Why are Corporations Hoarding Trillions in Cash?
February 7, 2025
Bankruptcy is one of the natural states which a company may find itself in. Entrepreneurship is primarily about taking risks. When companies take risks, some of them succeed, whereas others fail. Hence failure is a natural part of the business. However, many critics of bankruptcy laws believe that there isn’t a need for an elaborate […]
The Wirecard and Infosys Scandals are a Lesson on How NOT to Treat WhistleblowersWhat is the Wirecard Scandal all about and Why it is a Wakeup Call for Whistleblowers Anyone who has been following financial and business news over the last couple of years would have heard about Wirecard, the embattled German payments firm that had to file for bankruptcy after serious and humungous frauds were uncovered leading […]
Why the Digital Age Demands Decision Makers to be Like Elite Marines and Zen MonksHow Modern Decision Makers Have to Confront Present Shock and Information Overload We live in times when Information Overload is getting the better of cognitive abilities to absorb and process the needed data and information to make informed decisions. In addition, the Digital Age has also engendered the Present Shock of Virality and Instant Gratification […]
Why Indian Firms Must Strive for Strategic Autonomy in Their Geoeconomic StrategiesGeopolitics, Economics, and Geoeconomics In the evolving global trading and economic system, firms and corporates are impacted as much by the economic policies of nations as they are by the geopolitical and foreign policies. In other words, any global firm wishing to do business in the international sphere has to be cognizant of both the […]
Why Government Should Not Invest Public Money in Sports Stadiums Used by Professional FranchisesIn the previous article, we have already come across some of the reasons why the government should not encourage funding of stadiums that are to be used by private franchises. We have already seen that the entire mechanism of government funding ends up being a regressive tax on the citizens of a particular city who […]
The process of negotiations between startup companies and investors is often hotly debated and contested. There are several points of contention between the two parties. However, the two parties are often able to reconcile most of their differences. However, when it comes to controlling of the startup firm, both the startup founders as well as prospective investors tend to take an aggressive stance. Both parties want to retain as much control of the startup firm as possible.
The concept of veto rights is often used by investors to gain some control over the startup firm. In this article, we will try to understand what veto rights are and how these rights affect the interests of all the parties involved.
In any company, the decisions related to the company are taken based on a majority vote. Hence, in the case of startups, this would mean that the party which has 51% of the vote will be in control of the decision-making. The other parties cannot unilaterally stop a decision if 51% of the shareholders back it. This is considered to be problematic from an investor’s point of view.
It is common for investors to have 10% or 25% voting power in a company. Hence, in most cases, their opinions will have no bearing on the decisions being taken by the government.
This is where the concept of veto rights comes into play. Veto rights are a legal arrangement that does not allow the investors to unilaterally take decisions on behalf of the majority shareholders. However, at the same time, they allow the minority shareholders to unilaterally prevent the implementation of any decision made by the majority stakeholder. Hence, even if an investor controls 10% of the shareholding, they can prevent the decision being taken by the other 90% from being implemented.
This is the reason that investors are keen on obtaining these rights as a part of their investment agreement. However, at the same time, founders are skeptical about signing away these rights.
From an investor’s point of view, veto rights can be considered to be very important. In the absence of these veto rights, they would have very little information and control over their investments. Normally, investors have no interest in interfering with the day-to-day operations of the firm. Instead, the investors are more concerned about managing events that are outside the normal course of business.
For instance, if the founders decide to take the second round of funding at a lower valuation then the decision also impacts the existing investors. Similarly, if the startup founder wants to drastically increase the size of the option pool by diluting the shares of the current investors, then also the current investors are impacted.
These investors want to have a defense mechanism ready to protect them in such special cases. Interference in day-to-day operations would create chaos in the startup company and would end up being a lose-lose proposition for both parties.
Almost no startup founder would be willing to give away complete veto rights. This means that they cannot allow investors to use veto rights against every decision. Hence, a legal setup is created in which the investor can use their veto rights only in the case of certain decisions.
The list of these issues is generally restricted to topics that directly impact the valuation and dilution of existing shares. Founders also try to ensure that the veto rights are provided to all groups of investors. If only a certain group of investors has veto rights, they can hold the startup company hostage to special interests.
It is also common for investors with the highest purchase price to receive such veto rights. This is because the other shareholders may be willing to sell the company since they receive a higher return even at a lower price.
These rights lie only with the minority shareholders who may be the beneficiary of such clauses. Founders are often not comfortable providing waiver veto rights. These rights are only provided if the investors have a commanding bargaining position and the founder has very few options.
However, the bottom line is that veto powers provide very important legal rights to minority investors. Hence, these powers are highly valued by investors. Companies can expect their valuation to be raised significantly if they are willing to provide veto powers to the investors.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *