The Exchanges

Every argument clarity score on this site is built from rows on this page. Each question and answer was assessed with names hidden, the host's own answers included, on four things from 1 to 5: directness (does it answer the question asked), coherence (do the ideas follow), precision (concrete details and clear references), compression (says a lot per word). The weighted mix (30/30/25/15) is the exchange score. A person's published score averages their exchange scores on raw tape only, at least 8 of them, shrunk toward the cohort mean. Full method →

Ron Miller no published score: no usable exchanges on raw tape, and a fair score needs 8+ record → ← everyone

Every exchange below was scored with names hidden, four dimensions each from 1 to 5. An exchange's score is 0.30·directness + 0.30·coherence + 0.25·precision + 0.15·compression. The published score averages the raw tape exchange scores and shrinks small samples toward the cohort mean, so five great answers can't beat twenty good ones. Produced feed rows count only toward coarse estimates, never toward a full score.

clear all ✕
1exchanges match
0on raw tape
0redirected or not addressed
Answered produced feed D 5 · C 5 · P 4 · Cm 4 4.60

Q cap table. And generally speaking, the more people you have listed on your cap table, The higher risk in the future that one of them sues if you have a big exit, right? For some made up thing, just cause they want money. Uh, Ron, how does the system start engine as a system? How is, how illegally, how do, how is that risk, uh, limited for future potential investors?

A Well, first is through the disclosures and the subscription agreement that each investor signs, so there's going to be, um, an understanding, a mutual understanding, that's evidenced by the actual subscription agreement, which is gonna limit the rights of both the investor and the company, uh, relative to each other. The second thing is disclosure, as Chad pointed out, the third thing is, is that, you know, I, I, I think to be honest with you here, Nathan, I, I think there's an inversion of risk, and here's what it is, if you have Other sophisticated venture capital, super angels, high net worth individuals in your round, and something along the lines of what you described occurs, where there's an exit, but for some reason, some folks feel that they're entitled to more. People that have hundreds of thousands or millions into these deals have a substantial stake to motivate them to bring those kinds of cases, and in addition, they have access to the legal counsel, um, that would be able to perhaps even take that That kind of stuff on contingency. Whereas if you take the average person who might've invested five or 600 dollars in an opportunity, if it didn't work out, or if others ended up walking away with materially more, so meaning that, well, I thought I'm really entitled to double my money. I should've gotten a thousand dollars back, but instead I only got 650 or 750. I thin…

AI assessment note: “first is through the disclosures and the subscription agreement that each investor signs”

page 1
Made with StarZero

Turn any episode into a week of clips.

This entire site, over 2,600 episodes transcribed, diarized, checked and made playable, runs on the StarZero media pipeline. Drop in your own episode and the podcast clipper finds the moments worth sharing, cuts them, captions them, and reframes them for every feed.