In the world of venture capital, the type of shares issued to investors can have significant implications for both founders and investors. While most early-stage businesses begin with ordinary shares, VC investments almost always involve the issuance of preference shares, a class of shares designed to provide investors with additional rights and protections.
This article explores the differences between ordinary and preference shares, the rationale behind these structures, and the implications for both founders and investors. As part of our "Anatomy of a term sheet" series, this insight article will help demystify these structures and explain why they are a cornerstone of venture capital deals.
Ordinary shares are the basic building blocks of a company’s share capital. Holders of ordinary shares typically have:
Most founders and employees in early-stage businesses hold ordinary shares, as they represent the equity and control at the heart of the business.
Ordinary shares often play a critical role in securing investment under the Seed Enterprise Investment Scheme (SEIS) and Enterprise Investment Scheme (EIS). These schemes offer significant tax reliefs to investors in qualifying UK companies, including income tax relief and exemption from capital gains tax on profits.
To qualify for SEIS and EIS, the shares issued must be ordinary shares with no preferential rights. This means that investors looking to benefit from SEIS or EIS will need to hold ordinary shares, making these schemes particularly attractive for early-stage companies where the focus is on growth rather than complex share structures. Founders and advisors should consider this when planning their funding strategy.
Preference shares are a special class of shares that offer investors protections and economic benefits not available to ordinary shareholders. Key features of preference shares include:
These features are designed to de-risk the investment for VCs while still allowing them to benefit from the company’s upside potential.
Non-participating preference shares provide the investor with either their liquidation preference or their pro-rata share of the proceeds as if the shares had converted to ordinary shares—whichever is higher. This structure balances downside protection with fair upside sharing at higher exit values.
Example:
|
Non-participating shares are considered more founder-friendly, as they avoid giving investors a disproportionate return at higher valuations.
Participating preference shares allow the investor to receive both their liquidation preference and their pro-rata share of the remaining proceeds. This structure, sometimes referred to as the "double-dip," significantly enhances investor returns, especially at lower-to-mid-level exits.
Example:
|
Participating preference shares can sometimes include a cap (e.g., 2x the original investment), which limits the total amount an investor can receive under this structure. This makes it less punitive for founders at high exit valuations.
Feature |
Ordinary shares |
Preference shares |
Voting rights | Typically, 1:1 | May have enhanced or limited voting rights |
Liquidation priority | Last | Ahead of ordinary shareholders |
Dividends | Paid only if declared and after preference shareholders | May include fixed, cumulative, or preferential dividends |
Conversion | Not convertible | Often convertible to ordinary shares |
Anti-dilution protection | None | Commonly included |
SEIS/EIS eligibility | Eligible | Typically, not eligible |
Investors seek preference shares because they align risk and reward in their favour. These shares reduce downside risk while preserving upside potential. For example:
For investors, this structure provides a balanced approach to managing the high-risk nature of venture capital.
A company raises £5 million in a Series A round, issuing preference shares with a 1x non-participating liquidation preference. If the company sells for £10 million:
In a participating liquidation preference, preference shareholders would also share in the remaining £5 million, increasing their total payout.
In the same scenario, if the company sells for £50 million, the preference shareholders may convert their shares to ordinary shares, receiving their pro-rata share (e.g., 25% ownership) of the total proceeds.
While preference shares are a standard requirement in venture capital deals, founders can negotiate terms to ensure fairness and alignment. Common areas of negotiation include:
Founders' perspective |
Investors' perspective |
|
Motivation |
Founders typically favour simple structures, such as ordinary shares, to retain control and minimise complexity. They aim to limit dilution and maximise their long-term upside. SEIS/EIS ordinary shares are particularly attractive for raising early-stage funds from angel investors. | Investors require preference shares to de-risk their capital and ensure fair returns. They prioritise downside protection while maintaining the opportunity for upside. SEIS/EIS may not apply to preference shares, but early-stage VCs may still explore ordinary shares for tax advantages. |
Preferred position |
|
|
Risks |
Overly complex or investor-favourable terms (e.g., high liquidation preferences or uncapped participation) can deter future investors or reduce founder upside in an exit. | Aggressive terms may discourage founders, impair the company’s ability to attract future investors, or cause friction in governance. |
Where they align |
Founders and investors both benefit from a balanced structure that attracts future investment and incentivises all stakeholders to achieve a successful exit. Simpler, founder-friendly terms may encourage better founder performance, while appropriate protections ensure investors’ capital is safeguarded. |
The choice between ordinary and preference shares is a fundamental aspect of venture capital deals. For founders, understanding the mechanics and implications of preference shares is crucial to structuring a fair and sustainable investment. For investors, these structures provide the protections and upside they need to make high-risk investments.
Read the next article in our ‘Anatomy of a term sheet’ series, exploring liquidation preferences in greater detail, examining how they influence payout scenarios and exit dynamics.
If you're navigating the complexities of venture capital term sheets or preparing your business for investment, our experienced team is here to help. Get in touch today to discuss how we can support you in securing the right deal for your business.
Our 'Anatomy of a term sheet' series breaks down each critical section of a venture capital term sheet, offering technical insights and practical real-world examples to help founders with their fundraising journey.
Our aim is to demystify term sheets and empower founders and their advisors to navigate negotiations with clarity and confidence.
Anatomy of a Term Sheet OverviewChris Dyson
Partner and Head of Technology Sector
+44 (0)117 321 8054 c.dyson@ashfords.co.uk View moreRory Suggett
Partner and Head of Corporate
+44 (0)117 321 8067 +44 (0)7912 270526 r.suggett@ashfords.co.uk View moreAndrew Betteridge
Partner & Head of the Commercial Services Division
+44 (0)117 321 8063 +44 (0)7843 265362 a.betteridge@ashfords.co.uk View moreWe produce a range of insights and publications to help keep our clients up-to-date with legal and sector developments.
Sign up