A three-person partnership with equal shareholding is a taboo among taboos.
Without considering subsequent capital entry, the equity distribution of a three-person partnership is more complicated than that of a two-person partnership, but it is not very complicated. A three-person partnership of 100 shares needs to be cut twice. The advantage is that the majority can be followed when opinions are not unanimous (this can be written into the company's articles of association or a contract outside the articles of association).
In a three-person partnership, extra care must be taken in the distribution of equity. As long as money, power and fame are involved, people's hearts are endlessly greedy. As long as the conditions are ripe, there will be countless overt and covert struggles! And the best way to curb it is to make rules. Therefore, when three people form a partnership, they must avoid three situations:
One: 33.3, 33.3, 33.3.
Three-person partnership with equal shareholding is still a taboo among taboos. What is more troublesome than a two-person partnership with equal shareholding is that in addition to extremely low decision-making efficiency, it is more likely to lead to mutual blame-shifting. In operations that cannot be quantified, there is no scale that can accurately measure a person's contribution, so we can only solve the problem at the root (ownership structure)!
Since the equity shares are the same but the contributions are different, it leads to psychological imbalance among the three partners. Over time, there will be cases of buck-passing. Partner A feels that Partner B has not made much contribution, so he assigns him a bunch of his work. Partner C felt that Partner A had exceeded his authority, and was afraid that one day the overall situation would be controlled by Partner A, so he deliberately sabotaged his work...
This extremely unhealthy "three powers" is a hidden danger left by equal shareholding, starting a business Not only must you be able to find directions, but you must also be able to find people, and you must be able to find money. What is more important is the equity structure. A scientific and sound equity structure is like the steel foundation under a 10,000-meter building. No building can be built in the desert. Therefore, this equity structure of 33.3, 33.3, 33.3 must be resolutely eliminated!
Two: 49, 47, 4.
We assume that A, B, and C are 49, 47, and 4 respectively. The "Company Law" gives A and B one veto power. As for C, combined with any shareholder of A and B, he will own 49 4 = 53 equity and 47 4 = 51 equity. Whether 53 or 51, both are more than half. One, this is another permission in effect, which is control.
So this is a very dangerous structure: First of all, C’s dividend is too small and cannot last long. The second is that A and B have the same equity interests, and it is easy to fall into mutual blame-shifting and overt and covert fights for control. Then C will become the target of flattery, and C can easily blackmail any shareholder of A and B to achieve some goals that are beneficial to himself but not beneficial to the company.
For example, if C wants to recruit someone who is incompetent but loyal to him, under a healthy equity structure, shareholders A and B will object without hesitation. In this kind of "threat" equity structure, A and B will quickly pass. Because both Party A and Party B understand one truth: control is more important than the development of the company. This kind of fight is caused by unhealthy distribution methods and must be resolutely put an end to it!
Three: 40, 30, 30.
We assume that A, B and C hold 40, 30 and 30 shares respectively. The sum of the shares of either B and C and A will produce the following result: 30 40 = 70. And 70 has crossed two-thirds of the most critical lifeline: absolute control. Then B and C will be in danger of being eliminated at this time.
Another situation is: If B and C have a good relationship, their equity interests add up to 30 30 = 60. And 60 exceeds the one-half watershed. Then the major shareholders can easily be sidelined. If investors B and C jointly increase capital and share shares at this time, A's shares will be diluted to less than one-third. Then A is also in danger of being eliminated.
For those companies that have worked hard all their lives, there are not many founders who are out of business. Just like some people are born generals, leading troops in battles and becoming invincible! But because he didn’t understand politics, he died in politics in the end. Equity structure is the most basic politics for entrepreneurs.
So this dangerous equity allocation is unacceptable!
For three-person partnership, the author provides two typical equity structures:
One: 70, 20, 10.
Two: 60, 30, 10.
With this kind of ownership structure, senior executives can communicate smoothly and the boss can make decisions quickly!
Reference for the above content: Baidu Encyclopedia - Partnership Company
Reference for the above content: Baidu Encyclopedia - Partnership Company?