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

Houston college joins inaugural workforce accelerator supported by Google

hands-on training

Houston City College (HCC) is one of 15 community colleges from around the country to be selected for the first-ever Workforce Futures Accelerator.

The three-year effort is supported by Google.org, the tech company’s philanthropic arm, and led by the Association of Community College Trustees (ACCT), a non-profit educational organization that represents over 500 community, junior, and technical colleges. The accelerator focuses on helping colleges embed virtual, employer-sponsored training opportunities into short-term workforce training programs, giving participants access to opportunities that they might otherwise receive through internships or other "work-based learning" stints.

"The Workforce Futures Accelerator reflects the Houston City College mission of offering a high-quality, affordable education for workforce training and career development," Pretta VanDible Stallworth, HCC trustee and chair-elect of the ACCT board of directors, said in a news release. "Advancing student success and creating pathways to opportunities ensures that our students are well equipped to succeed and build a secure future in today's economy.”

Through the accelerator, HCC is tasked with fusing online project-based learning opportunities with its workforce education programs. The idea is to give students hands-on experiences working on projects sponsored by employers, allowing them to gain real-world knowledge in the process.

HCC will select two workforce programs that meet the accelerator’s criteria and insert into them into coursework. In the second and third year of the accelerator, the selected colleges are expected to scale the programs by adding instructors and programs to develop a network of to support their continued implementation.

“Participation by HCC will strengthen how we provide students with career-connected learning experiences that complement their classroom education and align with the needs of employers,” HCC Chancellor Margaret Ford Fisher added in the news release. “We are focused on ‘future forward’ strategies to meet the present and future needs of our region’s businesses.”

Two other Texas colleges were chosen to participate in the accelerator: Lamar Institute of Technology in Beaumont and Grayson College in Denison.

The remaining cohort includes:

  • Bergen Community College in Paramus, New Jersey
  • Central Louisiana Community College in Alexandria, Louisiana
  • Clark State College in Springfield, Ohio
  • Great Basin College in Elko, Nevada
  • Heartland Community College in Normal, Illinois
  • Hudson County Community College in Jersey City, New Jersey
  • Manchester Community College in Manchester, New Hampshire
  • Mesa Community College in Mesa, Arizona
  • Mohave College in Kingman, Arizona
  • San Joaquin Delta Community College in Stockton, California
  • San Juan College in Farmington, New Mexico
  • West Virginia University Parkersburg in Parkersburg, West Virginia

New report ranks Texas among top 10 states where AI could disrupt jobs

AI Workforce

A new nationwide report examining where AI could "reshape" the most jobs has ranked Texas No. 9 among the most at-risk states for AI job disruption.

The new SmartAsset report compared all 50 states and the District of Columbia to calculate the estimated percent of the workforce employed in the 26 occupations with the highest AI exposure, as determined by June 2026 research by the Virginia Economic Information and Analytics Division.

The findings revealed that 500,000 Texas workers, or 3.55 percent of the total workforce, are employed in occupations with "high exposure to potential AI disruption."

This also places the Lone Star State as the 9th most at-risk state in the U.S. where AI exposure can lead to "declining hiring demand, wage pressure, task automation, and other forms of disruption."

"States with larger concentrations of highly exposed occupations could experience more pronounced labor-market changes, particularly in roles where core tasks are more vulnerable to AI-driven restructuring," the report's author wrote.

Texas' biggest cities, like Houston and Austin, are known for their thriving tech and business industries, and the study noted that many of the occupations within those sectors are the most at risk. The Virginia Economic Information and Analytics Division said the top five most AI-exposed occupations in the U.S. are: mathematicians, proofreaders, correspondence clerks, court reporters, and media and communication workers. Additionally, computer programmers, database administrators, web developers, telephone operators, and communications equipment operators round out the top 10 most at-risk positions.

These are the 16 remaining occupations most exposed to AI disruption, in order:

  • Data Entry Keyers
  • Statistical Assistants
  • Office Support Workers
  • Interpreters and Translators
  • Database Architects
  • Software Quality Assurance Analysts
  • Medical Transcriptionists
  • Software Developers
  • Writers and Authors
  • Payroll Clerks
  • Web Designers
  • Miscellaneous Computer Occupations
  • Insurance Claims Processors
  • Telemarketers
  • Computer Numerically Controlled Tool Programmers
  • Bookkeeping and Accounting Clerks

A separate SmartAsset report from April 2026 found about 20.5 percent of Texas workers use AI to do their jobs in some capacity. That trend will continue to shift further as employers and employees choose to adopt — or reject — AI implementation.

Across the U.S., Washington topped the list as the state with the highest concentration of AI-exposed jobs, with nearly 5.7 percent of the state's workforce employed in the 26 most at-risk positions. SmartAsset said Washington's high prevalence of technology companies is a significant factor that skyrocketed the state to the top of the list.

"Home to major technology companies including Microsoft, Amazon, T-Mobile and Expedia, the state has large numbers of computer programmers and software developers, two occupations with high exposure," the report said.

Meanwhile, Mississippi ranked No. 51 with the lowest concentration of AI-exposed jobs in the nation. About 22,500 workers in Mississippi, or 1.93 percent of its workforce, are at risk for AI disruption.

The top 10 states where AI could reshape the most jobs are:

  • No. 1 – Washington
  • No. 2 – Virginia
  • No. 3 – District of Columbia
  • No. 4 – California
  • No. 5 – Utah
  • No. 6 – Maryland
  • No. 7 – Colorado
  • No. 8 – New Hampshire
  • No. 9 – Texas
  • No. 10 – North Carolina
---

This article originally appeared on CultureMap.com.

UH lands $1.2M NIH grant to fight superbugs using AI, quantum sensing

drug defense

The fight against antibiotic-resistant bacteria like MRSA is getting science fiction-like upgrades at the University of Houston thanks to a new four-year, $1.26 million grant from the National Institutes of Health.

The university says the recent funding brings total federal support up to $3.5 million for 11 years for the project, which uses AI and quantum-sensing technology to better understand how bacterial proteins develop resistance to drugs.

Any medical professional will tell you that one of the worst things that can happen is almost killing an infection. Bacteria that survive attacks from conventional antibiotic treatments emerge tougher, more resistant and more aggressive than before–making them much harder to treat. A good example is the superbug methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

UH chemistry professors Yuhong Wang and Shoujun Xu are working on this issue. They know full well that fighting superbugs requires new technology and new approaches, which is what they aim to pioneer with their new grant.

“Drug-resistant bacterial infections such as MRSA are becoming harder to treat, creating an urgent need for faster ways to understand how antibiotics and other small molecules interact with bacterial proteins,” Wang said in a news release.

Wang and Xu’s work centers around GTP, a cellular fuel that can cause tiny changes to a cell's structure when it mutates. Sometimes, those shape changes make it easier for drugs to breach the wall and attack the cells.

The UH scientists are employing AlphaFold, an AI-powered tool that can scan large molecular libraries in seconds. From these models, they can see promising drug combinations for future testing.

Once identified, the team uses their invention, super-resolution force spectroscopy, to monitor the cells. Tiny magnetic beads are attached to genetic material, then magnified to see how strong that material is when pulled. They can measure this incredible microscopic process through an atomic magnetometer, typically used in quantum physics. Combined, all these tools allow a high-definition look at how each molecule might respond to new chemical approaches.

“We're the only chemists in the world that use an atomic magnetometer for biological research,” Xu said. “It's a technique developed by physicists, and there is usually a gap between techniques developed by physicists and biological applications. Yuhong and I have been bridging that gap together for the past 10 years.”

Eventually, Wang and Xu hope to develop powerful software that can be used by drug manufacturers to model cellular responses. With enough predictive data, the software could even get ahead of superbugs’ own mutation, allowing drugs to be developed before new strains arrive.

"We want an algorithm where you input a protein sequence, score the mutation hotspots, and develop new inhibitors before a drug-resistant species even emerges," Wang added.