External investment is the default assumption for scaling businesses. The language of fundraising rounds, dilution, angels, venture capital and term sheets has become so embedded in the startup conversation that it can feel like the only path. Julie Waddellnever took it.
Over 12 years of building Moorish Foods from a kitchen in Birmingham to a multi-million pound exit, she looked at investment more than once, got close more than once, and each time concluded that the deal was not worth the cost. What she did instead is worth understanding, particularly for senior leaders thinking carefully about equity as part of their own compensation.
The problem with looking for money when you need it
Julie's description of the investment conversations she had is direct and instructive. She looked at angels. She was in conversation with Piper equity at one point. The problem was not the availability of capital. The problem was timing.
Investment conversations for a small scaling business tend to happen at moments of pressure. Cash flow has tightened. A major customer has changed terms. The cost base has grown in anticipation of revenue that has not yet fully materialised. These are precisely the moments when a founder feels they need external capital, and they are also precisely the moments when the terms on offer are worst.
"We always got to the point where we nearly signed with an investor, and it was always a bad deal. Because you went out looking for that kind of money when you were not in a great position."
The retailers Moorish was selling to did not adjust their commercial expectations because the business needed to improve its cash position. Listings were granted when the timing, the product and the commercial terms were right for the retailer, not when Moorish needed them. The business could not manufacture leverage it did not have.
So every time a difficult period prompted a serious investment conversation, Julie found herself in a negotiation where the other party knew she was under pressure and priced accordingly. She walked away from every one of those conversations.
What she did instead
Running a business of meaningful scale without external equity investment requires genuine creativity about the alternatives. Moorish used a combination of approaches over the years.
Debt financing, taken on at points when the business could service it and the terms were manageable.
Invoice factoring, which provided liquidity against receivables and was a regular part of the financial toolkit in the later years of the business.
A personal loan from Keith, the chairman, who injected cash at a moment when the business needed it and who had both the means and the commitment to the outcome to make that work.
None of these is elegant. Invoice factoring in particular carries a cost, and the dependency on a chairman's personal loan is not a model that scales indefinitely. Julie is candid about this. Cash was tight in the final period. The business was under real pressure.
But it held. And the consequence of holding without external equity investment was profound: at the point of exit, the cap table had three names on it. Julie, Andy, and Keith. The deal was clean.
Why the cap table matters more than most people realise
For anyone thinking about equity as part of a compensation package in a founder business, the structure of the cap table deserves considerably more attention than it typically receives.
A business with a complex cap table, multiple investors with different entry valuations, different liquidation preferences and different definitions of a successful outcome, is a business in which the path to a clean exit is long and difficult. The legal and financial complexity alone can absorb enormous amounts of time and energy in the final stretch. More significantly, the competing interests of different shareholders can create genuine obstacles to doing the deal that makes most sense for the business.
Julie's exit, a multi-million pound transaction with a two-week due diligence window, was survivable in part because there was no complex investor structure to navigate. Three people with aligned interests, a clear outcome in mind, and a chairman who knew the corporate finance world from the inside.
"Thank goodness we never had to take external investment. Because at the end, there were only three people with a finger in the equity pie."
What this means for you
If you are a senior leader assessing an equity offer as part of a package at a founder business, the questions worth asking go well beyond the headline percentage.
How many investors are already on the cap table, and what are their liquidation preferences? Preferred returns for investors come before ordinary equity. Depending on the structure, your stake may be worth considerably less than the percentage implies.
What is the realistic exit timeline and does it match your own? An investor who came in five years ago expecting a return within a certain window will have different motivations from a founder who wants to build for another decade. Misaligned time horizons are a source of significant friction.
Has the business taken on debt, and if so on what terms? Debt that is serviceable in normal conditions can become a constraint at exactly the moment you want flexibility, such as during an exit process.
Does the founder have a clear view of what a successful exit looks like, and is that view shared by the other stakeholders? Ambiguity here tends to surface at the worst possible time.
None of this is a reason to decline a role in a business that has external investors. Many excellent founder businesses are investor-backed and exit successfully for everyone involved. But the clarity of the Moorish cap table was a genuine competitive advantage at the point of exit, and it was not accidental. It was the result of years of difficult decisions to find another way through rather than accept terms that felt wrong.
That discipline is itself worth understanding as a signal about how the founder thinks and operates. A founder who has maintained equity discipline through pressure is likely to bring similar rigour to other consequential decisions. That matters when you are deciding whether to bet a significant part of your career on someone.
This is the fourth in a series of posts from bpe search drawing on a recent event featuring Julie Waddell, founder of Moorish Foods. The final post looks at what the exit itself actually looked like, and what it takes to get there.