Angel group sees record activity in 2011

Venture capital investments in Washington state took a negative turn last year, falling 16 percent to $540 million. But while venture capitalists didn’t invest as much as they used to in the region, at least one angel group said its members are picking up the pace.

The Keiretsu Forum Northwest, made up of angels in Seattle, Bellevue, Portland and Boise, said today that its members invested $24 million in 36 companies last year.

That was the highest total since the group was formed in Seattle in 2005.

Twenty nine of the 36 companies were based in the Pacific Northwest, including 4-Tell, BroVo Spirits, LoanTek, Pacific West Land and Vizit.

Thirty eight percent of the funds went to real estate firms, followed by technology (30 percent) and consumer/retail (16 percent). The angel group also added 78 new members in the Pacific Northwest last year.

“We are pleased to be steadily growing our membership and due diligence resources to provide vital funding to growing companies,” said Nathan McDonald, president of Keiretsu Forum Northwest.

Here’s a look at all of the companies that raised cash from the angel group in 2011.

Washington 

Atossa Genetics Inc.

Balance Financial

broVo Spirits

Cadence Biomedical

Connect.me

Digital Scirocco

Enroute Systems Corporation

IMOS

InSpa Corporation

NanoICE Inc.

Orahealth

Pacific West Land

Pacific West Land Fund II

Pyattt/Broadmark Fund

Splat Interactive

Valant Medical Solutions

Vibrant Games

Vizit Inc.

Your Local Market

Idaho

Banshee Bungee

LoanTek

Oregon

4-Tell

CrowdCompass

Oh Shoes

Red Hills Acquisitions V

Red Hills Acquisitions VI

The Lough Road

California

B&R Liquid Adventure

GoPhoto

Focal Point Energy

Landmark

Prolin

Colorado

Adapta Medical

Redstone Resources

Vancouver B.C.

Energy Aware

 

  • Thomas R.

    Any idea which of these are follow-on investments vs. new investments?

    • johnhcook

      Not sure which ones specifically, but here’s the break-down from Keiretsu:  Nine of the companies represented follow-ons, while 27 were new deals.

  • http://twitter.com/RedRussak ‘Red’ Russak

    Would be interesting to do an infograph of the local Angel ecosystem and how they compare. Fodder for a future article? I think so ;-)

    • Anonymous

       @redrussak:twitter  I have the 2010 comparative stats from Alliance of Angels, Keiretsu, Puget Sound Venture Club, Northwest Energy Angels, Seraph, Zino and WINGS as a result of moderating the @mitforum:twitter ”Meet the Angels” event. It shows number of deals, dollars invested, industry breakdown, stage of company, % of presenting companies that get funded, and the fees charged by each group.  All participating groups were great sports about sharing all the data they collected! 
      @0f2d11708357a0104a9550ca43e29a06:disqus Great question! I’m moderating the same event with the same players this year (March 1),  and will absolutely add “new vs. follow-on” investment to my list of questions for these groups (angels: you’ve been warned). :) 

      • Thomas R.

        Great Rebecca! Will definitely try to attend. Also curious about the founders of the companies that these angels invested in, i.e. age and experience. I also don’t see any companies that I’ve read on Geekwire (may be mistaken here). And given all the fanfare for the TechStars program, I’d expect to see at least one investment.  

        Just my own observation, but most of these companies don’t seem like the usual tech startups covered by Geekwire. More like the type of companies you’d see on Shark Tank. 

  • http://twitter.com/lunarmobiscuit Michael ‘Luni’ Libes

    The data simply isn’t public to do the analysis.  My quick check of AngelList (http://angel.co) shows some hits, but no information on investment rounds, size of the raise, or source of the funds.

    • Anonymous

      Luni you are correct!  The stats that the angel groups provided come with the caveat that they rely on self-reporting from their angel investor members.  Unlike VC funds with yay or nay decisions, as you know, angels affiliated with groups like this make individual decisions, which makes tracking much trickier.  In addition to these groups’ reported data, the University of New Hampshire takes a national survey (again, relying on angel groups’ self-reporting), and Rob Wiltbank of Willamette University (in association with the Kaufmann Foundation) has done some pretty rigorous work on individual angel returns, follow-on rounds and the like. It’s good stuff and I recommend it!