Startups looking to make it easier for people to rent apartments on a flexible, shorter-term basis are gaining momentum thanks in part to the rise of remote work. Last week, Dealbook reported that a flexible living startup, Flow, founded by WeWork co-founder Adam Neumann, has locked down $350 million from Andreessen Horowitz. Earlier today, TechCrunch reported that an online rental marketplace, Zumper, just raised $30 million in a Series D1 round of funding led by Kleiner Perkins to help it better serve people looking for short-term rental options.

Now, Landing, a startup that is making it possible for its customers to rent a fully furnished apartment on its platform for as short a period as one month, says it, too, has secured fresh funding: $75 million in equity funding and another $50 million in debt.

Delta-v Capital led the equity piece, joined by new and earlier investors, including Greycroft and Foundry. Landing has now raised $237 million in venture funding and $230 million in debt since its launch in 2019.

We told you a bit last week about Landing’s founder Bill Smith, a serial entrepreneur who we dubbed the “anti-Adam Neumann,” given that he’s decidedly understated, he’s conservative when it comes to raising venture funding, and his two past companies have only made investors money. Neumann, in comparison, is a forceful personality, and not everyone came out ahead, famously, on WeWork’s path to becoming a publicly traded company last year.

Smith’s company works like so: Using gobs of data on pricing and demand around the country, it zeroes in on multifamily buildings around the U.S. Through performance marketing and referrals, it then finds tenants for these apartments, itself signing one-year leases, then quickly moving in everything from furniture to utensils for the tenant. Landing has all of these furnishings made in Vietnam and shipped to warehouses in Austin, Phoenix and Alabama, where it is based.

Tenants, who sign on as Landing “members” for a $199 yearly fee, commit to renting from Landing for a minimum of six months, though they’re allowed to move freely to other Landing-operated apartments during that period, provided they give the company two weeks’ notice. Smith says that currently, on average, they stay in one spot six months.

Right now, Landing — which is not profitable — makes money by marking up what it pays in rent by upwards of 40%. Eventually, Smith told us last week, Landing intends to sell its software directly to the multifamily property owners. “Over time, we’ll partner with owners to bring this product to their building, and it really won’t be a ‘Landing’ lease product,” he said. “They’ll just join the Landing platform. They’ll operate using our technology and our standards. And, and it won’t be this model of, you know, Landing leases it and is committed to that lease.”

It sounds very much like what Flow is building, based on a “inside” story about Flow in the real estate outlet The Real Deal this week. According to the outlet’s sources, Flow is effectively a service that landlords employ to make their properties more attractive to people who want to bounce around yet also experience a branded, consistent experience.

As with Landing, shorter lease terms and furnished apartments will likely allow Flow to command higher rents, notes The Real Deal.

Unlike Landing, Flow will itself own at least some of the multifamily units into which its members move. Indeed, with his ample WeWork proceeds, Neumann has already snapped up more than 3,000 apartment units in Miami, Fort Lauderdale, Atlanta and Nashville, per Dealbook. It could give the outfit an additional advantage. As The Real Deal notes, Flow’s buildings will “also be able to tap into cheaper financing . . . because banks can lend to the properties at the same leverage point offered to apartment projects, or up to 80 percent. Those are more favorable terms than the roughly 55 percent typically offered to hotel developments, essentially creating a high-yield business with lower costs.”

Flow, Landing and Zumper aren’t alone in spying opportunity in flexible living. Last fall, Zeus Living, which is focused on giving people “flexible living” options, raised $55 million in a round led by SIG. Blueground, a pre-furnished apartment rental startup focused on short-term and long-term rental, meanwhile raised $180 million in equity and debt funding last September. Another tech-enabled platform, Placemakr, separately raised $90 million from investors back in March.

Another flexible-living company is Sentral, whose 3,000-plus properties are owned by Iconiq Capital, the San Francisco-based investment firm whose investors include Mark Zuckerberg and Reid Hoffman; Iconiq is also a major investor in Sentral, the WSJ reported last year.

Expect more players backed by more capital, despite the uneven performance of some companies in the space, including Sonder, a short-term rental startup that went public last year via a SPAC merger and that last month cut one-fifth of its staff as part of a restructuring designed to shave $85 million in annual expenses. (On the customer-review platform Trustpilot, Sonder receives 1.3 out of five stars, with complaints about everything from a lack of hot water in its branded units to blood-stained linens.)

While the short-term rental business is complicated given its many moving parts, more individuals are adopting a nomadic existence owing to the pandemic’s ripple effects, and VCs like nothing more than an industry in flux.

“Our view,” Placemakr’s CEO tells The Real Deal, is that the “more the merrier. The institutionalization of an asset class doesn’t happen by a single group.”

Traditionally, startups have looked to three primary sources for funding: venture capital firms (VCs), angel investors, and family offices. But in recent years, a fourth option has grown increasingly popular: corporate venture capital funds, or CVCs. Between 2010 and 2020, the number of CVCs grew more than six times to over 4,000, and these CVCs inked more than 2,000 deals worth $79 billion in the first half of 2021, surpassing all previous annual tallies.

These corporate investors offer not only funding, but also access to resources such as subsidiaries that can serve as market validators and customers, marketing and development support, and a credible existing brand. However, alongside this added value, CVCs can also come with some risk. To explore these tradeoffs, we collaborated with market intelligence company Global Corporate Venturing to conduct a quantitative in-depth analysis of the CVC landscape, as well as a series of qualitative interviews with both founders and CVC executives.

We found that of the 4,062 CVCs that invested between January 2020 and June 2021, more than half were doing so for the very first time, with just 48% having been in operation for at least two years at the time of investment. In other words, if you’re considering a CVC partner right now, there’s a decent chance that your potential investor has little to no experience making similar investments and supporting similar startups. And while more-experienced CVCs are likely to come with the resources and credibility that founders might expect, relative newcomers may struggle with even a basic understanding of venture norms.

Indeed, in a survey of global CVC executives, 61% reported that they didn’t feel like the senior executives of their corporate parent understood industry norms. In addition, because of their parent companies’ business imperatives, many CVCs may also be more impatient for quick returns than traditional VCs, potentially hindering their ability to provide long-term support to the startups in which they invest. Moreover, even a patient, veteran CVC can pose problems if other existing investors aren’t on board. As one founder we interviewed explained, “We had to turn down a CVC because our existing investors believed that taking them on would dilute exit returns and result in a negative perception on the eventual exit.”

Clearly, CVCs can be hit or miss. How can entrepreneurs decide whether corporate funding is a good fit for their startup, and if so, which CVC to pick? The first step is to determine whether the core objective of the CVC you’re considering aligns with your needs. Broadly speaking, CVCs can be sorted into four categories, with four distinct types of objectives: strategic, financial, hybrid, or in transition.

Four Kinds of CVCs

A strategic CVC prioritizes investments that directly support the growth of the parent. For example, Henkel Ventures is upfront about its focus on strategic rather than financial investments. “We don’t see how we can add value as a financial CVC,” explains Paolo Bavaj, Henkel’s Head of Corporate Venturing for Germany. “The motivation for our investments is purely strategic, we are here for the long run.”  Similarly, Unilever Ventures explicitly prioritizes brands that complement the consumer goods giant’s existing businesses.

This approach works well for startups that require a longer-term perspective. For example, CEO of nanotechnology startup Actnano Taymur Ahmad told us that he opted for CVC rather than VC investors because he felt he needed “patient and strategic capital” to guide his business through an industry fraught with supply chain, regulatory, and technical challenges.

Conversely, financial CVCs are explicitly driven by maximizing the returns on their investments. These funds typically operate much more independently from their parent companies, and their investment decisions prioritize financial returns rather than strategic alignment. Financial CVCs still offer some connection to the parent company, but strategic collaboration and resource sharing are much more limited. As Founding Managing Director of Toyota Ventures Jim Adler succinctly put it, “financial return must precede strategic return.”

A financial CVC is generally a good fit for startups that have less in common with the mission of the parent company, and/or less to gain from the resources it has to offer. These startups are generally just looking for financial support, and they tend to be more comfortable with being assessed on their financial performance above all else.

The third type of CVC takes a hybrid approach, prioritizing financial returns while still adding substantial strategic value to their portfolio companies. Hybrid CVCs often maintain looser connections with their parent companies to enable faster, financially-driven decision-making, but they still make sure to provide resources and support from the parent as needed.

While certain startups will benefit from a purely strategic or financial CVC partner, hybrid CVCs generally have the broadest market appeal. For example, Qualcomm Ventures offers its portfolio startups substantial opportunities for collaboration with other business divisions, as well as access to a wide array of technological solutions. It isn’t constrained by demands for short-term financial returns from its parent company, allowing the CVC to take a longer-term, more strategic perspective in supporting its investments. At the same time, Qualcomm Ventures still values financial returns, having achieved 122 successful exits since its founding in 2000 (including two dozen unicorns — that is, startups valued over $1 billion). As VP Carlos Kokron explained, “We are in this to make money, but also look for startups that are part of the ecosystem…startups we can help with product or go-to-market operations.”

Finally, some CVCs are in transition between a strategic, financial, and/or a hybrid approach. As the entire investor landscape continues to grow and evolve, it’s important for entrepreneurs to be on the lookout for these in-transition CVCs and ensure that they’re aware of how the potential investor they’re talking to today may transform tomorrow. For example, in 2021 Boeing announced that in a bid to attract more external investors, it would spin off its strategic CVC arm into a more independent, financially-focused fund.

Picking the Right Match

Once you’ve determined whether you want to work with a strategic CVC, a financial CVC, or something in between, there are several steps you can take to figure out whether a specific CVC is a good fit for your startup.

1. Explore the relationship between the CVC and its parent company.

Entrepreneurs should start by speaking with employees at the parent company to learn more about the CVC’s internal reputation, its connectedness within the parent organization, and the KPIs or expectations that the parent has for its venture arm. An outfit with KPIs that demand frequent knowledge transfer between the CVC and parent company might not be the best match for a founder looking for no-strings-attached capital — but it could be perfect for a startup in search of a hands-on corporate sponsor.

To get a sense for the relationship between the CVC and parent firm, ask questions that explore the extent to which the CVC has managed to convey its vision internally, the breadth and depth of its links to the various divisions of the parent, and whether the CVC will be able to offer the internal network you need. You’ll also want to ask how the parent company measures the success of the CVC, and what sorts of communication and reporting are expected.

For example, Tian Yu, CEO of aviation startup Autoflight, explained the importance of in-depth interviews with employees across the business in guiding his decision to move forward with a CVC: “We met the investment team, the key employees from business groups that we cared about, and gathered a sense of how a collaboration would work. This series of pre-investment meetings only raised our confidence levels that the CVC cared about our project and would help us accelerate our journey.”

2. Determine the CVC’s structure and expectations.

Once you’ve determined the CVC’s place within its larger organization, it’s important to delve into the unique structure and expectations of the CVC itself. Is it independent in its decision-making, or tightly linked to the corporate parent, perhaps operating under the umbrella of a corporate strategy or development department? If the latter, what are the strategic objectives that the CVC is meant to support? What are its decision-making processes, not just for selecting investments, but for giving portfolio companies access to internal networks and resources? How long does the CVC typically hold onto its portfolio companies, and what are its expectations regarding exit timelines and outcomes?

For example, after Healthplus.ai Founder and CEO Bart Geerts delved into the expectations of a potential CVC investor, he ultimately decided to turn the funding down: “We felt that it limited our exit options in the future,” he explained, adding that CVCs can be more bureaucratic than VCs, and that for his business, benefits such as greater market access weren’t worth the downsides.

3. Talk to everyone you can.

Ultimately, the people are the most important component of any potential deal. Before moving forward with a CVC investor, make sure you have a chance to speak with key executives from both the CVC and the parent company, in order to understand their vision and culture. It can also be helpful to chat with the CEOs of one or two of the CVC’s existing portfolio companies, to get an inside scoop on issues you might not otherwise uncover.

To be sure, it can sometimes feel uncomfortable to ask for meetings beyond an investor’s typical due diligence process — but these conversations can be pivotal. For example, one entrepreneur explained that their team “loved the pitch from a potential CVC investor, there appeared to be a great match between our strategic objectives and theirs. We got along well with the CVC lead, but meeting the board (which was not intended to be a part of the process) was an eye-opening experience as their questions highlighted the risk averse nature of the company. We did not proceed with the deal.” Don’t be afraid to push beyond what’s presented in a pitch and ask the hard questions of a potential partner.

As CVCs become more and more prevalent, entrepreneurs are likely to be faced with a growing number of corporate funding opportunities alongside traditional options. These investors can bring substantial value in the form of resources and support — but not every CVC will be the right fit for every startup. To build a successful partnership, founders must determine the CVC’s relationship to its parent company, the structure and expectations that will guide its decision-making, and most importantly, their cultural and strategic alignment with the key people involved.

Authors’ Note: If you have experience engaging with CVCs, please consider contributing to the authors’ ongoing research by completing this survey.

The legwork has already been done for you in the form of an e-book titled “How to Get VC Funding”, which details the process from beginning to end, with first-timers in mind. It is a free resource that’s a must-read for any businessperson that wants to get VC funding.

The most important takeaways from the e-book are highlighted below.

1. Have a Good Understanding of Early-Stage Venture Capital

Venture capital funding is defined by Entrepreneur as funds that flow into a company, usually during the pre-IPO process, in the form of an investment as opposed to a loan. The investments are controlled by an individual or small group referred to as venture capitalists (VCs) and are secured by a substantial ownership position and require a high rate of return.

Simply put, VC firms make investments in companies and get equity in those business in return, with the hope to see a positive return on that investment. The main source of VC funds is usually institutional and private investors. Typically, VC investments are essentially long-term partnerships between VC firms and companies.

2. Determine Whether Your Company Is Ready for Pursuing VC Financing

The best time to approach VCs for an investment will differ depending on the company. While you can attract a VC partner with just an idea, the vast majority of deals are closed once a business has 3 concrete items:

• A team of founders
• A minimum viable product (MVP)
• Customers

Venture capital is geared towards companies that have high startup costs and are designed to grow quickly. For the best chance of securing VC funding, it is important to have a disruptive idea, preferably in an industry where VCs usually invest heavily, such as technology, along with an impressive management team.

3. Build a Pitch Deck and Presentation

A solid pitch deck will be your calling card if you hope to raise money from a VC as well as the starting point of most introductory meetings.

A pitch deck refers to a presentation that gives an overview of the business. It can be used for sharing insights about your service or product, market opportunity, business model, your management team, and company funding needs.

It is important for a pitch deck to be short, concise, and cover the elements below:

• Company financials
• Investment amount
• Company progress
• Market pain point and solution
• Management team

4. Find the Right VC to Fund the Business

All VC firms have specific focus when it comes to the type of companies they fund. They typically invest in consumer products, software, green technologies, fintech, AI, or any other category of business. Each VC firm focuses on a different stage of investment (Series A, Series B, Series C, seed, early-stage, etc.) So, research is the first step in reaching out to VCs.

Once you have a target list of VCs to approach, it is now time to set up meetings. You will have 2 opportunities for making connections: a cold email to a VC partner or an introduction from someone in your network.

5. Mastery of the VC Term Sheet

The term sheet is basically a non-binding list of preliminary terms for VC financing. It is also informally referred to as the first real paper that a founder receives from a VC once they have made the decision to invest.

A terms sheet has 3 key sections:

• The Funding Section: It lays out the proposed investment’s financial guidelines. It outlines how much money the VC firm is willing to invest and what it wants from your company in return.
• The Corporate Governance Section: It is used to define the distribution of power between investors and founders as it relates to company decisions.
• The Liquidation and Exit Section: It describes what will happen to shareholders and investors if the company is sold, dissolved, or liquidated. It defines who will be paid first and highlights any specific preferences that are given to investors.

6. Complete Due Diligence, and Close the Deal

You can have higher chances of closing a deal with a VC as a founder if you prepare well for due diligence, which refers to the process used by investors to gather the necessary information on the potential or actual risk involved in an investment. It is also important to get familiar with the reasons why deals usually go wrong and take proactive steps to encourage a close.

The final stage of a VC funding deal is the time to find alignment across the VC firm, your internal teams, and your legal advisors. Founders should quickly follow through on commitments during this time and provide correct information pertaining to their companies.