I have a slightly different perspective. While I agree that one set of standardized documents for every seed deal is ideal, there is value in achieving more modest objectives at first. I now know of 5 companies that have used the Series Seed Documents and those went well. My hunch is that after the first set of companies use these forms new start-ups will hear about them from their friends in the community. That will lead others entrepreneurs to ask for these documents as part of the deal. Some investors will say yes, others no, but after time there will be a snowball effect and the documents will begin to take market share.
Also, while I agree with Jason that trying to force all the lawyer to agree is unlikely to yield any result, I think that if certain companies are getting their seed deals done quickly and cheaply, that market pressures regarding fees and timing will drive lawyers toward standardization for seed round documents. It doesn't solve everything in one fell swoop but over time I think it will be effective.
Brad: I guess it's like a Kurasowa movie in which eryone has their own perspectives. I apologize if you think I've mischaracterized your views but I certainly thought I heard them and these same concepts were echoed by Jason in this post.
I really want to get AWAY from all this and focus on making the financing process better for seed stage companies. I am committed to iterating on documents and engaging in an open dialouge about how to improve this process. Let's go forward together and work toward that objective. I think you and Jason both do a great service by openly disucssing these issues. Let's keep the conversation positive about what is working and how to make it better!
One of the reasons I wanted Marc Andreesseen as my launch partneron the Series Seed Documents was that he fit this bill exactly. Investor who was an entrepreneur. Kopleman too. I think that's why they supported this idea.
In my first conversation with Brad, I told him I disagreed with him on tactics. His response was that I don't care about enterpreneurs and was just a publicity hound. I tried to convince him that we were just disagreeing on HOW to help, but he was having none of it.
In this post you say "Lawyers are driven by fees and thus they want to acquire more clients. " and "Releasing a set of documents that get you on the cover of peHub and Techcrunch is good for business." Seriously, if I wanted more business Series Seed Documents and all that goes with it (including this excahnge) is not the best use of my time. The language is civil, granted, but the point is not too subtle. Your either impugning the motives of me or Yokum (so I'm going to guess me)
Let's have a debate about what should be in a standard set of early stage docs and what's the best way to get more people to use them and not take cheap shots at each other. I just don't see the point.
So in short, let's not give up just yet! Let's talk about "standard seed documents" and see where that leads. It may take years, but I've got a long horizon.
Finally (for now) I think we'd all be better served if this discussion were more civil. It seems to me folks are ascribing nefarious motives to various participants in the process (me included). I agree with you that getting a bunch of lawyers together is unlikely to result in moving the ball forward. You partner Brad has a different view. That's fine, we can agree to disagree, but I don't see why that calls people's intent into question. The cost of seed financing documents is a problem has bothered me for years and I'm trying to solve it. So far, I've had some success with my own clients (4 companies have succesfully used these docs to date) and I'm hoping that making these documents widely avaiable will help other. My tactics may be misguided and my efforts may be for naught, though I certainly hope that isn't the case, but I'm trying to do something good for the community that has given me so much.
So on the fees question, I picked 10k as number because the investors counsel is going to have to due diligence, review the financing documents and make sure the pre-money calculations all work out, go through the schedule of exceptions etc.. I'm not wedded to that number (though I 've had comments that it's both too low and too high), but would be happy to make changes. I don't think it's a fair characterization to say that the 10k fee is itself "proof" that VCs aren't paying attention. I also don't think 1k is realistic for the tasks set forth above.
Unfortunately the debate has been around which form is better or what process should be taken to adopt the documents. I'd rather talk about the doucments themselves. So for one example Yokum and I are planning to sit down and geek out on the documents. Maybe this will move the documents to a place where he is comfortable with the Series Seed, maybe not, but it will at least put us in a place where we understand each other's point of view. There are some investors whom I've worked with who have raised objections to my firm's form documents (not Series Seed). With those folks, I've come to accomodations (I know which form to start with to take their comments). Of course, this falls far short of the idea of "fill in the blank" documents that I am espousing, but it is a step forward that saves startups time and money and (as Martha Stewart would say) that's a good thing. I don't want to let the best be the enemy of the good.
It seems to me that this debate is being framed in the wrong manner. Instead of saying, "well there are four /five set of documents and therefore nothing good will ever come of it', we should look at the postive signs. There are a bunch of form documents available online for enterprenuers and investors to use for free. I've offered to open source the Series Seed Documents and take anybody's comments so as to harmonize them to the maximum extent possible. Maybe mine will become the standard, maybe somebody else's will, but whatever result we are moving towards more openness and more standardization and that is a good thing for all parties. It is certainly better for enterpreneuers that they can look at a set of documents and at least ask for them in the process (as Giff suggests). I also think its a good thing that there are some big name investors who have said that they will use the Series Seed Documents. As I discussed with Brad, my hope is that this will cause the Series Seed Documents to "tip." I may be wrong about this, but this is my go to market strategy. All of this, however, is directionally correct.
Jason
I think its early in the battle to surrender. You've raised some real obstacles towards the adoption of the Series Seed Documents (or any standard), but I think there's a path forward if folks stay united in the goal.
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Experiment