Explore the vast range of titles available.

Equity crowdfunding can provide significant resources to new ventures. However, it is not clear how crowd investors decide which ventures to invest in. Building on prior work on professional investors as well as theories in behavioral decision-making, we examine the weight non-professional crowd investors place on criteria related to a start-up’s management, business, and financials. Our conceptual discussion raises the possibility that crowd investors often lack the experience and training to assess complex and sometimes technical investment information, potentially leading them to place larger weight on factors that appear easy to evaluate and less weight on factors that are more difficult to evaluate. Studying over 200 campaigns on the platform Crowdcube, we find that fundraising success is most strongly related to attributes of the product or service, followed by selected aspects of the team, in particular, founders’ motivation and commitment. However, financial metrics disclosed in campaign descriptions do not predict funding success. We discuss implications for investors and entrepreneurs, as well as platform organizers and policy makers.

This paper is an exploratory attempt to understand gender-related differences in the behavior of investors in firms seeking equity financing. Using data from the Swedish equity crowdfunding platform FundedByMe, we find that female investors are less likely to invest in the equity of firms that are younger and high tech and have a higher percentage of equity offerings. This pattern seems consistent with a greater risk aversion in female versus male investors. Furthermore, female investors are more likely to invest in projects in which the proportion of male investors is higher.

Crowdfunding has gained traction as a mechanism to raise resources for entrepreneurial and artistic projects, yet there is little systematic evidence on the potential of crowdfunding for scientific research. We first briefly review prior research on crowdfunding and give an overview of dedicated platforms for crowdfunding research. We then analyze data from over 700 campaigns on the largest dedicated platform, Experiment.com. Our descriptive analysis provides insights regarding the creators seeking funding, the projects they are seeking funding for, and the campaigns themselves. We then examine how these characteristics relate to fundraising success. The findings highlight important differences between crowdfunding and traditional funding mechanisms for research, including high use by students and other junior investigators but also relatively small project size. Students and junior investigators are more likely to succeed than senior scientists, and women have higher success rates than men. Conventional signals of quality-including scientists' prior publications-have little relationship with funding success, suggesting that the crowd may apply different decision criteria than traditional funding agencies. Our results highlight significant opportunities for crowdfunding in the context of science while also pointing towards unique challenges. We relate our findings to research on the economics of science and on crowdfunding, and we discuss connections with other emerging mechanisms to involve the public in scientific research.

Reward-based crowdfunding not only provides finance to entrepreneurs but also generates valuable information on their products’ potential demand, their feasibility, and customers’ satisfaction. This study investigates how information from the campaigns, relating to the funding amount raised in excess of target capital, delays (if any) in product delivery, and crowd sentiment, influences the chances that a venture receives equity capital from professional investors in the aftermath of a campaign. To build a sample of ventures at risk of obtaining equity capital from professional investors, we focus on 300 successful hardware campaigns that have raised $100,000 or more on Kickstarter and Indiegogo. Our results indicate that the information provided by crowdfunding campaigns influences the odds of receiving external equity in the aftermath of the campaign; however, this relationship depends on whether the ventures have already backing from professional investors or not. Our study offers insights into what information professional investors use to assess crowdfunded ventures.

Research summary: This study replicates Dushnitsky and Shaver (2009) in an institutional setting different from the United States, that is, the European venture capital market. We highlight the role played by this switch of boundary condition in influencing how legal defenses protect new ventures' knowledge from misappropriation and encourage the formation of ties between these ventures and same-industry corporate venture capitalists. Furthermore, we consider timing and social defenses and their interactions with legal defenses in Europe. Our results indicate that the use of legal and other defenses by new ventures does vary, depending on the characteristics of the institutional context. Managerial summary: In this study, we focus attention on the formation of corporate venture capital (CVC) ties in Europe. We highlight that the institutional context of the European venture capital market differs from the one in the United States, and this difference influences how legal defenses protect new ventures' knowledge from misappropriation and encourage the formation of ties between these ventures and same-industry CVCs. We also consider the protection offered to new ventures by postponing CVC ties to later stages and by affiliation with prominent independent VCs. We show that, in Europe, these protections are less effective than in the United States. However, the protection provided by legal defenses is reinforced when new ventures are affiliated with prominent independent VCs.

We investigate how public policies related to product market regulation (PMR) influence the ability of European young venture-capital (VC) backed firms compared to a sample of matched non-VC backed firms to grow in size in proportion to their innovative activity. Whereas VCs can presumably offer value-added services to overcome the regulatory constraints of PMR, we find that VC-backed firms relative to non-VC backed ones are more adversely sensitive to these policies. This evidence indicates that PMR impedes the most VC-backed firms’ high-potential for innovation-driven growth.

We explore whether sensation-seeking, a personality trait that involves risk-taking for novelty and thrill, is one of the underlying motivations for participating in peer-to-peer lending crowdfunding markets. To empirically substantiate this argument, we test whether individuals participating in Prosper, one of the largest lending markets in the U.S., reduce their lending activity when gambling in the form of playing the multistate lotteries Powerball and Mega Millions becomes more attractive. Lottery is a repeated natural experiment: lottery jackpots are randomly won and a series of draws with no winners form large jackpots. We find that the thrill of winning a large jackpot lottery, perhaps intensified by advertising and media coverage around this event, fulfills some lenders' desire of sensation-seeking and substitutes participating in Prosper, decreasing their lending activity. We discuss implications for lenders and borrowers, as well as platform organizers and policy makers.

Working Paper No. 24402 Crowdfunding may provide much-needed financial resources, yet there is little systematic evidence on the potential of crowdfunding for scientific research. We first briefly review prior research on crowdfunding and give an overview of dedicated platforms for crowdfunding research. We then analyze data from over 700 campaigns on the largest dedicated platform, Experiment.com. Our descriptive analysis provides insights regarding the creators seeking funding, the projects they are seeking funding for, and the campaigns themselves. We then examine how these characteristics relate to fundraising success. The findings highlight important differences between crowdfunding and traditional funding mechanisms for research, including high use by students and other junior investigators but also relatively small project size. Junior investigators are more likely to succeed than senior scientists, and women have higher success rates than men. Conventional signals of quality - including scientists' prior publications - have no relationship with funding success, suggesting that the crowd applies different decision criteria than traditional funding agencies. Our results highlight significant opportunities for crowdfunding in the context of science while also pointing towards unique challenges. We relate our findings to research on the economics of science and on crowdfunding, and we discuss connections with other emerging mechanisms to involve the public in scientific research.

Crowdfunding may provide much-needed financial resources, yet there is little systematic evidence on the potential of crowdfunding for scientific research. We first briefly review prior research on crowdfunding and give an overview of dedicated platforms for crowdfunding research. We then analyze data from over 700 campaigns on the largest dedicated platform, Experiment.com. Our descriptive analysis provides insights regarding the creators seeking funding, the projects they are seeking funding for, and the campaigns themselves. We then examine how these characteristics relate to fundraising success. The findings highlight important differences between crowdfunding and traditional funding mechanisms for research, including high use by students and other junior investigators but also relatively small project size. Junior investigators are more likely to succeed than senior scientists, and women have higher success rates than men. Conventional signals of quality - including scientists' prior publications - have no relationship with funding success, suggesting that the crowd applies different decision criteria than traditional funding agencies. Our results highlight significant opportunities for crowdfunding in the context of science while also pointing towards unique challenges. We relate our findings to research on the economics of science and on crowdfunding, and we discuss connections with other emerging mechanisms to involve the public in scientific research.