Who owns what when one of you wants out?
The split was agreed over coffee. Nothing written down says what happens next.
Undocumented equity destroys companies
The split was agreed over coffee and never written down.
- A departing founder keeps full equity forever
- Deadlock freezes decisions until someone sues
- Investors walk from unclean cap tables
Incorporation feels like completion
Registration allocates shares. It never allocates control or exits.
Incorporation issues shares and stops there. Nothing in it says what happens when a founder stops working, wants out, or blocks a decision.
Default company law then supplies answers no founder would have chosen.
Turn founder promises into enforceable terms
Document how shares, decisions, and exits are handled from the start.
- Set clear rights, responsibilities, and equity expectations
- Establish what happens when a shareholder leaves
- Create rules for the decisions that actually get disputed
- Prevent unwanted parties from gaining ownership
Built for businesses with shared ownership
A fit if
- Two or more founders hold shares
- You plan to raise investment in the future
- You are admitting a key hire into equity
- You want rules before disagreements happen
- You have operated a year with no agreement signed
Not a fit if
- You are the sole shareholder and director
Before and after, in outcomes
The same business, with clearer ownership and fewer disputes.
Questions
Why now, before anything has gone wrong?
Terms are only negotiable while everyone still agrees. Once one party wants out, every clause becomes a concession.
Why not adapt a template ourselves?
Templates cannot decide your vesting, veto rights or exit terms — those are commercial choices. A clause that contradicts your constitution is worse than none.