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

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 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.

Amazon's robotaxi service Zoox rolls out in 'sprawling' Houston market

On the Road

Amazon-owned robotaxi ride-hailing service Zoox is zooming into Houston in September, becoming the latest robotaxi operator jockeying for local riders.

Initially, self-driving retrofitted SUVs with safety drivers on board will serve downtown Houston, centrally located tourist hotspots, and certain residential neighborhoods. The SUVs will test Houston roads before Zoox rolls out autonomous robotaxis here, the company says.

Zoox takes Houston for a test drive

At the outset, Zoox says, a limited number of vehicles will be driven by people to gather data about Houston roads.

Zoox test drive Photo courtesy of Zoox

“This helps create a detailed picture of each street, from road geometry to traffic lights,” the company says. “Once we have mapped out an area, we will test autonomous driving capabilities. Safety and operational readiness govern the pace of our rollout.”

Zoox says its robotaxi differs from vehicles operated by other ride-hailing services.

The all-electric robotaxi “is purpose-built for autonomous ride-hailing and designed for riders from day one,” the company says. “It has no traditional driving controls and instead has carriage-style seating, sliding glass doors, and features that let the rider personalize their journey.”

To help manage the fleet, Zoox plans to open a depot in Houston for vehicle charging and maintenance, a representative says via email.

Along with Houston, Zoox is launching this month in San Diego. The ride-hailing service already operates in Austin, Dallas, Atlanta, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, Phoenix, the San Francisco Bay Area, Seattle, and Washington, D.C.

Zoox breaks into “sprawling” Houston market

Zoox describes Houston as its “most sprawling market to date.”

“Driving here means navigating complex service-road networks, unique merging scenarios, and challenging environmental conditions, including severe heat, heavy rain, and urban flooding,” the company says. “It’s a rigorous test of our technology across geography and terrain.”

Zoox will join two other autonomous ride-hailing services in Houston:

  • Waymo began rolling in Houston in February. Alphabet, the parent company of Google, owns Waymo.
  • Electric vehicle manufacturer Tesla began offering robotaxi services earlier this year.

A third Zoox competitor is arriving within the next year. A partnership comprising rideshare provider Uber, EV manufacturer Lucid, and autonomous technology company Nuro plans to launch a robotaxi service in Houston by mid-2027.

---

This article originally appeared on CultureMap.com.