Trends In Legal Terms In Venture Financings In Israel 2013

F
Fenwick

Contributor

Fenwick logo
Fenwick provides comprehensive legal services to leading technology and life sciences companies — at every stage of their lifecycle — and the investors that partner with them. For more than four decades, Fenwick has helped some of the world's most recognized companies become and remain market leaders. Visit fenwick.com to learn more.
We have analyzed the terms of venture financings for Israeli and Israeli-related technology companies that reported raising money during 2013. Our survey does not include financing rounds of less than US $500,000.
United States Corporate/Commercial Law
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

Background — We have analyzed the terms of venture financings for Israeli and Israeli-related technology companies that reported raising money during 2013. Our survey does not include financing rounds of less than US $500,000. The tables below also show, for purposes of comparison, the results of our previously released surveys.

Financing Round — The financings closed in 2013 and in the periods covered by our previous surveys may be broken down by types of round, or series, as follows:

Series 2013 2012 2011 <2010 2009 H2'08 H1'08 H2'07 H1'07
A
37%
39%
81%
20%
16%
30%
36%
36%
46%
B
30%
31%
25%
28%
24%
30%
27%
32%
18%
C
13%
12%
27%
30%
14%
16%
20%
14%
16%
D
7%
13%
20%
10%
16%
12%
12%
11%
8%
E and higher
13%
5%
10%
12%
30%
12%
5%
7%
12%

Price Change — The financings closed in 2013 and in the periods covered by our previous surveys may be broken down by the directions of the change in price as compared to each company's respective previous round, as follows:

Price Change 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 H2'08 H1'08 H2'07 H1'07
Down
15%
16%
25%
39%
30%
32%
18%
9%
31%
Flat
5%
11%
9%
7%
17%
14%
0%
6%
4%
Up
80%
73%
66%
54%
53%
54%
82%
85%
65%

The percentages of financing transactions that were down-rounds, broken down by series, were as follows:

Series 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 H2'08 H1'08 H2'07 H1'07
B
5%
14%
24%
24%
0%
23%
7%
0%
44%
C
11%
25%
12%
27%
60%
29%
0%
25%
25%
D
20%
11%
35%
71%
50%
20%
57%
17%
25%
E and higher
33%
0%
30%
67%
36%
60%
33%
0%
17%

Liquidation Preference — Senior liquidation preferences were used in the following percentages of financings:

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 H2'08 H1'08 H2'07 H1'07
75%
76%
77%
69%
81%
83%
75%
75%
63%

The percentages of financing transactions with senior liquidation preference, broken down by series, were as follows:

Series 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 H2'08 H1'08 H2'07 H1'07
B
57%
45%
72%
48%
78%
69%
73%
78%
56%
C
88%
22.5%
73%
82%
100%
86%
73%
63%
50%
D
80%
22.5%
85%
71%
67%
100%
71%
67%
75%
E and higher
100%
10%
80%
89%
82%
100%
100%
100%
83%

Multiple-Based Liquidation Preferences — The percentage of financing transactions with senior liquidation preferences that included multiple preferences was as follows:

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 H2'08 H1'08 H2'07 H1'07
9%
3%
16%
8%
32%
10%
7%
22%
6%

Of the financings in which there were senior liquidation preferences based on multiples, the range of the multiples may be broken down as follows:

Range of multiples 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 H2'08 H1'08 H2'07 H1'07
>1x- 2x
100%
100%
70%
100%
75%
100%
100%
83%
100%
>2x - 3x
0%
0%
20%
0%
13%
0%
0%
17%
0%
> 3x
0%
0%
10%
0%
12%
0%
0%
0%
0%

Participation in Liquidation — The percentage of transactions, out of the total number of financing transactions, which included participation rights in liquidation were as follows:

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 H2'08 H1'08 H2'07 H1'07
60%
69%
77%
72%
84%
88%
86%
82%
84%

Out of those financing transactions the terms of which provided for participation, the percentages of those in which no cap was placed on the investors' right to participation were as follows:

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 H2'08 H1'08 H2'07 H1'07
57%
59%
59%
62%
61%
58%
58%
54%
47%

Cumulative Dividends and/or Accrued Interest as Part of the Liquidation Preference — Cumulative dividends and/or accrued interest constituted part of the liquidation preferences in the following percentages of financings:

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 H2'08 H1'08 H2'07 H1'07
40%
48%
48%
45%
38%
58%
64%
63%
58%

Anti-dilution Provisions — The use of anti-dilution provisions in the financings which took place in 2013 and in the periods covered by our previous surveys may be broken down as follows:

Type of Provision 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 H2'08 H1'08 H2'07 H1'07
Full Ratchet
6%
4%
9%
14%
11%
12%
9%
16%
14%
Weighted Average
91%
84%
85%
81%
89%
88%
91%
82%
78%
None
3%
12%
6%
5%
0%
0%
0%
2%
8%

Pay-to-Play Provisions — The use of pay-to-play provisions in the financings which took place in 2013 and in the periods covered by our previous surveys may be broken down as follows:

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 H2'08 H1'08 H2'07 H1'07
0%
1%
2%
4%
14%
7%
2%
2%
8%

Redemption — The percentage of transactions in 2013 and the periods covered by our previous surveys, out of the total number of financings in each respective period, in which the terms provided for mandatory redemption or redemption at the option of the venture capitalist was as follows:

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 H2'08 H1'08 H2'07 H1'07
6%
16%
18%
11%
19%
12%
11%
25%
8%

Corporate Reorganizations — The percentage of post-Series A financing transactions in 2013 and the periods covered by our previous surveys, out of the total number of financings in each respective period, which involved the conversion of senior securities into more junior securities was as follows:

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 H2'08 H1'08 H2'07 H1'07
1%
0%
1%
3%
3%
13%
2%
0%
4%

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More