In today’s modern world, there seems to be groups for almost any type of hobby or interest. There are mommy and daddy groups, book club, and Facebook groups for video gamers, garage sale hunters, and more. So, it’s not surprising that there are also such groups for investors.
While they may not meet up at parks for playdates, they do connect online to seek out advice and conversation with experienced investors more versed in crowdfunding fundamentals. This is how some beginners learn how to become an investor.
Called equity crowdfunding portals, these platforms give investors the opportunity to collaborate with other investors on fundamentals, deal selection, and due diligence. Like social networks, these portals/platforms show investors’ profiles in order to assess their expertise, credibility, and gain a sense of the wisdom of the crowd.
In October 2013, the SEC released its proposed rules for Title III (on page 376): “A premise of crowdfunding is that investors would rely, at least in part, on the collective wisdom of the crowd to make better informed investment decisions,” which is why the SEC requires intermediaries “to provide communication channels for issuers and investors to exchange information about the issuer and its offering.”
When you become a member of an equity crowdfunding portal (or equity crowdfunding platform operated by a broker-dealer), you have the ability to collaborate with other members through three methods:
But, just like any group, all it takes is one “bad” member to ruin it for everyone.
That’s why investors should compare these online collaborations among non-accredited investors with angel group collaboration.
The results of equity crowdfunding in the United States are mixed. For example, a report by the Small Business Administration (SBA) Office of Advocacy shows that California attracts the largest number of equity crowdfunding issuers with 35%, followed by Florida at 8%.
However, the adoption of equity crowdfunding has been slow in the United States, compared to Europe. According to the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, eurozone equity-based crowdfunding campaigns raised the equivalent of $233 million in total funding in 2016, while U.S. markets raised $30 million in the first 12 months of being active (May 2016-May 2017).
But, the private equity trend continues to grow. Entrepreneurs now have access to funds to jumpstart their business. In fact, in the United States, this pool amounted to $1.4 billion in 2017, and is projected to reach more than $5 billion by 2022, according to Statista.
Meanwhile, investors looking to reduce filing and compliance costs may in the future be able to take advantage of the JOBS ACT 3.0, which passed the House of Representatives with broad bipartisan support in January of 2019 (though it has languished in the Senate.) The law’s provisions would expand the definition of accredited investors, increasing the pool of investors who can participate, relaxes regulatory and reporting requirements, and would create “venture exchanges” that would be registered with the SEC where smaller companies can trade shares.
But, even if all of the crowd members are non-accredited investors – and thus inexperienced in the private securities markets – can an equity crowdfunding crowd really offer advantages comparable to those offered by angel groups? Under certain conditions, yes.
The premise of James Surowiecki’s book The Wisdom of Crowds is that:
“Under the right circumstances, [crowdfunding] groups are remarkably intelligent, and are often smarter than the smartest people in them. Groups do not need to be dominated by exceptionally intelligent people in order to be smart. Even if most of the people within a group are not especially well informed or rational, it can still reach a collectively wise decision.”
Looking at investors particularly, Surowiecki shows that even if “investors, as individuals, are irrational, it’s still possible that when you aggregate all their choices, the collective outcome will be rational and smart.”
The circumstances have to be right, though. Under the wrong circumstances, the crowd can be an irrational, destructive mob.
For instance, “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds,” written by Scottish author Charles Mackay, describes how mass manias and collective follies cause stock market bubbles and riots where “aggregating individual decisions produces a collective decision that is utterly irrational.” Mackay also quotes Bernard Baruch (1870-1965) – an American financier and adviser to U.S. presidents – who said, “Anyone taken as an individual is tolerably sensible and reasonable—as a member of a crowd, he at once becomes a blockhead.”
So, what are the circumstances under which a crowd – specifically a crowd of average investors on a Title III funding portal – will be wise, not mad? Surowiecki identifies three such conditions:
Crowdfunding portals can be ideal environments for crowd wisdom when all members are wise and follow the rules.
But portals should also enforce the same wise practices. Portals should require investors to use their real names, and verify their identities when they participate in on-platform discussion forums. Using their own identities will encourage less behavior of the self-interest-at-all-cost variety. If someone suspects a scam, it’s more likely they’ll come forward than just anonymously abandoning ship.
It’s easy to get irrationally swept up in the crowd of equity crowdfunding. But with careful research and planning (and smart decision-making), the right crowdfunding portal has the deliver big time with perfectly rational exuberance.
[Editor’s Note: To learn more about this and related topics, you may want to attend the following webinars: Crowdfunding 2018, Crowdfunding from the Start-Up’s Perspective, and Crowdfunding from the Investor’s Perspective. This article originally published March 30, 2016.]
Dave Freedman has worked as a journalist since 1978, primarily in the fields of law, business (particularly finance, marketing, and HR), and personal finance. From 1978 to 1999, he served on the editorial staffs of consumer, business, professional, and trade periodicals. As a freelance journalist since 1999, he has authored feature articles for dozens of…
Please log in again. The login page will open in a new tab. After logging in you can close it and return to this page.