DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Rule: Exemptions for Advisers to Venture Capital Funds

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Rule: Exemptions for Advisers to Venture Capital Funds SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 17 CFR Part 275 Release No. IA-3222; File No. S7-37-10 RIN 3235-AK81 Exemptions for Advisers to Venture Capital Funds, Private Fund Advisers With Less Than $150 Million in Assets Under Management, and Foreign Private Advisers AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (the ―Commission‖) is adopting rules to implement new exemptions from the registration requirements of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 for advisers to certain privately offered investment funds; these exemptions were enacted as part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the ―Dodd- Frank Act‖). As required by Title IV of the Dodd-Frank Act – the Private Fund Investment Advisers Registration Act of 2010 – the new rules define ―venture capital fund‖ and provide an exemption from registration for advisers with less than $150 million in private fund assets under management in the United States. The new rules also clarify the meaning of certain terms included in a new exemption from registration for ―foreign private advisers.‖ DATES: Effective Date: July 21, 2011. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian McLaughlin Johnson, Tram N. Nguyen or David A. Vaughan, at (202) 551-6787 or <[email protected]>, Division of Investment Management, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549-8549. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission is adopting rules 203(l)-1, 203(m)-1 and 202(a)(30)-1 (17 CFR 275.203(l)-1, 275.203(m)-1 and 275.202(a)(30)-1) under the - 2 - Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b) (the ―Advisers Act‖).1 Table of Contents I. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................ 2 II. DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................................... 9 A. Definition of Venture Capital Fund ........................................................................ 9 1. Qualifying Investments ............................................................................. 19 2. Short-Term Holdings ................................................................................ 32 3. Qualifying Portfolio Company ................................................................. 34 4. Management Involvement ........................................................................ 52 5. Limitation on Leverage ............................................................................. 55 6. No Redemption Rights .............................................................................. 61 7. Represents Itself as Pursuing a Venture Capital Strategy ......................... 65 8. Is a Private Fund ....................................................................................... 68 9. Application to Non-U.S. Advisers ............................................................ 68 10. Grandfathering Provision .......................................................................... 72 B. Exemption for Investment Advisers Solely to Private Funds With Less Than $150 Million in Assets Under Management ......................................................... 75 1. Advises Solely Private Funds ................................................................... 76 2. Private Fund Assets................................................................................... 81 3. Assets Managed in the United States ........................................................ 93 4. United States Person ................................................................................. 99 C. Foreign Private Advisers..................................................................................... 102 1. Clients ..................................................................................................... 104 2. Private Fund Investor .............................................................................. 106 3. In the United States ................................................................................. 115 4. Place of Business .................................................................................... 120 5. Assets Under Management ..................................................................... 122 D. Subadvisory Relationships and Advisory Affiliates ........................................... 124 III. CERTAIN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW MATTERS ...................................................... 128 IV. PAPERWORK REDUCTION ANALYSIS ................................................................... 129 V. COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS ........................................................................................ 130 VI. REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY CERTIFICATION ..................................................... 197 VII. STATUTORY AUTHORITY ........................................................................................ 199 TEXT OF RULES I. BACKGROUND On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Act,2 which, among 1 Unless otherwise noted, all references to rules under the Advisers Act will be to Title 17, Part 275 of the Code of Federal Regulations (17 CFR 275). 2 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Pub. L. No. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010). - 3 - other things, repeals section 203(b)(3) of the Advisers Act.3 Section 203(b)(3) exempted any investment adviser from registration if the investment adviser (i) had fewer than 15 clients in the preceding 12 months, (ii) did not hold itself out to the public as an investment adviser and (iii) did not act as an investment adviser to a registered investment company or a company that has elected to be a business development company (the ―private adviser exemption‖).4 Advisers specifically exempt under section 203(b) are not subject to reporting or recordkeeping provisions under the Advisers Act, and are not subject to examination by our staff.5 The primary purpose of Congress in repealing section 203(b)(3) was to require advisers to ―private funds‖ to register under the Advisers Act.6 Private funds include hedge funds, private equity funds and other types of pooled investment vehicles that are excluded from the definition of ―investment company‖ under the Investment Company Act of 19407 (―Investment Company 3 In this Release, when we refer to the ―Advisers Act,‖ we refer to the Advisers Act as in effect on July 21, 2011. 4 15 U.S.C. 80b-3(b)(3) as in effect before July 21, 2011. 5 Under section 204(a) of the Advisers Act, the Commission has the authority to require an investment adviser to maintain records and provide reports, as well as the authority to examine such adviser‘s records, unless the adviser is ―specifically exempted‖ from the requirement to register pursuant to section 203(b) of the Advisers Act. Investment advisers that are exempt from registration in reliance on other sections of the Advisers Act (such as sections 203(l) or 203(m) which we discuss below) are not ―specifically exempted‖ from the requirement to register pursuant to section 203(b), and thus the Commission has authority under section 204(a) of the Advisers Act to require those advisers to maintain records and provide reports and has authority to examine such advisers‘ records. 6 See S. Rep. No. 111-176, at 71-3 (2010) (―S. Rep. No. 111-176‖); H. Rep. No. 111-517, at 866 (2010) (―H. Rep. No. 111-517‖). H. Rep. No. 111-517 contains the conference report accompanying the version of H.R. 4173 that was debated in conference. While the Senate voted to exempt private equity fund advisers in addition to venture capital fund advisers from the requirement to register under the Advisers Act, the Dodd-Frank Act exempts only venture capital fund advisers. Compare Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010, S. 3217, 111th Cong. § 408 (2010) (as passed by the Senate) with The Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009, H.R. 4173, 111th Cong. (2009) (as passed by the House) (―H.R. 4173‖) and Dodd-Frank Act (2010), supra note 2. 7 15 U.S.C. 80a. - 4 - Act‖) by reason of section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of such Act.8 Section 3(c)(1) is available to a fund that does not publicly offer the securities it issues9 and has 100 or fewer beneficial owners of its outstanding securities.10 A fund relying on section 3(c)(7) cannot publicly offer the securities it issues11 and generally must limit the owners of its outstanding securities to ―qualified purchasers.‖12 Each private fund advised by an adviser has typically qualified as a single client for purposes of the private adviser exemption.13 As a result, investment advisers could advise up to 14 private funds, regardless of the total number of investors investing in the funds or the amount 8 Section 202(a)(29) of the Advisers Act defines the term ―private fund‖ as ―an issuer that would be an investment company, as defined in section 3 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-3), but for section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of that Act.‖ 9 Interests in a private fund may be offered pursuant to an exemption from registration under the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77) (―Securities Act‖). Notwithstanding these exemptions, the persons who market interests in a private fund may be subject to the registration requirements of section 15(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (―Exchange Act‖) (15 U.S.C. 78o(a)). The Exchange Act generally defines a ―broker‖ as any person engaged in the business of effecting transactions in securities
Load more

Recommended publications
  • New Orleans Ranks 12Th Among U.S. Cities for Infrastructure Jobs, Report Finds
    New Orleans ranks 12th among U.S. cities for infrastructure jobs, report finds TED JACKSON / THE TIMES-PICAYUNEThe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers dredge Wheeler works near head of passes in the lower Mississippi River, along with 5 other dredges keeping the channel open for shipping traffic, Tuesday, March 20, 2012. In the foreground is a river pilot boat headed downriver (and past the Wheeler) to pilot town. Print By Katherine Sayre, NOLA.com | The Times-Picayune Email the author | Follow on Twitter on May 09, 2014 at 7:20 AM, updated May 09, 2014 at 7:21 AM Workers operating refineries, engineering bridges, hauling containers and performing other labor focused on the nation's infrastructure make up nearly 13 percent of the New Orleans metro area workforce, one of the highest rates of infrastructure jobs in the country, according to a report released Friday. In total, infrastructure jobs -- defined as supporting the nation's assets in energy, trade, transportation, public works and other sectors -- make up 11 percent of the U.S. workforce, more than previously thought, according to the report from The Brookings Institution. Over the next decade, infrastructure jobs will grow by more than 9 percent, the report said, and 2.7 million workers will be needed to fill open positions from turnover and aging workers retiring. Researchers with Brookings' Metropolitan Policy Program took stock of the nation's infrastructure jobs, defining 95 occupations in 42 industries from civil engineers and urban planners to river pilots and and petroleum pump operators, calling it the first report of its kind.
    [Show full text]
  • Philadelphia Investment Trends Report
    Venture impact Technology investment in the Greater Philadelphia region Trends and highlights, January 2008 to June 2013 Innovation, investment and opportunity On behalf of EY, Ben Franklin Technology Partners of Southeastern Pennsylvania and the Greater Philadelphia Alliance for Capital and Technologies (PACT), we are pleased to present this review 421 companies of technology investment trends and highlights in the Greater Philadelphia region. $4.1 billion The technology investment community in the Greater Philadelphia region includes a wide variety of funding sources supporting a diverse array of companies and industry sectors. In this report, Total investment since we’ve analyzed more than a thousand investment rounds and January 2008 exits that occurred in the Philadelphia region since 2008 – including investments from venture capital fi rms (VCs), angel investors (Angels), corporate/strategic investors, seed funds, accelerators and other sources of funding. As shown in this report, 2012 reversed a post-recession slowdown in venture funding in Greater Philadelphia, and to date, 2013 has brought a welcome increase in the amount of new funds available at regional investment fi rms. These are positive signs for our region’s technology companies, as are the increasing number of exits via IPO and acquisition, which serve as further validation of the investment opportunities created by our region’s growing technology sector. We encourage you to explore this report, and we hope that it will provide useful insights into the current state of
    [Show full text]
  • Stepstone Atlantic Fund, L.P
    StepStone Atlantic Fund, L.P. Private Equity and Infrastructure Quarterly Monitoring Report For the period ending December 31, 2020 Report Prepared For: Important Information This document is meant only to provide a broad overview for discussion purposes. All information provided here is subject to change. This document is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer to sell, a solicitation to buy, or a recommendation for any security, or as an offer to provide advisory or other services by StepStone Group LP, StepStone Group Real Assets LP, StepStone Group Real Estate LP, StepStone Conversus LLC, Swiss Capital Alternative Investments AG and StepStone Group Europe Alternative Investments Limited or their subsidiaries or affiliates (collectively, “StepStone”) in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation, purchase or sale would be unlawful under the securities laws of such jurisdiction. The information contained in this document should not be construed as financial or investment advice on any subject matter. StepStone expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken based on any or all of the information in this document. This document is confidential and solely for the use of StepStone and the existing and potential clients of StepStone to whom it has been delivered, where permitted. By accepting delivery of this presentation, each recipient undertakes not to reproduce or distribute this presentation in whole or in part, nor to disclose any of its contents (except to its professional advisors), without the prior written consent of StepStone. While some information used in the presentation has been obtained from various published and unpublished sources considered to be reliable, StepStone does not guarantee its accuracy or completeness and accepts no liability for any direct or consequential losses arising from its use.
    [Show full text]
  • Teneros Series A
    PRESS RELEASE Press Contacts: Cynthia Harris (650) 520-8343 [email protected] TENEROS SECURES $7 MILLION IN SERIES A FUNDING FROM NEW ENTERPRISE ASSOCIATES AND SEVIN ROSEN FUNDS General Partners Join Board to Counsel Development and Growth MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. – July 12, 2004 – Teneros, Inc., developers of the first application continuity appliance addressing the need for zero-downtime of mission critical applications, announced today that it has closed Series A funding of $7 million from New Enterprise Associates (NEA) and Sevin Rosen Funds. "We are very pleased to have NEA and Sevin Rosin as investors and advisors in the development of our vision for application continuity solutions," said Steve Lewis, CEO of Teneros. "This funding is an important step in the timely delivery of products addressing a huge market need.” In addition, the company announced that partners from NEA and Sevin Rosin have taken board of director seats. Scott D. Sandell joined the Teneros board from NEA. He is currently a general partner at NEA and sits on the boards of Actional, Agami Systems, CenterBeam, Data Domain, Ensim, FineGround Networks, Foveon, and Spreadtrum Communications. Sandell formerly served on the boards of Amplitude Software (acquired by Critical Path), Neoteris (acquired by Juniper Networks, (NASDAQ: JNPR), NetIQ (NASDAQ: NTIQ) and WebEx (NASDAQ: WEBX). Nick Sturiale comes to the Teneros board from Sevin Rosen Funds where he serves as a general partner and sits on the boards of Chutney, NeoScale, RouteScience, SolidCore and Westbridge. Prior to Sevin Rosen, Sturiale spent many years as an entrepreneur in the enterprise software, flat panel display, and semiconductor industries.
    [Show full text]
  • Semi-Annual Market Review
    Semi-Annual Market Review HEALTH IT & HEALTH INFORMATION SERVICES JULY 2019 www.hgp.com TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Health IT Executive Summary 3 2 Health IT Market Trends 6 3 HIT M&A (Including Buyout) 9 4 Health IT Capital Raises (Non-Buyout) 14 5 Healthcare Capital Markets 15 6 Macroeconomics 19 7 Health IT Headlines 21 8 About Healthcare Growth Partners 24 9 HGP Transaction Experience 25 10 Appendix A – M&A Highlights 28 11 Appendix B – Buyout Highlights 31 12 Appendix C – Investment Highlights 34 Copyright© 2019 Healthcare Growth Partners 2 HEALTH IT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 An Accumulating Backlog of Disciplined Sellers Let’s chat about fireside chats. The term first used to describe a series of evening radio addresses given by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt during the Great Depression and World War II is now investment banker speak for “soft launches” of sell-side and capital raise transactions. Every company has a price, and given a market of healthy valuations, more companies are testing the waters to find out whether they can achieve that price. That process now looks a little more informal, or how you might envision a fireside chat. Price (or valuation) discovery for a company can range from a single conversation with an individual buyer to a full-blown auction with hundreds of buyers and everything in between, including a fireside chat. Given the increasing share of informal conversations, the reality is that more companies are for sale than meets the eye. While the healthy valuations publicized and press-released are encouraging more and more companies to price shop, there is a simultaneous statistical phenomenon in perceived valuations that often goes unmentioned: survivorship bias.
    [Show full text]
  • Richey-Mixon Building Will Think Outside the Box Engineering The
    Richey-Mixon Building Engineering the Future Will Think Outside the Box Business strategist makes a $2 million investment $5 million commitment supports “think box” approach to innovation When 1949 Case Institute of Technology alumnus Charles Phipps imparts advice to current engineering students, he focuses on an ever-changing future: “Commit to continuous learning. Take courses. Be adaptable. Learn to sell your The recipe for starting a successful new business is simple, according to Joseph B. “J.B.” ideas to those around you.” Richey II (CIT ’62) and A. Malachi Mixon III: Take one part technology, mix it with one part Above all else, he says, “Think ahead several years about what you want to business plan and add a few generous helpings of chicken wings. accomplish and what it will take to get there.” “We used to go to a place that had free chicken wings and plot how some day we’d have As a leadership donor, Phipps already has thought ahead about the tools a business together,” Mixon recalls. the Case School of Engineering will need to take electrical engineering and It was during one of those wistful conversations that he and Richey—whose adaptation computer science to the next level. Through a $2 million commitment, Phipps of X-ray tube and electronics technology created the first full-body CAT scan—began to will create an endowment that will help support the department’s needs as discuss a struggling wheelchair manufacturing company. The two co-led the leveraged they emerge. buyout of the company in 1979. Mixon turned to Richey to capitalize on the engineer’s Adaptability has been critical for his career, which has spanned six decades, talent for seeing the product potential in new technologies.
    [Show full text]
  • Growthink Research 2004 Annual Healthcare Venture Capital Report
    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & SAMPLE PAGES 2004 ANNUAL REPORT Healthcare Venture Capital Report growthink RESEARCH $5.8 Billion Invested 470 Company Profiles 525 Investor Profiles www.growthinkresearch.com growthink⏐RESEARCH Executive Summary Introduction Four hundred seventy (470) privately held biotechnology, pharmaceutical, medical device and other healthcare companies raised $5.8 billion in venture capital in 2003. These companies received over 30% of the total dollars invested, up from 26% in 2002. Investments in this sector picked up considerably in the latter half of 2003 following the successful IPOs of venture-backed companies such as Acusphere, CancerVax and Myogen. With more healthcare companies slated to go public in 2004, the industry is optimistic for an extraordinary year. Total U.S. Funding by Sector – 2003 Dollars Pct. of No. of Pct. of Average Invested Total Cos. Total Deal Size Connectivity $6,817,557,000 35.8% 576 31.0% $11,836,036 Healthcare $5,813,374,000 30.5% 470 25.3% $12,368,881 Business Software & Services $3,962,150,000 20.8% 542 29.1% $7,310,240 Other $1,438,194,000 7.6% 161 8.7% $8,932,882 E-Content & Commerce $998,950,000 5.2% 111 6.0% $8,999,550 Totals: $19,030,225,000 100.0% 1860 100.0% $10,231,304 Regions Bay Area companies led the nation in raising capital, receiving 23% of the dollars invested. CoTherix (Belmont, CA) and Corgentech (South San Francisco, CA) led the region, which was home to 96 healthcare ventures that raised $1.4 billion. CoTherix, a biopharmaceutical company that develops and commercializes therapeutics for life-threatening diseases, completed a $55 million Series C round.
    [Show full text]
  • Venture Capital and the Finance of Innovation, Second Edition
    This page intentionally left blank VENTURE CAPITAL & THE FINANCE OF INNOVATION This page intentionally left blank VENTURE CAPITAL & THE FINANCE OF INNOVATION SECOND EDITION ANDREW METRICK Yale School of Management AYAKO YASUDA Graduate School of Management, UC Davis John Wiley & Sons, Inc. EDITOR Lacey Vitetta PROJECT EDITOR Jennifer Manias SENIOR EDITORIAL ASSISTANT Emily McGee MARKETING MANAGER Diane Mars DESIGNER RDC Publishing Group Sdn Bhd PRODUCTION MANAGER Janis Soo SENIOR PRODUCTION EDITOR Joyce Poh This book was set in Times Roman by MPS Limited and printed and bound by Courier Westford. The cover was printed by Courier Westford. This book is printed on acid free paper. Copyright 2011, 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise, except as permitted under Sections 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, website www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030-5774, (201)748-6011, fax (201)748-6008, website http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions. Evaluation copies are provided to qualified academics and professionals for review purposes only, for use in their courses during the next academic year. These copies are licensed and may not be sold or transferred to a third party.
    [Show full text]
  • PDF: 300 Pages, 5.2 MB
    The Bay Area Council Economic Institute wishes to thank the sponsors of this report, whose support was critical to its production: The Economic Institute also wishes to acknowledge the valuable project support provided in India by: The Bay Area Council Economic Institute wishes to thank the sponsors of this report, whose support was critical to its production: The Economic Institute also wishes to acknowledge the valuable project support provided in India by: Global Reach Emerging Ties Between the San Francisco Bay Area and India A Bay Area Council Economic Institute Report by R. Sean Randolph President & CEO Bay Area Council Economic Institute and Niels Erich Global Business/Transportation Consulting November 2009 Bay Area Council Economic Institute 201 California Street, Suite 1450 San Francisco, CA 94111 (415) 981-7117 (415) 981-6408 Fax [email protected] www.bayareaeconomy.org Rangoli Designs Note The geometric drawings used in the pages of this report, as decorations at the beginnings of paragraphs and repeated in side panels, are grayscale examples of rangoli, an Indian folk art. Traditional rangoli designs are often created on the ground in front of the entrances to homes, using finely ground powders in vivid colors. This ancient art form is believed to have originated from the Indian state of Maharashtra, and it is known by different names, such as kolam or aripana, in other states. Rangoli de- signs are considered to be symbols of good luck and welcome, and are created, usually by women, for special occasions such as festivals (espe- cially Diwali), marriages, and birth ceremonies. Cover Note The cover photo collage depicts the view through a “doorway” defined by the section of a carved doorframe from a Hindu temple that appears on the left.
    [Show full text]
  • Clear Route to Phase Iib
    REPRINT FROM MARCH 24, 2008 BioCentury ® THE BERNSTEIN REPORT ON BIOBUSINESS Article Reprint Page 1 of 9 Ebb & Flow Focus Clear route to Phase IIb By Mike Ward investment with the potential to follow on up to a total of $30- Senior Editor $40 million per company.” Although big series A rounds have become increasingly Indeed, the average size of the 10 most recent rounds Phase4 commonplace, the recent deal for Albireo AB, expected to Ventures has participated in is a touch over $50 million. This is reach $40 million, reflects business as usual for Nomura more than two and a half times the average biotech venture Phase4 Ventures. The London firm has taken an aggres- round over the same period. sive approach to investing its parent’s money in biotech, Phase4 has participated in three series A rounds in the past characterized by large financing rounds geared to providing three years in which the syndicates committed a total of $162 a clear route to Phase IIb data, underpinned by international million to the three companies. syndication. The firm focuses primarily on investment in clinical stage Phase4’s story is one of increasing scale, with rounds companies and as a result has a portfolio that is heavily biased mounting in size from 1999 until the VC toward the U.S. Over 75% of the compa- hit its stride in 2004. Since then, the firm nies Phase4 invests in are in Phase I or has usually taken the lead in $1.3 billion “You need to bring enough II, with an average holding time of about worth of venture rounds.
    [Show full text]
  • Capital Flows to Education Innovation 1 (312) 397-0070 [email protected]
    July 2012 Fall of the Wall Deborah H. Quazzo Managing Partner Capital Flows to Education Innovation 1 (312) 397-0070 [email protected] Michael Cohn Vice President 1 (312) 397-1971 [email protected] Jason Horne Associate 1 (312) 397-0072 [email protected] Michael Moe Special Advisor 1 (650) 294-4780 [email protected] Global Silicon Valley Advisors gsvadvisors.com Table of Contents 1) Executive Summary 3 2) Education’s Emergence, Decline and Re-Emergence as an Investment Category 11 3) Disequilibrium Remains 21 4) Summary Survey Results 27 5) Interview Summaries 39 6) Unique Elements of 2011 and Beyond 51 7) Summary Conclusions 74 8) The GSV Education Innovators: 2011 GSV/ASU Education Innovation Summit Participants 91 2 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY American Revolution 2.0 Fall of the Wall: Capital Flows to Education Innovation Executive Summary § Approximately a year ago, GSV Advisors set out to analyze whether there is adequate innovation and entrepreneurialism in the education sector and, if not, whether a lack of capital was constraining education innovation § Our observations from research, interviews, and collective experience indicate that there is great energy and enthusiasm around the PreK-12, Post Secondary and Adult (“PreK to Gray”) education markets as they relate to innovation and the opportunity to invest in emerging companies at all stages § Investment volume in 2011 exceeded peak 1999 – 2000 levels, but is differentiated from this earlier period by entrepreneurial leaders with a breadth of experience including education, social media and technology; companies with vastly lower cost structures; improved education market receptivity to innovation, and elevated investor sophistication.
    [Show full text]
  • Bryce Start-Up Space 2017
    Start-Up Space Update on Investment in Commercial Space Ventures 2017 Formerly Tauri Group Space and Technology Contents Executive Summary . i Introduction . 1 Purpose and Background . 1 Methodology . 1 Overview of Start-Up Space Ventures. 4 Overview of Space Investors .......................6 Space Investment by the Numbers ................13 Seed Funding . 14 Venture Capital . 15 Private Equity . 17 Acquisition . 17 Public Offering . 17 Debt Financing . 18 Investment Across All Types . 18 Valuation . 19 Space Investors by the Numbers ..................20 Overall . 20 Angels . 23 Venture Capital Firms . 25 Private Equity Groups . 28 Corporations . 29 Banks and Other Financial Institutions . 31 Start-Up Space: What’s Next? . 32 Acknowledgements .............................34 3 Executive Summary he Start-Up Space series examines space investment in the 21st century and analyzes Tinvestment trends, focusing on investors in new companies that have acquired private financing. Space is continuing to attract increased attention in Silicon Valley and in investment communities world-wide . Space ventures now appeal to investors because new, lower-cost systems are envisioned to follow the path terrestrial tech has profitably traveled: dropping system costs and massively increasing user bases for new products, especially new data products . Large valuations and exits are demonstrating the potential for high returns . Start-Up Space reports on investment in start-up space ventures, defined as space companies that began as angel- and venture capital-backed start-ups . The report tracks seed, venture, and private equity investment in start-up space ventures as they grow and mature, over the period 2000 through 2016. The report includes debt financing for these companies where applicable to provide a complete picture of the capital available to them and also highlights start-up space venture merger and acquisition (M&A) activity .
    [Show full text]