Vice Capital
The ESG movement has spurred consideration of how investors express positive values in their startup investment decisions. Less examined is the mirror phenomenon—how startups in stigmatized industries access capital. In a move to fill that gap, in our forthcoming article, Vice Capital, we conduct an interview-based study, supplemented with descriptive data, on the funding of […]
Andrew Jennings is an Associate Professor of Law at Emory University School of Law and Kimberly D. Krawiec is the Charles O. Gregory Professor of Law and Sullivan and Cromwell Professor of Law at the University of Virginia School of Law. This post is based on their article, forthcoming in the U.C. Irvine Law Review.
The ESG movement has spurred consideration of how investors express positive values in their startup investment decisions. Less examined is the mirror phenomenon—how startups in stigmatized industries access capital. In a move to fill that gap, in our forthcoming article, Vice Capital, we conduct an interview-based study, supplemented with descriptive data, on the funding of “vice” startups. Vice businesses are, to varying degrees, stigmatized, prohibited, or heavily regulated, with restrictions designed to protect the safety, well-being, and even morality of customers and third parties. These industries have traditionally been understood to include the adult, alcohol, tobacco, weapons, and gambling industries, among others.
