Should we use non-voting share classes, and how does this affect fundraising and investor relations?

Non-voting share structures are generally not recommended for fundraising. Most sophisticated investors will not accept non-voting (B class) shares, as investors typically expect proportional shareholder voting rights tied to their equity stake. However, in practical terms, this concern is often overstated: since most early-stage investors hold under 1% of the company, their individual voting power is minimal and won't significantly inhibit founder control anyway.

The community consensus favours simplicity: - **Single share class structure** — recommended as the cleanest approach. Keeps cap table uncomplicated, gives all investors a voice, and avoids the friction of explaining voting restrictions to prospective investors. Members note this is often easier to manage as you scale. - **Realistic investor impact** — even with full voting rights, small investors (under 1%) have negligible practical influence, so the theoretical concern is often not the bottleneck it first appears.

Caveats: There is no single "correct" way; different structures have trade-offs. But if you're seeking outside investment, expect pushback on non-voting shares from institutional or experienced investors, making a single share class the pragmatic choice for fundraising ease.