I’ve been asked by more than a handful of entrepreneurs about using Reg CF in a Shark Tank format. The founder appears in a TV studio with experienced investors, who pepper her with questions. If viewers like what they see, they scan a QR code at the bottom left, which takes them through the Reg CF investment process.
Non-accredited investors getting easy access to great startups, agnostic as to geography. Exactly what the JOBS Act wanted.
I’ve had to tell each of those entrepreneurs No.
Each entrepreneur thought I was the bad guy, but the real bad guy is Rule 204, the Reg CF advertising rule. Rule 204 gives a company raising money two choices for advertising outside the funding portal. One, you can say anything you want as long as you don’t mention any of the six “terms of the offering.” Two, you can mention the terms of the offering but say almost nothing else, just the company’s name, address, phone number, and URL, and a brief description of the business (i.e., a “tombstone” ad).
The six deadly “terms of the offering” are:
- How much you’re trying to raise
- What kind of securities you’re selling (e.g., stock or SAFE)
- The price of the securities
- How you plan to use the money
- The closing date of your offering
- How much you’ve raised to date
Now imagine the founder answering questions in the studio. She can say anything she wants about the product, about herself, her team of advisors, the market, the social benefits of the company, all that stuff. Even with careful scripting, however, it’s unrealistic to think she can answer questions accurately and generate enthusiasm in the audience (which is the point) without mentioning any of those six items. Maybe a founder can do it here and there, but you wouldn’t bet your TV show on it.
The purpose of Rule 204 is to ensure that every Reg CF investor gets the same information as every other investor. The regulations want everything about the company and the offering to be in one place: the funding portal. They don’t want someone who watches your TV show to know either more or less than someone who doesn’t.
Personally, I think Rule 204 is misguided. If there’s a risk that someone who watches your TV show will know either more or less than someone who doesn’t, you can (i) post a video of the TV show on the funding portal, and (ii) make sure TV viewers invest through the funding portal’s platform, where they can see everything. Eliminating Rule 204 would invigorate the Reg CF market without hurting investors.
Eliminate Rule 204 and stop issuers and portals from using artificially low minimums. That’s my platform for 2026.
In the meantime, I’m afraid a Shark Tank for Reg CF isn’t going to work.
Questions? Let me know.
Markley S. Roderick
Lex Nova Law
10 East Stow Road, Suite 250, Marlton, NJ 08053
P: 856.382.8402 | E: mroderick@lexnovalaw.com
I’m sure you’ve seen the disclaimers in Form Cs that say words to the effect of, “don’t pay attention to something our founder may have said on a tv show, just go by what is stated in this document.”
I’ve seen it. Maybe it helps for claims for material misstatements, I don’t think it avoids violations of Rule 204. What do you think?