantial amount of funds up-front, which is hard to obtain via traditional sources of finance.

Rise of Business Angels in the UK

Right after the credit crunch, business angel network evolved in the UK and took the form of well-structured and organized groups of professionals. It allowed them to make significant initial investments and undertake subsequent investments in the same professional way as Venture Capital investors do. However, the Venture Capital funding system was not established and focused on investing in innovative ideas, but it began to change.

The UK Government Support for Venture Capital Investment

Inspired by the Venture Capital (VC) backed firms in the United States, economists and authorities in the UK showed rising interest in this alternate investment opportunity for its unique role in distributing resources and expertise to a small percentage of high potential businesses.

Every major economy in the world has implemented initiatives to promote the role of VC, and many governments have formed their own VC funds. Similarly, the UK government has established various hybrid VC funds to achieve the entrepreneurial objectives and bridge the equity gap by strengthening the VC ecosystem. The purpose of these funds is to focus on growth oriented startup firms with innovative ideas that continue to face difficulties in obtaining capital. The UK government has a history of such interventions in a financial market that goes back to 1945 the Industrial and Commercial Finance Corporation (ICFC) was formed for SMEs (Small and Medium Enterprises).

The Government VC Funds (GVCFs)

There are three main GVCFs operating in the UK, namely UK Innovation Investment Fund (UKIIF), Enterprise Capital Funds (ECF), and Angel Co-investment Fund (ACF). All of these are the hybrid co-investment schemes and their aim is to promote public-private sector investment.

UK Innovation Investment Fund (UKIIF) – It was established in 2010 to encourage VC investment in the Research and Development sectors. It supports the formation of viable investment capital and targets the high-potential IT businesses in the UK. The investment is made via two underlying funds, i.e., the UK Future Technology Fund (now ceased) and the Hermes Environmental Impact Fund. These funds invest in those VC funds that are involved in giving capital to strategically crucial sectors of the UK, such as, life sciences, digital technologies, advanced manufacturing, or clean technology.
Enterprise Capital Funds (ECF) – This fund started operating in 2006. It represents a combination of private and public investments in businesses that have a tendency of high-growth. The purpose of establishing this fund was to lower the entry barrier for fund managers to operate in the VC ecosystem as well as to increase the supply of equity in the region where small businesses do not have access to the growth capital. It is rolling a program of 19 funds around £840 million with a planned life-cycle of ten to twelve years.
Angel Co-investment Fund (ACF) – It is the UK government’s £100 million fund that was launched in 2011. The objective of this fund is to provide direct investment to SMEs with high growth potential and to support the UK business angel market. Under this scheme, funds are allocated across the UK with a goal to support companies at every stage of development in different sectors. Furthermore, it operates at an arm’s length from the UK government under the administration of the British Business Bank.

Government interventions have become more important with the rapidly changing business environment and more initiatives are required to be taken by the government to promote the innovative ideas in the country to boost the overall economic environment.

Governments and Venture Capital

Several governments around the world have started equity co-investment programs to bridge the financial gap by injecting Venture Capital (VC) to businesses that do not have sufficient capital but they have high potential. These hybrid (public/private) programs still engage private sector VC firms as a channel through which public support and a large amount of capital is invested.

Hybrid Scheme in the United States

In the U.S., models of the Small Business Investment Companies (SBIC) program, such as, hybrid schemes have been launched. It involves a participation by the state as a public guarantor or a special liability partner (LP) for the large part of the total capital raised for investment. Subsequently, full operational autonomy is entrusted to the general partnership (GP) by the state once the investment eligibility guidelines are agreed upon. This is done to attract investment returns to the investors, i.e., the LPs.

These models have been widely adopted by a large number of governments since the collapse of dot.com bubble that violently shook VC funding raising. Moreover, developing countries have also started showing interest in such models to encourage innovation and new startups.

Hybrid Venture Capital Schemes – The U.K. and Australia

Other developed countries, including the U.K. and Australia, also followed the SBIC models and designed their own Hybrid Venture Capital Schemes (HVCFs). The Enterprise Capital Fund was formed in the U.K., whereas, the Innovation Investment Fund was formed in Australia.

The UK government devised the program to provide growing startups an equity financing of £2 million ceiling. Under the program, the early stage funds, invested in the growing small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and startups, consist of private investment by the private investors with uncapped profit share and loan or equity from the government with capped profit share. A common structure of investment is one where there is an equal distribution of profit between private and public LPs. However, to increase the expected profits of private LPs, HVCF adopts a number of mechanisms where changes are made to the profit distribution, down-side protection, timings of investments, and the payment of operating cost related to the funds.

Although, SBIC wasn’t a complete success, yet, the governments that are in favor of equity enhancement programs followed its design and changed it to match their own requirements and preferences.

Issues Faced by High-Technology Companies

High tech organizations face three major issues when they try to access venture capital. Firstly, they do not have enough information about venture capitalists in the market and there are limited financial channels for technology companies. Secondly, organizations that seek public venture capital causes low demand for other VCs, and thirdly, these organizations need to have creative and dedicated management teams or else they face issues in convincing VCs to provide funds, which further widens the financial gap.

Role of Governments in a Developing Country to Counter the Issues of High-Technology Companies

Governments of different countries have taken measures to address these issues. For example, there is a “triple-helix model” that expresses a relationship between: University – Government – Industry to promote innovation in a society.

Innovation can be brought in industry and university via direct or indirect VC investment, government stock, enactment of laws, formulation of policies, and through the promotion of high-tech SMEs. Government can play its role in different ways, i.e., by having a creative function, through venture investment regulations and tax policies that directly leave an impact on VC market, and by other measures that indirectly affect VC industry, such as regulations and laws that govern the labor market, patent, stock market, pension funds, etc.

For example, there is a city in China called Suzhou where 75 percent of the science parks are backed by municipal public VC. A special institute, which is responsible to the Local Science Committee of the central Chinese government, was developed to administer these parks. The employees of the institute are directly recruited and trained by the government. Therefore, as a developing country progresses in becoming a developed nation, a shift in the role of public VC arises from its direct participation in the market environment to provision of services.

Governments usually provide support to the Venture Capital markets due to perceived market failure or financing gap faced by startups or early stage businesses, and also due to the positive impact it will have to bring innovation and create job opportunities for a prosperous economy.

What do Social Investors Want?

Funding is a lifeblood of any startup. It is a crucial element for the survival of any business.

For social entrepreneurs, it is important to take steps in the right direction if they wish to secure funds. This is the reason why they have to learn what social investors really want and what their expectations are. Having a thorough understanding of your businesses increases the likelihood of attracting the right investor. Therefore, the vision of your business must be clear and well-focused.

Below are four main guiding principles every social entrepreneur must bear in mind in order to secure reasonable funds to keep their businesses running.

Financial and Social Objectives Must Be Well-Integrated

Social entrepreneurs have to be convincing in order to succeed in winning the trust of an investor. They not only should have a persuasive social mission, but also present a strong business case. If both these elements are properly aligned, they create a strong case that can make an appealing financial outcome to widen your impact. A great example of that can be Taxi-Electric that runs the cars on electricity and charge a fair price for providing taxi services. In addition to that, they also provide job opportunities to people who experience long term unemployment or are students. Both of these core elements have enabled them to sell as many taxi rides as possible.

Another well-known example is Tony’s Chocolonely that produce and sell chocolates. Moreover, it opposes child labor and slavery at the same time by partnering up with trade firms in Ghana and Ivory Coast to purchase cocoa beans at a fair price directly from farmers. These organizations are making an effort to spread a positive message while growing their revenues and returns.

Investors usually look for such businesses that offer a combination of both. It is quite likely that angel investors would invest in visionary ideas and would try to improve the business side of these social startups, whereas, investment funds tend to focus on the business side in order to assist them in aligning their social goals. Investors normally expect social entrepreneurs to have a deep understanding of their financial as well as social goals along with having an integrated approach and clear vision. It is important to optimize your plan through discussion with your investor.

A Well-Balanced and Strong Management Team

It is important to have a well-balanced team of professionals.

Investors always stress the importance of having a solid team that has its goals aligned with the goals of a business. Having a group of professionals who are motivated to invest their time and expertise in a social enterprise is considered quite healthy for a business as it is an indicator of good future prospects. Financial institutions and venture capital firms specifically look for companies with strong teams while taking investment decisions. Therefore, it is recommended to add a diverse group of people in your team at an early stage, because having more than one person behind an idea shows its strength and persuasiveness.

Measure Your Impact

It is not easy for social firms to measure their impact or quantify its outcome and they blame the lack of resources for not being able to do so. Investors, however, consider the impact measurement a strong requirement before they invest in a business. Although, they understand that it is difficult to measure the social impact, yet, they emphasize that it can prove to be very helpful for social entrepreneurs to maintain focus on their operations and identify clearly what their goals are.

The question remains how to get it done. The key is to start small, for example, measure the number of people employed by a social enterprise and the positive feedback it receives. There is no doubt that every method comes with its limitations, but one cannot deny that you can, at least, measure your progress with it. Taking the question “why” is it you want to measure the impact can play a vital role in integrating your financial and social goals.

Avoid Deviation from Your Core Mission

It is very important to stick to your key mission. The deviation can cost a business a lot in terms of losing their financial wealth and losing their core values. It usually occurs after two to three years into the business, especially when new employees, leaders or investors start showing interest.

For venture capitalists, the shift from a mission is one of the major issues that arises in social enterprises. It happens when they start deviating from their balanced view of pursuing financial and social goals together, and instead, move toward financial returns at the cost of their social mission. If such deviation occurs, it detracts the social entrepreneurs from the original mission they discussed with investors.

It is to be noted that moving away from the original mission is not a bad thing as long as the expectations of the enterprise and investors are aligned. Keeping the investors on the same page, and having their agreement is crucial for the success of any social enterprise.

Social Venture Capital

Starting a business isn’t easy, and getting funds is even harder. But if your business is involved in social or environmental activities, access to funds is even more difficult. One of the things social enterprises repeatedly talk about is a tough time they face finding people who are interested in giving them funds.

Although, there are different types of investors who are interested in investing in these firms, it is not easy to find capital. However, the trends have started to change in the past few years with the rise of social venture capitals.

Social Enterprises

These are organizations that employ commercial strategies to improve the well-being of a society.

They have a revenue generating business set up with two objectives, i.e., to attain social, environmental, and cultural targets and to make profits. On the face of it, many of these firms operate in the similar fashion as traditional businesses. But it’s only when you look more carefully, do you get to see its distinct characteristics, with the social mission being a center point and income generation playing its role as a support system.

Social Venture Capital

Social Venture Capital isn’t the same as traditional Venture Capital, as investors seek to look past the profits and risk/reward figures. Some of the common causes supported by them are to have a clean environment, elimination of poverty, and social justice. Instead of keeping their focus on investment returns, they tend to look for ventures that show profitable prospects along with the mission to bring positive change through their product or services.

Social VC – Changing the Name of the Game

Normally, traditional VC firms prefer to invest in those emerging businesses that show great potential to grow in monetary terms. So, when the business takes off, it’s a win-win situation for venture capitalists as they retain a portion of profits. Social VC follow the same pattern. They look for startups, assess their product and potential to grow in future. By investing their money, they become entitled to receive an equity share in a business.

According to the Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN), there are more than 300 VC firms that seek double bottom line businesses (companies with both profit and social impact). In a survey conducted by GIIN of 125 funds, it was found out that 25 to 50 percent of them follow the VC model or a private equity model.

So What Triggered the Social Wave?

Brian Griffiths and Kim Tan said that the social venture capital has partly been triggered by a shift in the role of business in developing countries that have a history of misusing the resources and poverty-stricken members of society. Another reason was the failure of massive aid to bring significant change.

This is why well-off venture capitalists expressed their desire to apply high tech style innovation to their altruism. Chairman of the Big Society Capital, Sir Ronald Cohen, said that impact-investing can balance the course of crime, poverty, and homelessness for green energy, education and a lot more.

Traditional VCs Shifting their Focus?

With the emergence of social VCs, a growing interest has been observed in traditional VCs as well. A former Wall Street Journal writer, David Bank, said that institutional funds that have given rise to social VC are looking at markets like sustainable timber, agriculture and green real estate. An eyeglass maker, Warby Parker, donates glasses to these businesses so they can sell it in emerging markets. They managed to secure around $100 million venture capital from Tiger Global Management, Spark Capital, General Catalyst and a lot of other firms.

There are many venture capitalists who are making small investments, for example, an outdoor gear firm, Cotopaxi, attracted $3 million from New Enterprise Associates and several other investors. Overall, it has secured around $9.5 million, showing that Silicon Valley can see the potential to generate returns in these businesses.

Venture capitalists actually get attracted to the fast-paced growth of these businesses, which is gaining popularity with more-than-ever-before socially aware consumers. Social VC is not generating high profits as of now, but it was the same for venture capital funds when they first appeared.

Venture Capital and Equity CrowdFunding Co-Existence

It’s been more than four years since the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act has been enacted, and its democratization has already started with a few Regulation A+ CrowdFunding (CF) offerings officially recognized by the Security and Exchange Commission to raise funds.

Given the increasing interest in Equity CF and reward based CrowdFunding, venture capitalists would find it hard to seize startups seeking investment opportunities as they prefer to raise funds via crowdfunding. On one hand, it has ignited the fear in some VC firms as they believe it could disrupt their industry by creating a hindrance to attracting young companies, whereas, other venture capitalists are of the notion that startups looking for both seed and later stage funding can utilize CF and VC funds alongside each other.

This gives rise to an important question

Whether Equity Crowdfunding and Venture Capital Co-exist or Not?

The answer to that is yes.

Despite the apprehensions raised by VCs, both the sources have turned out to be successful for startup businesses, as they offer two unique routes to raise funds. Although Venture Capital makes up a large part of the financing, yet, crowdfunding can add an extra element to it and help companies by allowing them to raise money quickly and in a more cost effective way.

CrowdFunding Provide Real-Time Feedback

Every VC investor seeks strong ideas that have a potential to provide high reward with minimal risk. With equity CrowdFunding, VCs have the advantage to get real time feedback as they observe the public response to see whether a product or service gain traction. According to an article by Deborah Gage on the Wall Street Journal, three out of every four startups (supported by VCs) fail. However, if it is supplemented by Equity CrowdFunding, the number can reduce to a minimum. As David Loucks, CEO of Healthios, rightly said that both the sources of investments complement each other. It can be seen as a sequence, wherein, CrowdFunding plays its part and then Venture Capital plays its role.

He further said that CrowdFunding doesn’t necessarily have to be restricted to the seed stage; in fact, startups can use it at a later stage to help strengthen their deal. He went on to say that instead of going to the capital markets, companies can turn to CrowdFunding in order to arrange funds around a specific initiative, as there is certainly going to be an investor in the market who would seek a partnership with a top buyer.

Challenges of VC and CrowdFunding Partnership

There is always a risk, to VC firms, of getting involved with scores of other equity investors. Loucks said that VCs have to be strict in ensuring the credibility of the sources of funds that a CrowdFunding platform represents.

Lynn said that there can be a situation where companies coming to the Venture Capital round, with thousands of shareholders if they find successful CrowdFunding offering, which complicates the capital structure, especially for Venture Capitalists who want to have a lion’s share in the business.

It also reflects a tough choice on the company’s part that seeks funds through CrowdFunding prior to attracting VC money.

Venture Capitalists Can Bring Their Own Skill Set

When it comes to CF, Venture Capitalists can go with the number of structures that allow them to co-invest in a company in tandem with new crowdfunding methods. For example, VCs might get access to preferred stock when CF investors may only get common stock. Moreover, VCs can also maintain control provisions, including anti-dilution measures so that rights attributed to them are not applicable to CF shares.

These arrangements can be quite fruitful for startups and investors alike, and in many cases, VCs can boost the overall value of an enterprise, while structuring arrangements in a way that meet their business needs. They can bring connections and market exposure to the table. As a result, new companies get to raise capital, Venture Capital firms get validation, and CF investors get the advantage of VC guidance and experience. Therefore, it can be fairly said that with the right strategy and partners, both the VCs and CF investors can co-exist.

Crowdfunding and Venture Capital

If startups manage to get funding from a venture capital firm (VC) or angel investors, they mark it as a successful milestone.

However, in the past few years, another investment vehicle has been introduced in the financial market to fund innovative ideas called CrowdFunding (CF). It has been changing the game ever since its inception and it is a new form of raising money to finance ideas. Unlike other forms of investments, such as, seed funding, angel investing, VCs or bank loans, CrowdFunding actually enables startups and entrepreneurs to invest in their business with a large amount of capital supply. Before going into detail, let’s look at what crowdfunding actually is.

What is CrowdFunding?

In simple words, CrowdFunding is a mean of raising money through a large amount of individuals, who are requested to fund an idea on a CrowdFunding website with a small amount of money. This phenomenon depicts the wisdom of the crowd, wherein, a business gets an opportunity to satisfy the market demand that was previously not exploited. Having this system in place results in creator getting funds to excel in his creativity and crowd getting a new product, which makes it a win-win situation.

CrowdFunding or Venture Capital – A Better Choice?

This can be a topic of solid debate if discussed in detail, because both sources have their upside and downside. In order to get a clear idea of which one of the two is a better choice, some of the key points have been discussed below.

Ease of Access

There is no doubt that it is easier to access funds via CrowdFunding than it is to raise capital via Venture Capital. You can meet your capital requirement with CF without having to build any connections, and instead, leave the decision to a large group of individuals. Sometimes, VC is hard to access. Despite having actual customers and real revenues, companies are considered small by the venture capitalists.

With CrowdFunding platform, it becomes easier to access a wide array of accredited individuals to fulfill initial capital requirements. On the other hand, regardless of how streamlined the venture capital processes are, there will always be more friction in terms of VC making inquiries and spending more time.

Stability

Stability is a key to a successful business, but it isn’t achieved easily. Most of the startups do not show an incredible growth curve in the beginning. It takes time to find the product/market fit and to find out a scalable way to sell a product. It means startups would need extra time for which, there will be extra financing requirements. In case of CrowdFunding, there is no apparent deal with responsibility and resources to fill this gap. This is where venture capital partners can assist a business to maintain their focus on execution by providing enough cash.

However, it should be done based on TRUST where both the founders of a startup and venture capitalists feel that the investment was done fairly.

Venture Capitalists working with CrowdFunding platforms

Ron Miller, a CEO of StartEngine (CrowdFunding platform), venture capitalists are compelled to use CF, because it asks founders for revealing the strength of their teams and values in the marketplace. He further said that it shows that strong teams and concepts are likely to get exposure in the market, which will draw attention of the VCs and other investors to further invest in their ideas.

For Example, Oculus Rift, a virtual reality system. They raise $2.4 million through CrowdFunding, which gave them the opportunity to rise another round led by Andreeseen Horowitz (VC firm) to raise $75 million.

Both sources of funds have their pros and cons. However, some VCs are now turning to crowdfunding websites to get access to new deals. Having strict timelines, they use CrowdFunding to identify if the idea is worth investing time in.

Corporate Venture Capital vs. R&D

According to a venture capital database (CB Insights), the venture capital market invested $74.2 billion across North America in 2015. The Corporate Venture Capital (CVC) groups participated in 17 percent of the deals in that region, making up 24 percent of the total venture investment distributed to startups that have been fueled by VCs.

This definitely reflected a reasonable improvement in CVC activities as their participation was limited to 12 percent in 2011. Significant growth has been observed in this investor type as an alternative source of funding for new businesses, but only a few know what corporate venture capital is.

Corporate Venture Capital (CVC)

CVC is defined as an equity investment by an established company in a startup business. It can be put together as an independent part of a company or an appointed investment team that is off their company’s statement of financial position. The main goal of CVC is to invest in companies showing high growth prospects. Some of the marquee brands having venture presence in the technology and healthcare industry, include Dell Ventures, Google Ventures, Cisco Ventures, Intel Capital and Johnson & Johnson Innovation.

Corporate venture capital has been one of the most critical contributors in the venture capital ecosystem that has matured over time.

Research and Development (R&D) and Corporate Venture Capital

R&D and CVC are two prominent sources of creating new potential.

CVC can be used as a substitute for internal research and development in creating such opportunities or capabilities. In different theories proposed by Dushnitsky and Lenox (2005), Cassiman and Veugelers (2002), and Gompers and Lerner (2001), there was unanimity on the idea that R&D backs the increasing use of CVC, in contrast with CVC to be used as a substitute for internal R&D. However, not much consideration has been given to how different industries might affect the relationship between these two sources.

Preferred Use of Investment

With the rapid changes in the global market, companies have drawn their focus on research and development investment to strive for achieving short term targets, as VCs are considered too quick to get caught up in the latest thing. But it doesn’t have to be this way. A number of opportunities with the great potential to boost innovation already exist, except corporations are not able to make use of it. One of these means is to use corporate venture funds.

Corporate R&D – Slow and Expensive Investment

Research and development investment is mostly focused on perfecting technologies that are already used by the public. The United States has spent billions on gigantic science projects for years, but the commercial returns were not as expected. Cutting back on R&D is not the right choice either, as Kodak ended up filing for bankruptcy when they cut their research funding and focused on film, and Nokia is now being purchased by Microsoft as they tried to keep their focus on low-end phones.

Corporate Venture Capital – Quick and Cheap Investment

CVC, on the other hand, is better at identifying new regions and is quite flexible and cheap as compared to R&D. During the last 20 years, a number of CVC initiatives gave a boost to pharmaceutical companies that were struggling to catch up with new advancements in bioscience.

The large companies in a corporate sector stay cautious of CVC, as they have seen them distributed ineffectively. For a corporate venture to be a successful mode of investment, its goals should be in line with corporate objectives and the approval of funds should be done smoothly with the same compensation levels as offered by independent venture groups. If a company fails to provide a fair incentive, it is likely to face a consistent flow of desertion. Rewards should always be given if people solve a problem or launch a new product in the market, but they do not necessarily have to involve cash. Recognition can also be a significant reward for such efforts.

Traditional R&D are not good at pointing out threats from the competitors. Instead, it keeps its focus on a specific number of projects that results in ignoring innovative advances that happen outside the company. Whereas, CVC quickly responds to change and potential threats, which allows decision makers to withdraw from any investment that doesn’t seem to be generating revenue in the future. It is highly likely that a creation of the CVC fund would prove to be a breakthrough idea that changes everything.