"Don't wait too late in your rounds fund raise before you apply"
When you "do a round" is there some sort of legally binding time and funding limit? Or is this just some kind of self imposed thing (like when you're selling vacuum cleaners door to door and say to the customer "Better get in quick! We only have 5 vacuum cleaners left and they're selling fast!").
Why is the supposedly most important idea listed last? It's no wonder startups waste time on the wrong things, if this is the way advice is structured.
Often, the last item in a list like this gets read much more often than the middle items.
In any case, it's a fair point.
This means, if you find an investor who brings something other than money, and you agree to terms that take this into account, the owners of angel list can get in on half of the deal at those terms.
So, would you agree to the same terms with a star like ashton kutcher, or dave mcclure as you would to someone you've never heard of who is just offering money? (Personally, I might not give either of the "stars" better terms, because I would want a venture investment to be about money, not intangibles, but that's me.)
I don't know the people behind angel list, so, lets presume they are great. But I'm wary of entering into a situation where, unless you read the details of the T&C and discover it, you've agreed to give people you don't know half of your funding round, on terms that you might have set based on qualities that the angel list people don't also possess.
This is what prevented me from getting an account there, and without an account it is hard to know much about how angel list works, or what it is like. (so, feel free to enlighten me.)
I'm not bashing them, just expressing a concern that I obviously can't express there (because I'd have to agree to the T&C to open an account.) It's also quite possible I'm wrong or misread the T&C.
People submit bug reports to us all the time. This is the first time we've gotten a legal one. Thank you.
DELETED: "We also have the right to invest in any business on the same terms as are offered to Investors, or on better terms if we are able to negotiate them with Entrepreneurs, and we have no obligation to make those investment opportunities available to anyone else."
It was dumb. We also made a few other changes. Let us know if you have any other feedback http://angel.co/terms
We've taken small allocations in a few investments on the site but we've had to talk our way into the deal like every other investor in the world.
The terms are still not perfect nor will they ever be. I would like to rewrite and simplify them one day but that might be wishful thinking.
Thanks to our counsel for the quick fixes. And thanks for the bug report.
The clause was probably an idea that sounded good eons ago when they started AngelList and now makes no sense at all.
No excuses or delays. Nivi iterates immediately and agrees to update us here. Issue squashed. Trust maintained...even improved.
I love seeing role models role-model the fundamentals of running a startup.
I was moments away from completely writing off AngelList when I read the parent comment. Now they seem cool. Disaster averted.
Your point though is well taken though.