What If We Designed Revenue Sharing Notes That Gives Companies Runway?
Picture this: A company raises $500,000 with a 5x return target.
In the first 3 years, they pay nothing. Zero revenue share. All capital goes to building, hiring, and developing products. Us investors signed up knowing this, we’re intentionally providing patient capital.
By the 4th year, the company hit its stride. They start sharing 3% of revenue. Not enough to constrain growth, but investors see the first returns tied to actual performance.
Years 5-6, the percentage increases gradually - 5%, then 7%. Company's still keeping the vast majority for growth, but the returns are accelerating.
After 7 years, full revenue share kicks in. Maybe 10-12% of revenue flows to investors until we hit that 5x multiple - $2.5M total. Then the agreement completes and the company is free and clear.
This is what patient capital actually looks like.
The company got a runway without payment pressure. Investors got 5x over roughly 10 years - about 17% IRR, competitive with VC returns. And it all came from business performance, not speculation.
Compare this to the same company raising equity. Those shares exist forever. They create perpetual growth pressure. Returns only come through dividends (rare), trading (speculation), or exit (maybe never). There's no defined completion, no clear path to freedom.
The patient rev-share note stays productive. The equity becomes speculative.
This protects early-stage companies while ensuring investors participate in success.
Our Regulation Crowdfunding community can achieve VC-level returns through productive instruments.
We don't need perpetual equity to fund high-growth companies.
We just need better-designed revenue-sharing structures.
Register for FREE to comment or continue reading this article. Already registered? Login here.
1
