• Home
  • News
  • Fortune 500
  • Tech
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Lifestyle
  • Rankings
  • Multimedia

The future of ‘demo days’ in an era of general solicitation

By
Dan Primack
Dan Primack
Down Arrow Button Icon
By
Dan Primack
Dan Primack
Down Arrow Button Icon
September 20, 2013, 4:27 PM ET

FORTUNE — Beginning on Monday, private companies will be legally permitted to “generally solicit” investors. And it may forever change startup “demo days,” which have become ubiquitous in Silicon Valley and beyond.

For decades, private issuers have been prohibited from publicly passing the hat. That’s why you’ve never seen advertisements for shares in hot new tech startups or venture capital funds. It’s also why so many private company CEOs refuse to discuss fundraising while on television or on a conference stage. Protecting grandma from con artists has outweighed helping new companies find investors.

The one exception to all of this has been “demo days” — events that many startups consider to be their cotillions. They get 10 or 15 minutes to explain their product to a large in-person audience, usually in the hopes of securing investment interest. In many cases, funding goals are made explicit.

Such solicitation is obviously in violation of SEC policy, but the Agency has historically turned a blind eye. In fact, I can’t find a single instance in which the Agency has taken action against either a demo day organizer or presenter.

But now things are about to change.

Last year’s federal JOBS Act did away with the general solicitation ban, and earlier this summer the SEC codified the legislation — saying that private issuers would be free to generally solicit come this Monday, September 23. The only new requirement would be that issuers would need to verify that investors are accredited (for individual investors, that means net worth in excess of $1 million and/or annual income in excess of $200,000). In other words, investors would have to submit documentation like W-2 forms, rather than just check a box affirming that they meet the standard.

On the surface, this seems great for demo days. They can proceed with business as usual, without even the faintest threat of regulatory scrutiny. Just make sure the participating startups acknowledge that they are generally soliciting, when it comes time to file the appropriate SEC paperwork.

The problem, however, is that the SEC also proposed a bunch of other rules that could make life both difficult and expensive for general soliciters. For example, such issuers would be required to file a Form D with the SEC at least 15 days prior to the beginning of general solicitation, and also file an amended Form D within 30 days after the offering is terminated (either because it closed successfully or was abandoned). And Failure to do so could cause the SEC to ban them from subsequent securities issuance for a year or more.

These extra rules are not yet law — the comment period remains open — and may get watered down before a final vote (after which those already in the midst of general solicitation will be “transitioned” to the new scheme).

But what happens if next week’s demo day participants acknowledge that they are general soliciters, and then the full spate of new rules is enacted? It’s hard to imagine that future demo day participants could just return to the good old days of pretending they aren’t generally soliciting, so as to avoid the new burdens. Once that bell has been rung, the SEC will hear it.

So how should demo day organizers continue to run their events, while allowing all participants the utmost flexibility?

The answer may be to insist that presenters not discuss investments or capital requirements from the stage. After all, the started purpose of these events was to demonstrate new technologies, not demonstrate ROI potential. If investors want to pull them aside afterward, so be it.

Sure everyone in the crowd will know why the startup is really there, but it’s plausible deniability for everyone. The company, the investors and the SEC.

Sign up for my daily email newsletter on deals and deal-makers: GetTermSheet.com

About the Author
By Dan Primack
See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon

Latest in

CryptoBinance
Binance has been proudly nomadic for years. A new announcement suggests it’s finally chosen a headquarters
By Ben WeissDecember 7, 2025
3 hours ago
Big TechStreaming
Trump warns Netflix-Warner deal may pose antitrust ‘problem’
By Hadriana Lowenkron, Se Young Lee and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
7 hours ago
Big TechOpenAI
OpenAI goes from stock market savior to burden as AI risks mount
By Ryan Vlastelica and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
7 hours ago
InvestingStock
What bubble? Asset managers in risk-on mode stick with stocks
By Julien Ponthus, Natalia Kniazhevich, Abhishek Vishnoi and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
8 hours ago
EconomyTariffs and trade
Macron warns EU may hit China with tariffs over trade surplus
By James Regan and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
8 hours ago
EconomyTariffs and trade
U.S. trade chief says China has complied with terms of trade deals
By Hadriana Lowenkron and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
8 hours ago

Most Popular

placeholder alt text
Real Estate
The 'Great Housing Reset' is coming: Income growth will outpace home-price growth in 2026, Redfin forecasts
By Nino PaoliDecember 6, 2025
2 days ago
placeholder alt text
AI
Nvidia CEO says data centers take about 3 years to construct in the U.S., while in China 'they can build a hospital in a weekend'
By Nino PaoliDecember 6, 2025
2 days ago
placeholder alt text
Economy
The most likely solution to the U.S. debt crisis is severe austerity triggered by a fiscal calamity, former White House economic adviser says
By Jason MaDecember 6, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
Economy
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon says Europe has a 'real problem’
By Katherine Chiglinsky and BloombergDecember 6, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
Big Tech
Mark Zuckerberg rebranded Facebook for the metaverse. Four years and $70 billion in losses later, he’s moving on
By Eva RoytburgDecember 5, 2025
3 days ago
placeholder alt text
Politics
Supreme Court to reconsider a 90-year-old unanimous ruling that limits presidential power on removing heads of independent agencies
By Mark Sherman and The Associated PressDecember 7, 2025
16 hours ago
Rankings
  • 100 Best Companies
  • Fortune 500
  • Global 500
  • Fortune 500 Europe
  • Most Powerful Women
  • Future 50
  • World’s Most Admired Companies
  • See All Rankings
Sections
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Success
  • Tech
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Environment
  • Fortune Crypto
  • Health
  • Retail
  • Lifestyle
  • Politics
  • Newsletters
  • Magazine
  • Features
  • Commentary
  • Mpw
  • CEO Initiative
  • Conferences
  • Personal Finance
  • Education
Customer Support
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Customer Service Portal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms Of Use
  • Single Issues For Purchase
  • International Print
Commercial Services
  • Advertising
  • Fortune Brand Studio
  • Fortune Analytics
  • Fortune Conferences
  • Business Development
About Us
  • About Us
  • Editorial Calendar
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Diversity And Inclusion
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map

© 2025 Fortune Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
FORTUNE is a trademark of Fortune Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.