A serial entrepreneur and investor, Josh Kopelman is our first VC to be featured that resides outside the traditional hotbeds, as he lives in Philly. While it may not be a VC hotbed, Josh’s track record and background should definitely put it on the map.
Name: Josh Kopelman
Company: First Round Capital
Blog: Redeye VC (One of our liked blogs!)
Bio: Josh has been a successful founder of many companies over the years (Infonautics, Half.com, etc.) and has been awarded eight patents as well. He has also been an EIR for Comcast. More about him here!
Miscellaneous/Interesting Facts: Josh’s company, First Round Capital, is one of the cooler VCs out there if you ask us. They have a strong portfolio and are also purveyors of the Dorm Room Fund, one of the first/only student run VCs in the biz. Very cool to get students involved at an early stage, check it out here! Bonus interview with Josh about Dorm Room Fund below!
Also, if you do not subscribe to their newsletter, the First Round Review, we highly recommend it as it is C:V. required reading!
The Finals continue! All info here at Term Sheet Central! Denver round 1 here!
1. Board of Directors vs. 2. Vesting
Board of Directors: One of the biggest control mechanisms and defining aspects of the company. The Board of Directors is the management team that sets direction and helps the company achieve their vision.
Vesting: The time period and speed at which you earn your equity in the company. Simple in theory, huge implications in practice.
- Example: If you have a 4 year vesting schedule at 25% a year on 100 shares, you will get 25 shares a year for 4 years. If you leave after 2 years, you get 50 shares and 50 shares is “left on the table” unvested.
C:V.’s Chief Term-ologist’s Take: Easily the strongest region and two of the fiercest competitors in the entire tournament. The Board is a consistent powerhouse with their far-reaching ability to provide advice, structure, and idea validation to the founders but Vesting is no push-over. Its timing effects and potential implications on employee retention and performance are underrated. This matchup will be a close one.
Outcome: Matchups like these are what the madness is all about. Had the selection committee done better when seeding, this could have been the finals. Alas, it is not and the Board has simply too strong of a balanced-attack style to be upset. Board Advances.