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 digital health platform Koda lands strategic investment

money moves

Houston-based advance care planning platform Koda Health has added another investor to the lineup.

The company secured a strategic investment for an undisclosed amount from UPMC Enterprises, the commercialization arm of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. The funding is part of Koda's oversubscribed series A funding round that closed in October, according to a release.

"UPMC Enterprises’ investment is a meaningful signal, not just to Koda, but to the broader market," Dr. Desh Mohan, chief medical officer and co-founder of Koda Health, said in the news release. "It validates that health systems are ready to invest in infrastructure that makes advance care planning work the way it should: proactively, at scale, and with the human support that these conversations require. Having UPMC Enterprises as a strategic investor puts us in a unique position to prove what's possible."

Koda has raised $14 million to date, according to a representative from the company. Its series A round was led by Evidenced, with participation from Mudita Venture Partners, Techstars and the Texas Medical Center last year. At the time, the company said the funding would allow it to scale operations and expand engineering, clinical strategy and customer success. The company described the round as a "pivotal moment," as it had secured investments from influential leaders in the healthcare and venture capital space.

Koda Health, which was born out of the TMC's Biodesign Fellowship in 2020, saw major growth last year, as well, and now supports more than 1 million patients nationwide through partnerships with Cigna Healthcare, Privia Health, Guidehealth, Sentara, UPMC and Memorial Hermann Health System.

The company integrated its end-of-life care planning platform with Dallas-based Guidehealth in April 2025 and with Epic Systems in July 2025. It also won the 2025 Houston Innovation Award in the Health Tech Business category. Read more here.

New 'living pharmacy' biotech company launches out of Rice venture studio

fighting cancer

Rice University’s biotech venture studio RBL LLC has launched a new “living pharmacy” company, Duracyte, designed to make cancer treatment easier on patients.

Backed by an up to $45 million Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H) award, Duracyte aims to commercialize implantable biohybrid pharmacy devices that are designed to produce therapeutic proteins inside the human body around the clock, replacing the need for regular injections and infusions for some cancer patients.

The company’s main platform is its Hybrid Advanced Molecular Manufacturing Regulator (HAMMR), a rechargeable, implantable device that can sense biological signals, monitor tumor environments and adjust therapeutic output in real time. HAMMR has wireless communication capabilities, which allow patients and clinicians to remotely monitor results through an app every five minutes and make changes to treatment plans without a hosptial visit. Additionally, the device can generate its own oxygen supply, which is key for the therapeutic cells’ survival.

“Biologic medicines such as monoclonal antibodies, cytokines and metabolic regulators already account for a significant share of modern therapeutics, but the way we deliver them today often requires frequent injections or infusions that can be demanding for patients and lead to inconsistent drug levels,” Daniel Anderson, MIT professor and co-founder of Duracyte, said in a news release. “Our vision is to enable a continuous, stable therapy by producing these medicines directly inside the body, which could improve treatment consistency, reduce side effects and ultimately transform how biologic therapies are delivered across many diseases.”

Duracyte’s first clinical trial is slated to begin by the end of 2026 and will focus on recurrent ovarian cancer. The Phase I study will build upon existing work on encapsulated cytokine pharmacy technology, and the company hopes that within a few years this treatment can reach clinical application.

The development of Duracyte is supported by ARPA-H's Targeted Hybrid Oncotherapeutic Regulation (THOR) project, which supports a multidisciplinary research consortium co-led by Omid Veiseh, a professor of bioengineering at Rice. The consortium also includes others at Rice, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Stanford University, Carnegie Mellon University, Northwestern University and the University of Houston, plus industry collaborators like Chicago-based CellTrans.

“What we are building is the culmination of years of progress in cell engineering, biomaterials and implantable device technology,” Veiseh added in the release. “By combining these advances with real-time sensing and adaptive drug delivery, we are working with the support of RBL to create a true ‘living pharmacy’ that can deliver continuous, precisely controlled biologic therapies and fundamentally change how these treatments reach patients.”

RBL launched in 2024 and is based out of Houston’s Texas Medical Center Helix Park. Duracyte is the third company launched by RBL, including Sentinel BioTherapeutics, a clinical-stage immunotherapy company developing localized cytokine therapies for solid tumors, and SteerBio, a regenerative medicine company targeting lymphedema.

“Duracyte exemplifies the kind of breakthrough that Houston’s ecosystem is built to produce,” Paul Wotton, managing partner of RBL LLC and co-founder of Duracyte, added in the release. “With world-class clinical infrastructure, exceptional engineering talent and initiatives like the Texas Biotech Task Force driving alignment across industry, investment and talent, this region is uniquely positioned to move the most ambitious ideas in medicine from concept to patient, faster than anywhere else.”