Equitable Law Assists 'The Crystal Maze' With EIS Fund Investment

Equitable Law is pleased to announce our legal advice and assistance with a recent Three Million British Pounds Plus (GBP £3,150,000) investment (by investors managed by Edition Capital) by way of new equity subscription - into this Solicitors practice's client, Little Lion Entertainment Limited ('Little Lion').

The investment places a substantial Eight Figure British Pound (GBP £xx,000,000) valuation upon Little Lion, a company only incorporated in December 2014, with a share capital of GBP £1,000 (and whom Equitable Law has acted for since our introduction in early 2015).

Little Lion is the company behind the highly successful 'Crystal Maze Live', the sell-out live version of the popular 1990’s British TV show.

The current London venue opened in 2016 (after a highly successful initial crowdfunding process), with teams of up to eight navigating the various zones and challenges featured in the programme before reaching the iconic crystal dome.

The launch of the experience was met with critical acclaim, and has consistently positive reviews in the press, resulting in an expansion of the brand to include a central Manchester location (upon the 'Granada TV' site).

The two venues are currently generating annualised GBP £2.2m EBITDA on GBP £8m of revenue.

The investment will be used to relaunch the company’s new London venue in a flagship Central London location - scheduled to open by January 2019, as the current London site closes.

The new venue will be designed to double the capacity from 256 to 512 people per day, with the corporate booking and sponsorship opportunities being further developed.

The team forecast annual EBITDA of £4.7m across the new London and existing Manchester venues, once London is fully operational.

Following the success of Crystal Maze Live, the show returned to TV on Channel 4 introducing a new generation of fans to the concept to further strengthen the brand appeal.

The Directors of Little Lion commented;

"We are delighted to take this opportunity to thank Mr. Dan Johnson of Equitable Law for his support of our business over recent years - as our 'General Counsel', and in particular, his sterling work during this stage of our business' development.  We look forward to working further with Dan - As our business grows and develops."

For more information, please see:-

http://ramcapital.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/First-Edition-EIS-Spring-18-Investment-Summary.pdf

“Crystal Maze London: This exhilarating ride is worth every penny” London Evening Standard

Legal Fees Negotiation . . .

Sometimes, you just have to accept that some people treat the businesses (they are negotiating fees on behalf of) in the same manner as this individual treats this dental work . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_qwjcxwUqw

Regards

Dan.Johnson@EquitableLaw.com

+44 (0) 7788 537 187 : U.K. Cell. / e-Tel.

'Know When To Hold 'Em [/ Know When to Fold 'Em]

Equitable Law (Mr. Dan Johnson) was recently asked (on a bulleting board) :-

Can anyone offer some guidance on this query:

1) The buyer of a company has discovered that the seller took confidential information in respect of key suppliers prior to completion.

2) This suggests that the seller will breach their restrictive covenants.

3) There is nothing in the contract saying this, but can the buyer withhold monies owed post completion for the company if the buyer has evidence that the seller is in breach of confidentiality and non-compete obligations?

Dan Johnson replied:-

This falls squarely into the realm of  'possession is nine-tenths of the law'. 

The buyer should withhold cash and 'force' the seller in writing to acknowledge their historic breach and obtain a written undertaking from the seller to destroy confidential information and observe their obligations in the future. 

If the seller doesn't - this is likely to strengthen the case for an injunction - but provides a counter-claim (of likely estimated losses from breach of confidentiality) to any claim by the seller to unpaid consideration. 

Plenty of other steps to potentially take with the written undertaking(s) - whether or not signed (!) but you'd need to buy me lunch for this 'grey beard's' experience in such matters. 

Let me know if you would appreciate my input (I've seen it before!) = As was once said of me in an appraisal - "You undertake non-contentious work in a very contentious manner". "Thank you", I said! 

Dan.Johnson@EquitableLaw.com

Solicitors -v- Lawyers / Legal Advisors = Do you know the difference?

I would always suggest that you would be wise to want to access professional legal advice & assistance from an experienced, expert legal advisor that you can rely upon - such as an English Solicitor - while always ensuring that they are appropriately qualified and legally practising in England & Wales (part of the United Kingdom) via the Law Society's 'Find A Solicitor' service.

My firm and my personal details are at:-

http://solicitors.lawsociety.org.uk/office/545878/equitable-law-limited

http://solicitors.lawsociety.org.uk/person/9511/daniel-robert-johnson

If others who approach you don't trade under both of these registrations (individual & business entity) then they are likely to lack some element of competency and / or professionalism – most likely leading to them not being appropriately insured (whatever they may claim!).

Certainly - they are not able to call legitimately call themselves ‘Solicitors’, nor trade as such in private practice (without committing criminal offences under U.K. legislation!).

Describing yourself as a ‘lawyer’ or ‘legal advisor’ means absolutely nothing under English law, and there are a large number of un-authorised / un-regulated (largely / if not wholly un-qualified) individuals operating in the U.K. = Trust me, I often see the ‘horror stories’ after the event!   

I do appreciate that legal advice & assistance from laymen / non-Solicitors (or people with less experience and/or expertise than me) may (at first instance) appear to be cheaper than my services - but I would encourage you to buy on 'cost-effectiveness' -v- not absolute price - since in life it is a general truth that 'you tend to get what you pay for' (and you may well not discover the deficiencies in others' advice & assistance etc. until it is too late!)

Forwarned is forearmed / You know where to find me!

Regards

Dan.Johnson@EquitableLaw.com

+44 (0) 7788 537 187 (U.K. Cell. Tel.)

www.EquitableLaw.com

Equitable Law's : Heads of Terms - Convertible Loan Note = Revised & Ready For Use

Please feel free to contact us if you would like a copy / to discuss it's use.

contact@EquitableLaw.com

+44 (0) 333 390 3525

www.EquitableLaw.com 

LexisNexis Video - Share Capital & Trends

Our Principal, Mr. Dan Johnson recently contributed to LexisNexis' webinar on Share Capital - Issues and Trends (2017)

Further details are available at:-

http://www.lexiswebinars.co.uk/legal/corporate-law/share-capital-issues-and-trends

A summary is :-

In the pursuit of greater profits, clients are increasingly open to ever more complicated share structures. In this webinar, out expert speakers will take you through all the key issues and trends from the past 12 months, helping to ensure you're fully equipped to advise your clients on their options. Topics discussed will include:

Historical Context.
Issues with Share Capital Structured Companies.
Different Share Classes.
Issuing shares to Founders/Stakeholders/Employees.
Employment-related securities legislation.
Investors and share capital.
SEIS & EIS - Tax Advantaged Investments For 'Business Angels'
Share dealings.
Share buybacks.
Company constitution.
Share Option Schemes.
Operational and tax benefits of different share classes.
Privileged relations transfers.
Restrictive covenants in shareholder agreements.
Fair value of share price.
Shares and employee incentive schemes.

FREE BRANDING ADVICE FROM A SOLICITOR !

Strangely, for a generation who habitually consider David Fincher's 2010 film 'The Social Network' (a loose telling of the 'Facebook' founding myth) to be their inspiration (if not their business plan?)!, I continue to see the same mistake made by early stage web-based businesses - that Mark Zuckerberg (played by Jesse Eisenberg) and / or his colleagues made (and which was only rectified at a relatively late stage in that venture's development).

The clip is 'here' and if you are time constrained - Watch just before '3:00' minutes into the video :-

https://youtu.be/dU6scly2AFU

I would strongly recommend to any new business start-up (that is considering it's name) NOT to include the definitive article (i e the word "The") within your name or web-addresses etc.

It adds nothing for the consumer, but causes endless confusion over how to find your venture in search engines, how your venture should be alphabetized in third party's lists etc.

Don't take my word for it, in the semi-fictional words of 'The Social Network' script, Sean Parker, the founder of 'Napster' (played by Justin Timberlake) made (what is acknowledged by a character to be) his biggest contribution to Facebook with the words :-

"Drop the 'The', Just 'Facebook' - It's cleaner".

Sean Parker's net worth in Facebook immediately after the IPO was over USD $2 Billion.

I've just provided that 'tip' to you for free (but it is secondhand)!

Does anybody disagree with me?

Feel free to comment below.

Regards

Dan.Johnson@EquitableLaw.com

+44 (0) 333 390 3525 (Global Roaming e-Voicemail)

www.EquitableLaw.com