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

Texas is the 7th hardest working state in America for 2026, says report

Labor Day Report

Texans pride themselves on being industrious, and a new report has confirmed Texas as one of the 10 most hardworking states in America in 2026.

The Lone Star State claimed the No. 7 spot this year in a slight dip from its 2025 ranking, where it appeared in the top five. Texas last ranked 7th in 2024, but the state has consistently appeared among the top 10 for nearly a decade.

WalletHub determined the rankings after analyzing 10 "direct" and "indirect" work factors across all 50 states, and then graded each metric on a 100-point scale, where a score of 100 signified the "hardest working." Analysts then examined each state’s weighted average across all metrics to calculate its overall score and used the resulting scores to rank-order the states.

There was only a 10.32-point difference between Texas and South Dakota, who claimed the top spot as America's hardest working state in 2026 with a score of 64.59 out of a possible 100 points.

Texas ranked 6th nationally in the "direct" work factors category, which examined the following six metrics:

  • The state's average workweek hours.
  • Employment rates.
  • The share of households where no adults work.
  • The share of workers leaving vacation time unused.
  • The share of "engaged" workers — those that are "involved in, enthusiastic about, and committed to their work and workplace," as defined by Gallup.
  • The rate of "idle youth" — individuals aged 18-24 who are not currently enrolled in school, not working, and have no degree beyond a high school diploma or GED.

Texas ties with Louisiana for the second highest average workweek hours nationwide, with Alaska topping the list with the No. 1 longest workweeks in America. Alaska is the only state where workers clock in more than 40 hours per week at their jobs, with WalletHub reporting Alaskans work 41.4 hours on average weekly.

In the "indirect" work factors category — which encompassed workers' average commute times, the share of workers with multiple jobs, annual volunteer hours per resident, and the average leisure time spent per day — Texas ranked 36th nationwide.

Here's how WalletHub ranked Texas in three individual metrics:

  • No. 10 – Average commute times
  • No. 20 – Average leisure time spent per day
  • No. 30 – Employment rates

According to the World Economic Forum, Americans clock in about 1,800 hours at work per year on average, which is 468 more hours per year than workers in Germany. And many are leaving vacation time on the table, WalletHub says.

"Even when given the chance to take time off, many Americans won’t, as nearly half of workers don't expect to use all of their allotted vacation days," the report said. "It is possible to work hard without overdoing it, though. Hard work is key to success, and the residents of some states understand that better than others."

Hardest-Working States in America


The top 10 hardest working states in America in 2026 are:

  • No. 1 – South Dakota
  • No. 2 – North Dakota
  • No. 3 – Alaska
  • No. 4 – Hawaii
  • No. 5 – Wyoming
  • No. 6 – Nebraska
  • No. 7 – Texas
  • No. 8 – New Hampshire
  • No. 9 – Tennessee
  • No. 10 – Georgia
---

This article originally appeared on CultureMap.com.

Houston ranks No. 3 among rising coding markets in U.S.

city code

When you think of coders—the wizards who design, write and test programming languages for software and mobile apps—tech hotbeds like Silicon Valley and Austin might pop into your head.

But Houston has earned a spot on the coding map.

A new study puts the Houston area in third place among the fastest-growing metros for coding in the U.S.

The study, published by coding platform Coddy Tech, ranks Albuquerque, New Mexico, as the top on-the-rise market for coding. San Antonio sits in second place.

Houston earned a “momentum score” of 77 out of 100. The momentum category measured job growth for developers, rising interest in coding as measured by online searches, and growth in hackathon activity.

Here are the 10 fastest-rising U.S. metros for coding:

  • No. 1 Albuquerque, New Mexico
  • No. 2 San Antonio
  • No. 3 Houston
  • No. 4 Jacksonville, Florida
  • No. 5 Cape Coral, Florida
  • No. 6 Columbia, South Carolina
  • No. 7 New York City
  • No. 8 Salt Lake City
  • No. 9 North Port, Florida
  • No. 10 Tampa, Florida

The study analyzed the country’s 75 largest metros “to map where coding has taken hold and where it’s catching fire.” It took into account learning searches, GitHub developer density, job growth, interest in bootcamps and hackathon activity. Only 64 metros were eligible for the ranking of fastest-growing markets.

Austin tops ranking of coding capitals

Coddy crowned Austin the coding capital of the country, with Houston landing at No. 24 in the ranking of the most established coding hubs. San Antonio appeared at No. 16 and Dallas at No. 22.

Here are the top 10 coding hubs:
  • No. 1 Austin
  • No. 2 San Jose, California
  • No. 3 Seattle
  • No. 4 San Francisco
  • No. 5 New York City
  • No. 6 Salt Lake City
  • No. 7 Denver
  • No. 8 San Diego
  • No. 9 Los Angeles
  • No. 10 Raleigh, North Carolina

Why do coders matter?

Without coders, cellphones, laptops, smart TVs and other devices might not work well — or at all. Coding allows people to communicate with these devices, according to ComputerScience.org.

“Since computers do not communicate like humans, coding acts as a translator,” ComputerScience.org explains. “Code converts human input into numerical sequences that computers understand.”

NASA awards Texas Space Commission role in $10M aerospace workforce initiative

space hub

The Texas Space Commission is one of seven organizations tapped by NASA to lead the space agency's new state and regional Skilled Technical Workforce Hubs.

The $10.5 million initiative aims to help foster the next generation of skilled workers in the aerospace industry.

Through the new program, the hubs will work together over the next three years to meet growing industry needs by aligning “industry employers, community colleges, high school career and technical education programs, and workforce systems,” according to a news release from NASA.

It aims to create clear pathways for workers in technical jobs, like welding, electrical work and machining, plus other jobs that require advanced STEM knowledge but do not require a bachelor’s degree.

“The need for technical talent is already urgent and will only continue to grow as we return humanity to the Moon and set our sights on Mars and beyond,” Elaine Ho, associate administrator for the Office of STEM Engagement at NASA, said in the release. “NASA is uniquely positioned to be the catalyst and convener that accelerates America’s aerospace workforce development and fosters the next generation of technicians.”

As part of the initiative, the TSC plans to launch the statewide network known as the Texas Space STEM Alliance (TSSA). According to a TSC release, the TSSA will link up schools, colleges, workforce groups and aerospace companies to build a pipeline for space-industry workers.

Additionally, the TSC is developing the Texas Aerospace Pathways Plus (TAP+) portal to consolidate information on training programs, internships, apprenticeships, employment opportunities and scholarships, while also identifying regional gaps in workforce opportunities.

Other state and regional organizations to receive the award include:

  • Antelope Valley Community College District in Lancaster, California
  • Georgia Tech Research Corporation
  • Minnesota State Colleges and Universities
  • Southern Utah University
  • Space Florida
  • State Board for Community Colleges and Occupation Education, Arapahoe Community College in Littleton, Colorado

The Houston area is home to more than 43,000 aerospace and aviation professionals, according to the Greater Houston Partnership. The Texas Space Commission has been awarded $150 million for 24 projects since being established to increase the state’s space economy in 2023.

The funding for the NASA state hubs comes from NASA’s Office of STEM Engagement through its Next Gen STEM Project.