米国におけるベンチャーキャピタル投資の概要

WSG&Rがとても興味深い記事を書いています。

Media Pre-money Valuations

Median Equity

Anti-dilution provisions. There was a small increase in the use of broad-based weighted-average anti-dilution provisions, from 92% of all rounds in 2012 to 94% in 1H 2013.

Median Bridge

Interest Rates. Data for 1H 2013 confirmed the previously reported trend of generally declining interest rates for pre-Series A bridge loans but generally increasing interest rates for post-Series A bridge loans. The percentage of pre-Series A bridges with annual rates under 8% increased markedly, from 64% of all deals in 2012 to 75% in 1H 2013. By contrast, the percentage of post-Series A bridge loans with annual interest rates above 8% increased from 15% of all deals in 2012 to 20% in 1H 2013. The percentage of post-Series A bridges with rates of less than 8% declined from 44% to 39%.

Maturities. Maturities for pre-Series A bridge loans remain substantially longer than for post-Series A ones. The percentage of pre-Series A deals with maturities of 12 months or more increased from 92% in 2012 to 97% in 1H 2013. For post-Series A loans, maturities of one year or more increased from 66% of loans in 2012 to 69% in 1H 2013.

via WSG&R

Why Merger Cases Settle

Wilson Sonsiniが書いた記事について,Kevin M. LaCroixがコメントしています。

組織再編に関する訴訟について,日本でも興味が高まっているようなので,参考になると思います。

Clark suggests two reasons the cases settle. The first is that the litigation is time=consuming and expensive. Most targets of this type of litigation just “want someone to make it go away,” and the settlement allows the defendants to avoid the irksome and expensive litigation activity. Based on these considerations, the decision for most defendants in this type of litigation is “pretty clear” because “settling makes a lot of sense.”

But, according to Clark, there is a second reason these cases settle. Clark’s observations about this additional reason is the more interesting part of Clark’s analysis. According to Clark, another reason the cases settle is that post-merger litigation can drag on interminably because it can be difficult to resolve. The difficulty of resolving the litigation post-close provides another incentive for the defendants to try to resolve the case prior to the transaction closing.

via WSG&R, The D&O Diary