????2.公眾投資者可以“重復利用”自己的資本，而大多數(shù)風投基金不能簡單地這么做,。奇怪吧,？如果富達通過投資貴公司在一年半的時間里獲得了70%的回報，他們會相當高興——他們可以轉手,，將這些錢再投資于其他股票,。如果Accel的投資在一年半的時間里獲得了70%的回報，他們會相當不高興——他們得將這70%返還給投資者,，根本不能再投資,。要算過這個帳來，風投基金的投資需要獲得3倍的回報,。那又怎樣,？這意味著后期投資者在融資交易中可能給你較低的估值和更多“架構”（即參與度），希望達到更高的投資回報水平,，而公共投資者可能更加靈活,。

????3.我們對我們的董事會總體很滿意，不準備尋找新董事或新觀察員,。

????現(xiàn)在,，我們再來說說HubSpot。每家公司都不一樣,。比方說,，你是一家經營不錯的旅行科技公司，但需要在董事會中獲得一些幫助,，用一些風投大腕和關系人來提升團隊,、領域專長，或許還需要一些資金全盤收購現(xiàn)有投資者的股票和他們的董事會席位,。在這種情況下,，如果你不與General Catalyst或紅杉這樣的公司合作,，那你就是瘋了,。

普遍使用“架構”，令人吃驚

????在我們公司的A輪至D輪融資中從未出現(xiàn)過“架構”概念。實際上,，當一位潛在的E輪投資者問我：“你接受‘架構'嗎,？”我確實被問住了，我根本不知道這是什么,，但也不想被視為一位完完全全的新手,。因此，我回答說,，“我得問問董事會才能回復你,。”這還是一句好回答,。

????“架構”這個時髦詞指的是設立一些優(yōu)先條款,，用于提高新投資者的投資回報或限制新投資者的損失。我在前邊提到過,，私募投資者通常需要在后期投資交易上獲得三倍的投資回報,，而且他們很怕如果投資一家公司，6個月后就能加價75%賣出,。對于能重復投資這些資金的人,，這是一個很好的結果；對于風投可不是這樣,。為了避免這樣的風險,，他們會要求參與優(yōu)先股投資，為他們的投資設定回報底限,，比如兩倍,。鑒于風投的激勵機制，這很有意義,，但優(yōu)先股是一種不同的股權類型,，凌駕于其他任何股權之上，需要相當仔細的研究,。優(yōu)先股有很多特點,，在彌補估值分歧時也很有效，但可能有些難以理解,。因此,，我推薦投資者深入挖掘，建立演進模式,。

????風投采用的另一類架構是禁止IPO或售股價格低于兩倍回報（或類似這樣的條件）,。鑒于風投與有限合伙人之間的合同架構，這樣的限制對風投很有意義,，對貴公司或許也有意義——但在此之前,，需要瞪大眼仔細看,。

A輪條款在后期融資中的驚人價值

????現(xiàn)實的情況是，A輪條款經常被剪貼,、復制到后期的融資交易合同中,。如果你在早期融資時在一些條款上做出讓步，后期融資時就不得不付出代價,。你通常不會從零開始,，反復寫這些條款。

驚人理性的定價

????在我們的早期融資階段,，最初的報價差別很大,；但在夾層融資階段，報價已經很接近,。有一些公開的數(shù)據(jù)可以比較：上市公司以及上市公司近期收購的估值,。報價討論似乎比早期融資交易時更“現(xiàn)實”。

????2.Public investors can "recycle" their capital while most venture funds can't really do that easily. Huh? If Fidelity gets a 70% return on their investment in your company in a year and a half, they are pretty happy -- they can turn around and reinvest that money into other stocks. If Accel gets a 70% return on their investment in a year and a half, they are actually pretty unhappy -- they need to return that 70% to their investors and can't really reinvest it. In order for venture funds to make their math work, they need to get a 3X return on their investment. So what? Well, this means that the late-stage venture folks will likely give you lower valuations and more "structure" (i.e. participation) in their deals to try to reach higher return levels, while the public folks will likely be more flexible.

????3.We are generally very happy with our board and were not looking for new members or even new observers.

????Now, that's HubSpot. Every company is different. Let's just say, as an example, that you are a travel technology company that's doing well, but you need some help on the board, some VC pedigree and connections to improve your team, domain expertise and maybe some money to buy out existing investors and their board seats. In that case, you'd be nuts not to go with, for example, General Catalyst or Sequoia.

The Surprisingly Common Use of "Structure"

????In our A through D rounds, the concept of "structure" did not come up. In fact, when one of the potential Series E investors asked me, "Are you open to 'structure'?" it caught me off guard, because I didn't know what it was and didn't want to seem like a complete rookie. So I said, "Let me check with my board and get back with you." That turned out to be a good answer, by the way.

????Structure is a fancy word for preferential terms set up to increase the return of the new investor, or limit the downside of the new investor. As I mentioned earlier, private investors typically need to get a 3X return on a late stage deal, and they're nervous that they will invest money into a company and six months later it will sell for 75% more than they invested. For someone who can reinvest that capital, that's a great outcome; for a VC, it's not. In order to protect themselves from that risk, they will ask for participating preferred stock that, for instance, will put a floor on their return of 2X. Given the VC's incentives, it makes perfect sense, but that is a different type of equity that sits on top of everyone else's equity that needs to be looked at extremely carefully. It comes in a lot of flavors and can work well to bridge a valuation gap, but can be confusing, so I recommend folks dig in and build the model on how it ripples through.

????Another type of structure that VCs put in is a block on an IPO or trade sale of less than 2X (or something like that). This block makes perfect sense for the VC given their contract structures with their LPs, and it might make sense for you -- but you need to go into that with eyes wide open.

The surprising importance of your Series A terms in later rounds.

????It turns out that the terms from your Series A are most often cut and pasted into your later round deals. When you compromise on terms in the early stages, you will have to pay the price in the later stages. You generally don't start from scratch and rehash the terms.

Surprisingly rational pricing

????The initial pricing interest in our early stage rounds varied widely; but in our mezzanine round, the numbers came in much closer to each other. There are hard public numbers to look at with publicly traded companies and recent acquisitions by public companies. The pricing discussions just seemed much more "real" than the earlier stage deals.