Melek Yatırımcıların Ortak Değerlendirme Kriterleri ve Girişimci Ekibin Yeterliliğinin Melek Yatırım Kararları Üzerindeki Hakim Rolü

Öz

Melek yatırımcılar açısından yatırım fırsatlarının içerdiği üç temel risk icra riski, piyasa riski ve vekalet riskidir. Bu araştırma kapsamında öncelikle bu risklerin melek yatırımcılar açısından ne anlam ifade ettiği açıklanmaktadır. Ardından melek yatırımcı ile girişimci arasındaki ilişki bir ‘vekalet ilişkisi’ olarak ele alınarak, melek yatırımcıların yatırım öncesi değerlendirme sürecinde vekalet riski konusunda yüksek hassasiyet göstermelerinin nedenleri açıklanmaktadır. Devamında, yatırım öncesinde icra riski, piyasa riski ve vekalet riskinin anlaşılabilmesi için melek yatırımcıların hangi değerlendirme kriterlerine başvurabilecekleri açıklanmaktadır. Son olarak, ‘girişim fırsatının yeterliliği’ ve ‘girişimci ekibin yeterliliği’ şeklinde gruplanan kriterlerin ve yatırım fırsatından beklenen getirinin melek yatırım kararlarını ne derecede açıkladığı, ayrıca araştırma kapsamında vekalet riski ile ilgili savunulan tezlerle paralel olarak girişimci ekibin yeterliliğinin melek yatırım kararı üzerinde hakim olup olmadığı test edilmektedir. Bu doğrultuda, Türkiye’de son 10 yılda en az 1 girişime melek yatırım yapmış 122 melek yatırımcıdan elde edilen 239 geçmiş yatırım kararı verisi (117 olumlu, 122 olumsuz) üzerinde Hakimiyet Analizi yapılmıştır. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre, girişimci ekibin yeterliliğinin yatırım kararı üzerinde hakim olduğu görülmektedir. Araştırma Türkiye’de melek yatırımcıların yatırım kararlarını odağına alan geniş örnekleme sahip ilk araştırmalardan biridir. Araştırma özellikle melek yatırımcılığa başlamak isteyenler (veya yeni başlamış olanlar) ve melek yatırımcılardan fon temin etmeyi hedefleyen girişimciler için bir rehber niteliğindedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• melek yatırımcı
• melek yatırım
• melek yatırımcılık
• startup
• girişimci
• vekalet teorisi
• vekalet riski

Common Evaluation Criteria Used by Business Angels and Entrepreneurial Team Strength as the Dominant Factor Affecting Angel Investment Decisions

Öz

When business angels make investments in young companies, they are exposed to execution risk, market risk and agency risk. The first part of this research begins by explaining what each of these risks mean for business angels and why agency risk matters for them the most. Then it suggests 12 relevant evaluation criteria business angels may use during the due diligence process to assess execution risk, market risk and agency risk. The second part of the research groups these criteria into two (‘venture opportunity strength’ and ‘entrepreneurial team strength’) and aims to test whether 1) suggested criteria are able to predict the outcome of the due diligence process and 2) entrepreneurial team strength is the dominant factor affecting investment decisions. Data related to 239 previous investment decisions (117 positive, 122 negative) made by 122 Turkish business angels are analysed using Dominance Analysis method. Results clearly show that entrepreneurial team strength is the dominant factor affecting business angels’ investment decisions. This research is among the first few academic research to focus on Turkish business angels’ investment decisions. It is believed to have the largest sample size compared to previous research carried out in Turkey. This research is a resourceful guide for novice business angels and entrepreneurs that seek funding from investors.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• angel investor
• business angel
• angel investment
• angel investing
• entrepreneur
• startup
• agency theory
• agency risk

Kaynakça

1. ACA. (2021). Angel Funders Report. https://www.paperturn-view.com/angel-capital-association/angel-funders-report-2021 adresinden erişildi. (Erişim tarihi: 10.05.2022)
2. Aernoudt, R. (2005). Business angels: The smartest money for starters? Plea for a renewed policy focus on business angels. International Journal of Business, 10(3).
3. Akerlof, G. A. (1978). The market for “lemons”: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Uncertainty in Economics (pp. 235-251). Cambridge: Academic Press.
4. Aldrich, H., & Herker, D. (1977). Boundary spanning roles and organization structure. Academy of Management Review, 2(2), 217-230.
5. Amaeshi, K., & Scarbrough, H. (2006). Does trust matter? Exploring the link between investment decisions and trustworthiness in knowledge markets. Evolution for Business Knowledge, working paper.
6. Amit, R., Glosten, L., & Muller, E. (1990). Entrepreneurial ability, venture investments, and risk sharing. Management Science, 36(10), 1233-1246.
7. Amit, R., Glosten, L., & Muller, E. (1993). Challenges to theory development in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Management Studies, 30(5), 815-834.
8. Ardichvili, A., Cardozo, R. N., Tune, K., & Reinach, J. (2002). The role angel investors in the assembly of non-financial resources of new ventures: Conceptual framework and empirical evidence. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 10(01), 39-65.

9. Arfsten, M. C. (2013). Venture selection and decision factors influencing risk and return for angel investing. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Argosy University Twin Cities. Minnesota.
10. Atasoy, D. (2001). Lojistik regresyon analizinin incelenmesi ve bir uygulaması. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi. Sivas.
11. Aven, T. (2011). On some recent definitions and analysis frameworks for risk, vulnerability, and resilience. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 31(4), 515-522.
12. Azen, R., & Traxel, N. (2009). Using dominance analysis to determine predictor importance in logistic regression. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 34(3), 319-347.
13. Baden-Fuller, C., & Haefliger, S. (2013). Business models and technological innovation. Long Range Planning, 46(6), 419-426.
14. Balachandra, L. (2011). Pitching trustworthiness: cues for trust in early-stage investment decision-making. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2205965
15. Baum, J. A., & Silverman, B. S. (2004). Picking winners or building them? Alliance, intellectual, and human capital as selection criteria in venture financing and performance of biotechnology startups. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(3), 411-436.
16. Becker-Blease, J. R., & Sohl, J. E. (2015). New venture legitimacy: The conditions for angel investors. Small Business Economics, 45(4), 735-749.
17. Beckman, C. M., Burton, M. D., & O'Reilly, C. (2007). Early teams: The impact of team demography on VC financing and going public. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(2), 147-173.
18. Bengtsson, O., & Hsu, D. H. (2010). How do venture capital partners match with startup founders? Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1568131
19. Blank, S. (2010). What's a startup? First principles. https://steveblank.com/2010/01/25/whats-a-startup-first-principles/ adresinden erişildi. (Erişim tarihi: 05.02.2020)
20. Blank, S., & Dorf, B. (2005). The path to epiphany: The customer development model. The Four Steps to the Epiphany, 17-28. K&S Ranch Publishing.
21. Block, J. H., Fisch, C. O., Obschonka, M., & Sandner, P. G. (2019). A personality perspective on business angel syndication. Journal of Banking & Finance, 100, 306-327.
22. Brandstätter, E., Gigerenzer, G., & Hertwig, R. (2006). The priority heuristic: Making choices without trade-offs. Psychological Review, 113(2), 409.
23. Bugg-Levine, A., & Emerson, J. (2011). Impact investing: Transforming how we make money while making a difference. Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, 6(3), 9-18.
24. Cable, D. M., & Shane, S. (1997). A prisoner's dilemma approach to entrepreneur-venture capitalist relationships. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 142-176.
25. Camp, J. J. (2002). Venture capital due diligence: A guide to making smart investment choices and increasing your portfolio returns (Vol. 102). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
26. Carlton, D. W., & Perloff, J. M. (1994). Modern Industrial Organization, New York: Harper Collins Publishers.
27. Carpentier, C., & Suret, J. M. (2015). Angel group members' decision process and rejection criteria: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(6), 808-821.
28. Carson, S. A. (2018). Identifying critical risk factors in the decision-making process of angel investors and venture capitalists: A delphi research study. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. East Tennessee State University. Tennessee.
29. Carter, R. B., & Van Auken, H. E. (1992). Effect of professional background on venture capital proposal evaluation. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 3(1), 45-55.
30. Casson, M., & Wadeson, N. (2007). The discovery of opportunities: Extending the economic theory of the entrepreneur. Small Business Economics, 28(4), 285-300.
31. Ciuchta, M. P., Letwin, C., Stevenson, R., McMahon, S., & Huvaj, M. N. (2018). Betting on the coachable entrepreneur: Signalling and social exchange in entrepreneurial pitches. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 42(6), 860-885.
32. Collewaert, V. (2012). Angel investors’ and entrepreneurs’ intentions to exit their ventures: A conflict perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(4), 753-779.
33. Coveney, P., & Moore, K. (2019). A typology of angels: a better way of examining the informal investment phenomena. Entrepreneurship and SME Research: On its Way to the Next Millennium (pp. 65-80). London: Routledge.
34. Croce, A., Tenca, F., & Ughetto, E. (2017). How business angel groups work: Rejection criteria in investment evaluation. International Small Business Journal, 35(4), 405-426.
35. Daly, P., & Davy, D. (2016). Crafting the investor pitch using insights from rhetoric and linguistics. The Ins and Outs of Business and Professional Discourse Research (pp. 182-203). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
36. Davenport, D. (2022). Predictably bad investments: Evidence from venture capitalists. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4135861
37. Davis, C. R. (2002). Calculated risk: A framework for evaluating product development. MIT Sloan Management Review, 43(4), 71.
38. EBAN. (2019). Statistics compendium 2019. https://www.eban.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/EBAN-Statistics-Compendium-2019.pdf adresinden erişildi. (Erişim tarihi: 08.10.2020)
39. Edelman, L. F., Manolova, T. S., & Brush, C. G. (2017). Making progress through the angel investment process: The effect of external certification. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 37, 1-5.
40. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57-74.
41. Eisenmann, T. R. (2020). Determinants of early-stage startup performance: Survey results. Harvard Business School Entrepreneurial Management. 21-57.
42. Engineer, M. H., Schure, P., & Vo, D. H. (2019). Hide and seek search: Why angels hide and entrepreneurs seek. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 157, 523-540.
43. Epstein, L. G. (2004). A definition of uncertainty aversion. Uncertainty in economic theory (pp. 187-224). London: Routledge.
44. Ericsson, K. A., & Charness, N. (1994). Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition. American Psychologist, 49(8), 725.
45. European Commission. (2020). Crowdfunding. https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/fisma/items/667392/en adresinden erişildi. (Erişim tarihi: 20.09.2020)
46. Feeney, L., Haines Jr, G. H., & Riding, A. L. (1999). Private investors' investment criteria: insights from qualitative data. Venture Capital, 1(2), 121-145.
47. Fiet, J. O. (1995). Risk avoidance strategies in venture capital markets. Journal of Management Studies, 32, 551–573.
48. Fili, A., & Grünberg, J. (2016). Business angel post-investment activities: a multi-level review. Journal of Management & Governance, 20(1), 89-114.
49. Forrester, R. C. (2014). Behavioral finance: Factors influencing angel investor decisions. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Kennesaw State University. Georgia.
50. Freear, J., Sohl, J. E., & Wetzel Jr, W. E. (1995). Angels: personal investors in the venture capital market. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 7(1), 85-94.
51. Frias, K. M., Popovich, D. L., Duhan, D. F., & Lusch, R. F. (2020). Perceived market risk in new ventures: A study of early-phase business angel investment screening. Journal of Macromarketing, 40(3), 339-354.
52. Forbes. (1976). The unfashionable business of investing in startups in the electronic data processing field. Issue: 15 August 1976.
53. Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Balkin, D. B., & Welbourne, T. M. (1990). Influence of venture capitalists on high tech management. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 1(1), 103-118
54. Gompers, P., Kovner, A., Lerner, J., & Scharfstein, D. (2010). Performance persistence in entrepreneurship. Journal of Financial Economics, 96(1), 18-32.
55. Google. (1999). Google receives $25 million in equity funding. http://googlepress.blogspot.com/1999/06/google-receives-25-million-in-equity.html adresinden erişildi. (Erişim tarihi: 05.06.2022)
56. Haar, N. E., Starr, J., & MacMillan, I. C. (1988). Informal risk capital investors: Investment patterns on the East Coast of the USA. Journal of Business Venturing, 3(1), 11-29.
57. Hair, J. F., William C. B., Barry J. B. & Rolph E. A. (2014). Multivariate data analysis. (7th ed). London: Pearson Education Limited.
58. Hallowell, R. (2001). “Scalability”: the paradox of human resources in e‐commerce. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 12(1), 34-43.
59. Hammond, J. S., Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1998). The hidden traps in decision making. Harvard Business Review, 76(5), 47-58.
60. Harding, R., & Cowling, M. (2006). Points of view: assessing the scale of the equity gap. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 13(1), 115–132.
61. Harrison, R. T., Dibben, M. R., & Mason, C. M. (1997). The role of trust in the informal investor's investment decision: An exploratory analysis. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 21(4), 63-81.
62. Harrison, R. T., & Mason, C. M. (2017). Backing the horse or the jockey? Due diligence, agency costs, information and the evaluation of risk by business angel investors. International Review of Entrepreneurship, 15(3), pp. 269-290.
63. Harrison, R. T., Mason, C. M., & Smith, D. (2015). Heuristics, learning and the business angel investment decision-making process. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 27(9-10), 527-554.
64. Hsu, D. K., Haynie, J. M., Simmons, S. A., & McKelvie, A. (2014). What matters, matters differently: a conjoint analysis of the decision policies of angel and venture capital investors. Venture Capital, 16(1), 1-25.
65. Huang, L., & Pearce, J. L. (2015). Managing the unknowable: The effectiveness of early-stage investor gut feel in entrepreneurial investment decisions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 60(4), 634-670.
66. Hurt, K. J., & Serviere, L. (2008). New venture creation: The significance of entrepreneur-opportunity fit. Association for Small Business & Entrepreneurship 35th Annual Conference Proceedings. San Antonio, Texas. (p.99-110).
67. Iruarrizaga, J. H., & Santos, M. S. (2013). The informal investment context: specific issues concerned with business angels. Investigaciones Regionales-Journal of Regional Research, (26), 179-198.
68. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
69. Jin, L., Madison, K., Kraiczy, N. D., Kellermanns, F. W., Crook, T. R., & Xi, J. (2017). Entrepreneurial team composition characteristics and new venture performance: A meta–analysis. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(5), 743-771.
70. Kaplan, S. N., & Strömberg, P. (2003). Financial contracting theory meets the real world: An empirical analysis of venture capital contracts. The Review of Economic Studies, 70(2), 281-315.
71. Kaplan, S. N., Sensoy, B. A., & Strömberg, P. (2009). Should investors bet on the jockey or the horse? Evidence from the evolution of firms from early business plans to public companies. The Journal of Finance, 64(1), 75-115.
72. Klyver, K., Lindsay, N. J., Suleiman, K., & Hancock, G. (2017). Altruistic investment decision behavior in early-stage ventures. Small Business Economics, 48(1), 135-152.
73. Kochan, J. A. (2005). The role of domain expertise and judgment in dealing with unexpected events. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Central Florida. Florida.
74. Kuratko, D. F., Neubert, E., & Marvel, M. R. (2021). Insights on the mentorship and coachability of entrepreneurs. Business Horizons, 64(2), 199-209.
75. Lahti, T. (2009). Angel investing in Finland: An analysis based on agency theory and the incomplete contracting theory. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Hanken School of Economics. Finland.
76. Lahti, T. (2011). Categorization of angel investments: an explorative analysis of risk reduction strategies in Finland. Venture Capital, 13(1), 49-74.
77. Landström, H. (1998). Informal investors as entrepreneurs: Decision-making criteria used by informal investors in their assessment of new investment proposals. Technovation, 18(5), 321-333.
78. Levie, J., & Gimmon, E. (2008). Mixed signals: Why investors may misjudge first time high technology venture founders. Venture Capital, 10(3), 233-256.
79. Mamonov, S., & Malaga, R. (2019). Success factors in title II equity crowdfunding in the United States. Venture Capital, 21(2-3), 223-241.
80. Mann, C. L. & Sanyal, P. (2010). The financial structure of startup firms: The role of assets, information, and entrepreneur characteristics. Federal Reserve Bank of Boston Working Paper No. 10-17. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1768099.
81. Mason, C., & Stark, M. (2004). What do investors look for in a business plan? A comparison of the investment criteria of bankers, venture capitalists and business angels. International Small Business Journal, 22(3), 227-248.
82. Maurya, A. (2022). Running Lean. Sebastopol: O'Reilly Media.
83. Maxwell, A. L., & Lévesque, M. (2014). Trustworthiness: A critical ingredient for entrepreneurs seeking investors. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(5), 1057-1080.
84. Maxwell, A. L., Jeffrey, S. A., & Lévesque, M. (2011). Business angel early stage decision making. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(2), 212-225.
85. McCroskey, J. C., Richmond, V. P., & Daly, J. A. (1975). The development of a measure of perceived homophily in interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 1(4), 323-332.
86. Mitchell, J. R., & Shepherd, D. A. (2010). To thine own self be true: Images of self, images of opportunity, and entrepreneurial action. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(1), 138-154.
87. Mitteness, C. R., Baucus, M. S., & Sudek, R. (2012). Horse vs. jockey? How stage of funding process and industry experience affect the evaluations of angel investors. Venture Capital, 14(4), 241-267.
88. Nevostruev, P. Y. (2019). Market identification and its parameters for developing consumer value. Marketing Enterprise Management, 10(3), 90-99.
89. Noe, T. H., & Rebello, M. J. (1996). Asymmetric information, managerial opportunism, financing, and payout policies. The Journal of Finance, 51(2), 637-660.
90. Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y. & Tucci, C. L. (2005). Clarifying business models: Origins, present, and future of the concept. Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 16(1), 1.
91. Parhankangas, A. & Hellström, T. (2007). How experience and perceptions shape risky behaviour: Evidence from the venture capital industry. Venture Capital, 9(3), 183-205.
92. Park, K.F. & Shapira, Z. (2017). Risk and Uncertainty. The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Strategic Management. (pp. 1-7) London: Palgrave Macmillan.
93. Podolny, J. M. (2001). Networks as the pipes and prisms of the market. American Journal of Sociology, 107(1), 33-60.
94. Porter, M. E. (1985). The Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. New York: Free Press.
95. Porter, M. E. (1997). Competitive strategy. Measuring Business Excellence. 1(2), 12-17.
96. Remeňová, K., Kintler, J., & Jankelová, N. (2020). The general concept of the revenue model for sustainability growth. Sustainability, 12(16), 6635.
97. Riding, A. L., Madill, J. J., & Haines Jr, G. H. (2007). Investment decision making by business angels. Handbook of Research on Venture Capital, 1, 332.
98. Ries, E. (2009). Minimum viable product: a guide. http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2009/08/minimum-viable-product-guide.html adresinden erişildi. (Erişim tarihi: 08.08.2020)
99. Ries, E. (2011). The lean startup: How today’s entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses. New York: Crown.
100. Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36.
101. Roundy, P., Holzhauer, H., & Dai, Y. (2017). Finance or philanthropy? Exploring the motivations and criteria of impact investors. Social Responsibility Journal, 13(3), pp.491– 512.
102. Rubenstein, D. (2022a). Bloomberg Wealth: John Doerr. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=II4eprIHdDU adresinden erişildi. (Erişim tarihi: 05.11.2022)
103. Rubenstein, D. (2022b). Bloomberg Wealth: Vinod Khosla. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fDW5Hw3C1Y adresinden erişildi. (Erişim tarihi: 05.11.2022)
104. Sarason, Y., Dean, T., & Dillard, J. F. (2006). Entrepreneurship as the nexus of individual and opportunity: A structuration view. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(3), 286-305.
105. Schwarzkopf, J., Lévesque, M., & Maxwell, A. (2010). How entrepreneurs-in-residence increase seed investment rates. Venture Capital, 12(1), 65-81.
106. Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline. New York: Doubleday.
107. Shane, S. (2008). Fool's Gold?: The truth behind angel investing in America. London: Oxford University Press.
108. Shane, S., & Cable, D. (2002). Network ties, reputation, and the financing of new ventures. Management Science, 48(3), 364-381.
109. Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217-226.
110. Shepherd, D. A., Douglas, E. J., & Shanley, M. (2000). New venture survival: Ignorance, external shocks, and risk reduction strategies. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5-6), 393-410.
111. Shrader, R., & Siegel, D. S. (2007). Assessing the relationship between human capital and firm performance: Evidence from technology–based new ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(6), 893-908.
112. Söderblom, A., Samuelsson, M., & Martensson, P. (2016). Opening the black box: triggers for shifts in business angels’ risk mitigation strategies within investments. Venture Capital, 18(3), 211-236.
113. Sokolova, E. (2021). Market size assessment for startups: TAM-SAM-SOM method with examples. https://startupjedi.vc/content/market-size-assessment-startups-tam-sam-som-method-examples adresinden erişildi. (Erişim tarihi: 07.11.2022)
114. Sørheim, R. (2003). The pre-investment behaviour of business angels: a social capital approach. Venture Capital, 5(4), 337-364.
115. Stinchcombe, A. L. (1965). Organizations and social structure. Handbook of Organizations, 44(2), 142-193. Chicago: Rand-McNally.
116. Sudek, R. (2006). Angel investment criteria. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 17(2), 89-104.
117. Svetek, M. (2022). The role of entrepreneurs’ perceived competence and cooperativeness in early-stage financing. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 1-30.
118. The New York Times. (2022). Embattled crypto exchange FTX Files for bankruptcy. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/11/business/ftx-bankruptcy.html adresinden ulaşıldı. (Erişim tarihi: 11.11.2022)
119. Van Osnabrugge, M. (1998). Do serial and non-serial investors behave differently?: An empirical and theoretical analysis. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 22(4), 23-42.
120. Van Osnabrugge, M., & Robinson, R. J. (2000). Angel investing: Matching startup funds with startup companies-The guide for entrepreneurs and individual investors. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
121. Venugopal, B. (2017). Homophily, information asymmetry and performance in the angels market. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2981033
122. Veugelers, R. (2011). Mind Europe's early-stage equity gap. Bruegel Policy Contribution, No. 2011/18.
123. Wasserman, N. (2017). The throne vs. the kingdom: Founder control and value creation in startups. Strategic Management Journal, 38(2), 255-277.
124. Wetzel, W. E. (1983). Angels and informal risk capital. Sloan Management Review, 24(4), 23.
125. Wetzel, W. E., & Seymour, C. (1981). Informal risk capital in New England. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 1981, 217-45.
126. Wuebker, R., Hampl, N., & Wuestenhagen, R. (2015). The strength of strong ties in an emerging industry: Experimental evidence of the effects of status hierarchies and personal ties in venture capitalist decision making. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 9(2), 167-187.
127. Ye, Q. (2018). New-born startups performance: Influences of resources and entrepreneurial team experiences. International Business Research, 11(2), 1-15.
128. Zimmerman, M. A., & Zeitz, G. J. (2002). Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy. Academy of Management Review, 27(3), 414-431.