[pg]

The top firms are expensive, but worth it. It's usually not worth trying to economize on lawyers unless you really know what you're doing. Once a startup is established, it can make sense to try cut down one's legal bills by e.g. hiring an in-house counsel, but when you're inexperienced you don't want to be cutting corners in the legal dept. Better to overpay your lawyers than end up with some disastrous term in your funding agreement.

[robg]

Isn't there a conflict of interest if a firm is introducing you to their investor network but then helping to craft the agreements? Or is this degree of cross-fertilization common and even necessary?

Still, if there's that prior relationship between the firm and some investors, how can we be sure our interests are being best represented?

[pg]

If they're representing you, they're legally required to act in your interest, and they take that pretty seriously. I can't think of a case among all the startups we've funded where the startup felt their lawyers were selling out to the investors. There have been all sorts of disputes with lawyers (excessive bills, slowness, incompetence), but never that.

[ivankirigin]

Technically, they are representing the company, not you personally. It is an important difference that doesn't really come up often AFAIK