The eighth FlexUp Startup Networking Workshop brought together an ecosystem builder from Georgia, a software development founder from Brazil, and the FlexUp team for a very practical conversation about how early-stage projects can move forward when cash is limited, roles are still evolving, and traditional structures feel too rigid.
As in our previous workshops, the discussion was not about theory. It focused on real situations: teams that form quickly around a startup idea, service providers that want to work with promising startups without taking unreasonable risk, and event organisers who need a fair way to share costs and upside without creating unnecessary legal complexity.
What made this workshop especially interesting was that the three opportunities discussed were very different on the surface, but closely related underneath. In each case, the same question came back: how do you create a framework that lets people contribute now, share risk fairly, and participate in future value creation?
For clarity, some details below have been simplified, but the opportunities faithfully reflect the substance of the workshop discussion.
Case 1 – Partnering with a startup weekend in Georgia
The first opportunity came from a community-led startup event in Georgia designed for students and early-stage entrepreneurs. The format is simple and powerful: participants come together over three days, form teams, develop an idea, receive input from experienced professionals, and then pitch on the final day to a panel of judges.
This is exactly the kind of setting where traditional startup structuring often breaks down. Teams may form on the spot. Participants may not know each other well. Some people may contribute far more than others after the event. Advisors and mentors may continue helping the strongest teams, but the startups often do not have the cash to pay for that support properly.
FlexUp creates a much better starting point for this kind of environment.
Instead of pushing teams to decide their equity split too early, FlexUp can give them a simple framework to start collaborating immediately while keeping track of contributions over time. Founders can record work, expertise, and cash contributions in a transparent way, and let ownership evolve based on what each person actually brings to the project.
That makes the event partnership itself interesting in several ways:
- participants can use FlexUp as a practical template to structure their team after the workshop;
- mentors or advisors can continue supporting the most promising teams and be remunerated through the same model;
- winning teams can receive free access to the platform and advisory support to help them move from pitch to execution; and
- FlexUp and members of its network can provide follow-on advisory services in exchange for equity when cash is still scarce.
This turns the event into more than a pitching exercise. It becomes a real launchpad for new ventures, with a concrete system for handling one of the first problems that usually creates tension inside young teams: who contributes what, and how should that be recognised?
It also creates value for the organisers. Instead of simply rewarding the winners with prize money and visibility, they can connect them with a business framework, a legal structure, and an advisory network that helps them continue building after the event ends.
Case 2 – Structuring an event without creating a separate legal entity
The third opportunity came from the event context itself.
Organising a startup event, workshop, or conference often requires many different contributors: organisers, sponsors, venue partners, speakers, marketing partners, and sometimes volunteers or service providers. In the early stages, one person or one company often carries most of the legal and financial burden, even though the event depends on a much broader group effort.
This creates a familiar problem. People contribute time, contacts, services, discounted access, or cash, but there is no simple framework to measure those contributions and share profits later if the event becomes commercially successful.
FlexUp offers a very practical alternative.
Rather than creating a dedicated company for each event, the organisers can create a project account in FlexUp and use it to record who contributed what. That can include:
- cash from sponsors or early backers;
- time from organisers and project managers;
- discounted or deferred services from venues, designers, or communication partners; and
- in-kind support from ecosystem partners who help bring credibility and participants.
If the event later generates revenue through tickets, sponsorship, partnerships, or related services, the project can first reimburse contributions according to agreed rules and then distribute any remaining profit transparently among the contributors.
This is especially useful for events that may grow over time. A small free workshop today can become a much larger annual event tomorrow. When that happens, the people who helped build it in the early phase often deserve more than informal recognition, but founders also do not want to create a complicated legal structure too soon. FlexUp gives them a middle path: simple bookkeeping, clear rules, and a fair way to align everyone around the success of the event.
Case 3 – Software development services with a cash + equity model
The second case focused on a software development company that works with startups and SaaS businesses. This raised a very common problem: many startups urgently need an MVP, a platform, or product development support, but they do not have enough cash to pay the full price of the work upfront.
The traditional outcomes are usually poor.
Either the software supplier walks away from the opportunity because the budget is too small, or they accept vague equity in a startup with an unrealistic valuation. In both cases, trust is weak. The startup feels constrained, and the service provider feels exposed.
The workshop explored how FlexUp can create a more balanced arrangement.
Instead of treating the equity component as a speculative percentage based on an arbitrary valuation, the FlexUp model starts from actual contributions. Let's say for example that the software company offers to build an MVP for a startup for 10 000 €. The startup can pay 4 000 € in cash, and 6 0000 € in equity. The equity is not based on a headline valuation, but on the real value of the work being done and the cash being invested.
If the founders have so far invested 54 000 € worth of work into the startup, and the software company "invests" 6 000 € of development services in exchange for equity, the software provider would receive a 10% stake in the startup (6 000 € / (54 000 € + 6 000 €)). That is a much more transparent and fair way to calculate ownership, and it gives both parties a clear sense of how their contributions are valued.
Of course, this may seem like a very low valuation for the startup, since at the beginning we do a cost+risk based valuation. In exchange, the founders keep the option to buy back that equity later on under clear, pre-agreed terms. Typically 3x after 3 years, and 10x after 10 years. That means that if the startup grows quickly and becomes more valuable, the software provider can still benefit from that upside, while the founders can eventually recover full ownership if they want to simplify their structure.
This changes the conversation materially:
- the startup preserves cash at a critical stage;
- the software development company gains access to clients that would otherwise be out of reach;
- the equity component is calculated on a fairer and more transparent basis; and
- the startup keeps the option to buy back that equity later on under clear, pre-agreed terms.
That last point matters a great deal. In the model discussed during the workshop, a startup that wants to buy out the supplier later would not do so at an arbitrary price. It would do so on terms that remain attractive for the supplier, such as repayment at twice the invested amount plus 25% per year annual return. That gives the software provider genuine upside if the startup succeeds, while also giving the startup a path to recover full ownership if it grows quickly and wants to simplify its structure later.
For suppliers, this is not just a pricing trick. It is a portfolio approach to business development. They can selectively support startups that look promising, reduce the cash barrier for those clients, and potentially earn a meaningful return if the startups they back create real value.
A common thread – making early collaboration investable
Across these three cases, one theme stood out very clearly.
Early-stage projects often do not fail because people lack ideas, energy, or goodwill. They fail because the structure around the collaboration is too weak. Teams form without clear rules. Service providers face all the downside and little of the upside. Event partners help build value, but have no transparent claim on future returns.
FlexUp addresses that gap by giving founders, partners, and contributors a practical way to structure collaboration before they are ready for a heavy legal setup or a conventional financing round.
Whether the context is a startup weekend in Georgia, a software company building MVPs for young ventures, or an event that needs to share costs and profits fairly, the underlying opportunity is the same: replace rigid, one-off deals with a framework that reflects real contributions, shared risk, and evolving value over time.
Want to join our next workshop?
Our workshops are open to entrepreneurs, founders, and professionals who want to explore fairer ways to structure partnerships, finance growth, and collaborate when cash is limited.
You can find the schedule and register at: www.flexup.org/events
Further reading
- Read about other workshops: https://www.flexup.org/blog/workshops-8
- How FlexUp works: https://flexup.org/economic-model
Startup Networking Workshop #8, Online