An increase in capital is a good opportunity to "wash" the shareholding: while new investors come in, it is often a mutual interest that some historical shareholders cash out. Different people write different stories at different stages of the company and don't necessarily have aligned interests (to keep the shares) for one reason or another. This is why our deals have logically involved more than 10m€ cash out for the best interest of all the parties involved. Trenching the deal can turn out to be a good option to better handle uncertainty avoidance from the different parties.

Seed/early stage. Apart from precise cases, we do not believe in "powdering financings" which on top of defocusing the CEO from precious time in operations (losing time in financing) do not allow to reach fast growth, nor critical size, nor any decent exit multiples; while VC financing is about "growing bigger and faster together than in stand-alone mode, so that the consented dilution is worth it for both the entrepreneur and investor"... "Faster" includes the notion to size the opportunity while it is the right time. How much "faster" is relatively to the pace behind and in comparison to other market players... In that perspective, the American VC culture is more agressive as soon as early stages and it seems to be one of the important reasons of the greatest successes of world wide leaders in ICT (scale big and fast and before the competition).

< 1  2

"It always looks seems impossible until it's done" - Nelson Mandela