Margarita Kelrikh, counsel at Pillsbury, joins the Houston Innovators Podcast to discuss her career, legal tips for startups, and why she's dedicated to the Houston startup community. Photo courtesy

Margarita Kelrikh has taken a circuitous route to her new role working with her Houston startup clients at Pillsbury.

She started out her legal career in New York as a debt attorney, transitioned to investment banking then worked in-house at WeWork at its peak, before moving to Houston in 2022 with a mission of representing startups as an emerging companies and venture capital lawyer.

The common thread of her career? Tackling the most challenging problems she can get her hands on.

"I have this instinct — when someone tells me a problem, I say, 'Let me solve that for you,'" Kelrikh, who serves as counsel at Pillsbury, explains on the Houston Innovators Podcast.

After working in house for most of her career, her decision to go back into working at a law firm stemmed from wanting new, fresh, and varied problems for the connections she made and continues to make in the startup ecosystems of New York and now Houston.

"I realized I wanted to work with the people who I worked with in the past, and the only way I could do that is if I went back to a law firm," she says, explaining that working in house means you can only have one client: your employer. "It's about having that variety and being able to work with a wide array of people"

Since moving to Houston, she's dove headfirst into the startup community by going at events and other programming to grow her connections locally. Kelrikh says she doesn't see many EC/VC lawyers showing up like she does.

"What I really want to do at Pillsbury is to really spend time on investing in the Houston startup community," she says, explaining that this includes hosting events and office hours. "Pillsbury is really committed to the Texas and Houston markets."

Kelrikh's client list is industry agnostic, and says she usually looks for founders who have started their businesses, maybe reached some product-market fit, and is gearing up to raise their first round of funding. But there are some instances when she'll take promising, high-growth potential companies at incorporation stage.

"Some companies don't need to hire a lawyer — they just need someone to point them in the right direction," she says, adding that even if a company isn't ready to hire Pillsbury yet, the firm has a lot of free and useful resources on its platform, Pillsbury Propel.

In the same vein, Kelrikh shares some of her go-to startup legal advice on the podcast, and she emphasizes how ready and willing she is to serve the Houston startup community.

"What I like about Houston as a startup ecosystem is it's a startup itself, and that's my absolute sweet spot," she says. "For anybody who wants to be involved, not only is there an opportunity to participate, but there's an opportunity to take a really active role to build it."

Should your startup opt for SAFEs or convertible notes on your next funding round? This Houston expert weighs in. Photo via Getty Images

Houston startup adviser on navigating SAFE, convertible notes in funding rounds

guest column

As both a founder and occasional early-stage investor in the Houston ecosystem, I've seen firsthand the opportunities and challenges surrounding seed funding for local startups. This critical first fundraising round sets the trajectory, but navigating the landscape can be tricky, especially for first time founders who may not be familiar with the lingo.

One key dynamic is choosing the right deal structure — SAFEs (Simple Agreement for Future Equity) vs. convertible notes are the most common vehicles early stage startups use to raise capital and are far more founder-friendly than a priced round.

Let's start first with what the have in common:

  • Both allow you to defer setting a valuation for your company until a later (likely priced) round, which is useful in early stages or pre-revenue companies
  • Both are cheaper and faster to execute than a priced round, which cash-strapped early stage founders like
  • Both can have terms like valuation cap, discount, conversion event, and pro rata rights.
  • Both are less attractive to investors seeking immediate equity (especially important if starting the QSBS clock is part of your investors strategy or if the investor is newer to startup investing)
  • Both can create messy cap tables and the potential for a lot of dilution for the founders (and investors) if they are used for multiple raises (especially with different terms)

While as you can see they have similarities, they have some important differences. Let's dig in on these next:

SAFEs:

  • Created by Y Combinator in 2013, the intent was to create a simplified, founder friendly agreement as an alternative to the convertible note
  • Is an agreement for future equity for the investor at a conversion event (priced round or liquidation event) which converts automatically.
  • It's not a debt instrument and does not accrue interest or have a maturity date.
  • Generally have much lower upfront legal costs and faster to execute

Convertible Notes:

  • A debt agreement that converts to equity at a later date (or conversion event like a priced round)
  • Accrues interest (usually 2 to 8 percent) and has a maturity date by which the note must either be repaid or convert to equity. If you reach your maturity date before raising a qualifying round, you can often renegotiate to extend the maturity date or convert the note, though be prepared to agree to higher interest rates, additional warrants, or more favorable conversion terms.
  • More complex and take longer to finalize due to non-standard terms resulting in higher legal and administrative costs

It's worth reiterating that in both cases, raising multiple rounds can lead to headaches in the form of complex cap tables, lots of dilution, and higher legal expenses to determine conversion terms. If your rounds have different terms on discounts and valuation caps (likely) it can cause confusion around equity and cap table structure, and leave you (the founder) not sure how much equity you will have until the conversion occurs.

In my last startup, our legal counsel — one of the big dogs in this space for what it's worth — strongly advised us to only do one SAFE round to prevent this.

Why do some investors tend to prefer convertible notes?

There are a few reasons why some investors, particularly angel investors from developing startup ecosystems (like Houston), prefer convertible notes to SAFEs.

  • Because they are structured as debt, note holders have a higher priority than equity investors in recovering their investment if the company fails or is liquidated. This means they would get paid after other creditors (like loans or credit cards) but before equity investors, increasing the likelihood of getting some of their money back.
  • The interest terms protect investors if the founder takes a long time to raise a priced funding round. As time passes, interest accumulates, increasing the investor's potential return. This usually results in the investor receiving a larger equity stake when the note converts. However, if the investor chooses to call in the note instead, the accrued interest would increase the amount of money owed, similar to a traditional loan
  • More defined conversion triggers (including a maturity date) gives investors more control and transparency on when and how their investment will convert.
  • Can negotiate more favorable terms than the standard SAFE agreement, including having both a valuation cap and a discount (uncommon on a SAFE, which usually only has one or the other), interest rates, and amendment clauses to protect them from term revisions on earlier investors by future investors (called a cram-down), etc.
We'll go over what the various terms in these agreements are and what to look out for in a future article

How to choose:

  • Consider your startup's stage and valuation certainty — really uncertain or super early? Either of these instruments are preferable to a priced round as you can defer the valuation discussion
  • Assess investor preferences in your network — often the deciding factor if you don't have a lot of leverage; most local angels prefer c-notes because they see them as less risky though SAFEs are becoming more common with investors in tech hubs like Silicon Valley
  • Evaluate your timeline and budget for legal costs — as I mentioned, SAFEs are way less expensive to execute (though still be prepared to spend some cash).
  • Align the vehicle with your specific goals and growth trajectory

There's no one-size-fits-all solution, so it's crucial to weigh these factors carefully.

The meanings of these round terms like "seed" are flexible, and the average seed funding amount has increased significantly over the past decade, reaching $3.5 million as of January 2024. This trend underscores the importance of choosing the right funding vehicle and approach.

Looking ahead, I'm bullish on Houston's growing startup ecosystem flourishing further. Expect more capital formation from recycled wins, especially once recently minted unicorns like High Radius, Cart.com, Solugen, and Axiom Space exit and infuse the ecosystem with fresh and hungry angels, new platforms beyond traditional venture models, and evolving founder demographics bringing fresh perspectives.

------

Adrianne Stone is the principal product manager at Big Cartel and the founder of Bayou City Startups, a monthly happy hour organizer. This article original ran on LinkedIn.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Biosciences startup becomes Texas' first decacorn after latest funding

A Dallas-based biosciences startup whose backers include millionaire investors from Austin and Dallas has reached decacorn status — a valuation of at least $10 billion — after hauling in a series C funding round of $200 million, the company announced this month. Colossal Biosciences is reportedly the first Texas startup to rise to the decacorn level.

Colossal, which specializes in genetic engineering technology designed to bring back or protect various species, received the $200 million from TWG Global, an investment conglomerate led by billionaire investors Mark Walter and Thomas Tull. Walter is part owner of Major League Baseball’s Los Angeles Dodgers, and Tull is part owner of the NFL’s Pittsburgh Steelers.

Among the projects Colossal is tackling is the resurrection of three extinct animals — the dodo bird, Tasmanian tiger and woolly mammoth — through the use of DNA and genomics.

The latest round of funding values Colossal at $10.2 billion. Since launching in 2021, the startup has raised $435 million in venture capital.

In addition to Walter and Tull, Colossal’s investors include prominent video game developer Richard Garriott of Austin and private equity veteran Victor Vescov of Dallas. The two millionaires are known for their exploits as undersea explorers and tourist astronauts.

Aside from Colossal’s ties to Dallas and Austin, the startup has a Houston connection.

The company teamed up with Baylor College of Medicine researcher Paul Ling to develop a vaccine for elephant endotheliotropic herpesvirus (EEHV), the deadliest disease among young elephants. In partnership with the Houston Zoo, Ling’s lab at the Baylor College of Medicine has set up a research program that focuses on diagnosing and treating EEHV, and on coming up with a vaccine to protect elephants against the disease. Ling and the BCMe are members of the North American EEHV Advisory Group.

Colossal operates research labs Dallas, Boston and Melbourne, Australia.

“Colossal is the leading company working at the intersection of AI, computational biology, and genetic engineering for both de-extinction and species preservation,” Walter, CEO of TWG Globa, said in a news release. “Colossal has assembled a world-class team that has already driven, in a short period of time, significant technology innovations and impact in advancing conservation, which is a core value of TWG Global.”

Well-known genetics researcher George Church, co-founder of Colossal, calls the startup “a revolutionary genetics company making science fiction into science fact.”

“We are creating the technology to build de-extinction science and scale conservation biology,” he added, “particularly for endangered and at-risk species.”

Houston investment firm names tech exec as new partner

new hire

Houston tech executive Robert Kester has joined Houston-based Veriten, an energy-focused research, investment and strategy firm, as technology and innovation partner.

Kester most recently served as chief technology officer for emissions solutions at Honeywell Process Solutions, where he worked for five years. Honeywell International acquired Houston-based oil and gas technology company Rebellion Photonics, where Kester was co-founder and CEO, in 2019.

Honeywell Process Solutions shares offices in Houston with the global headquarters of Honeywell Performance Materials and Technologies. Honeywell, a Fortune 100 conglomerate, employs more than 850 people in Houston.

“We are thrilled to welcome Robert to the Veriten team,” founder and CEO Maynard Holt said in a statement, “and are confident that his technical expertise and skills will make a big contribution to Veriten’s partner and investor community. He will [oversee] every aspect of what we do, with the use case for AI in energy high on the 2025 priority list.”

Kester earned a doctoral degree in bioengineering from Rice University, a master’s degree in optical sciences from the University of Arizona and a bachelor’s degree in laser optical engineering technology from the Oregon Institute of Technology. He holds 25 patents and has more than 25 patents pending.

Veriten celebrated its third anniversary on January 10, the day that the hiring of Kester was announced. The startup launched with seven employees.

“With the addition of Dr. Kester, we are a 26-person team and are as enthusiastic as ever about improving the energy dialogue and researching the future paths for energy,” Holt added.

Kester spoke on the Houston Innovators Podcast in 2021. Listen here

.