The fifth FlexUp Startup Networking Workshop, held last week at Station F, once again confirmed the value of these open sessions between entrepreneurs.
Eight founders attended the workshop, representing a wide variety of sectors, backgrounds, and challenges. As with the first workshop, the goal was not simply to present FlexUp, but to create a space where entrepreneurs could openly discuss their projects and explore solutions together. These discussions are particularly valuable for two reasons:
- they allow founders to share real challenges and learn from each other's experiences;
- they provide concrete opportunities to illustrate how the FlexUp model can address real entrepreneurial problems.
Perhaps even more interesting is that these conversations often reveal new use cases for the model, sometimes ones we had not previously imagined.
In many ways, it is similar to what we observe with AI: when a new technology appears, people initially see it as an interesting novelty. But as more people start using it, they gradually discover applications that are far broader and more diverse than initially expected.
For confidentiality reasons, the names and some figures below have been slightly modified. However, the situations described faithfully reflect the real discussions that took place during the workshop.
Case 1 – LedgerFlow: Expanding internationally without immediately creating a new company
The first case involved LedgerFlow, a startup founded by two North African entrepreneurs who developed software capable of automatically reading invoices and accounting documents and integrating them directly into accounting systems. The product is already operational in Tunisia, and the founders are now looking to expand into the French market. They recently moved to France with this goal in mind, but they are facing several practical questions:
- Do they need to create a company in France immediately?
- How can they invoice French clients?
- How can they finance the localisation of their software? The founding team is structured as follows:
- one partner responsible for business development (50%)
- two partners responsible for technical development (25% each)
The challenge: adapting the software to the French accounting system
To operate in France, the application must integrate the French chart of accounts, which requires substantial work with a local French accountant to properly configure how accounting entries are categorised. This represents a significant upfront investment.
A possible solution using FlexUp
One approach discussed during the workshop was to create a FlexUp sub-account dedicated to the French market. In this structure:
- the Tunisian entity remains the main project;
- a French sub-account is created to develop and operate the French version of the product. Several contributors could participate in this sub-project:
- the Tunisian team invests development time to localise the product;
- the French accountant contributes time or a negotiated fixed amount to adapt the system to French accounting rules;
- additional freelancers or business developers could be recruited with compensation partly tied to commercial success. The core software could then be licensed to the French project through a licensing agreement between the Tunisian parent project and the French sub-account. One key advantage of this structure is that the team can test the French market without immediately creating a new legal entity. Depending on the situation, client invoicing could be handled:
- directly from Tunisia,
- through a local partner,
- or through the FlexUp incubation service. This allows entrepreneurs to enter a new market quickly while sharing both risk and investment among the partners involved.
Case 2 – ShelfLife Analytics: Financing software development through future customers
The second case presented during the workshop involved ShelfLife Analytics, a project created by Deepak, an Indian master's student. He has developed a software concept designed to optimise supermarket purchasing and inventory management based on product expiration dates. Through simulations, he estimates that a typical supermarket could save tens of thousands of euros per year by reducing food waste. However, he faces a common challenge for early-stage technology projects:
- the concept has strong potential,
- but it still requires funding to fully develop the product.
The typical dilemma
Once fully developed, this type of software might be sold for around 1 000 EUR per year. But at that price point, it would be impossible to finance the initial development.
Turning early customers into project partners
One solution discussed during the workshop was to approach a few pilot supermarkets with a different model:
- an initial licence fee of 10 000 EUR per year for early partners,
- while making it clear that the future standard price will be 1 000 EUR per year. In this structure:
- the additional 9 000 EUR effectively represents an investment in the development of the product;
- these early partners could later recover their investment, potentially with a share of future profits. In other words, the first customers become co-investors in the project, aligning incentives between the founder and the early adopters.
A second challenge: legal status
Deepak is currently in France on a student visa, which does not allow him to work or invoice clients directly. In this case, FlexUp can also provide an incubation solution. The project can be hosted under a FlexUp account, allowing:
- clients to be invoiced through the incubation structure;
- revenues to be collected on behalf of the project. The funds remain allocated to the project, and once Deepak registers his company and opens a professional bank account, the project can be transferred to the new legal entity. This approach allows entrepreneurs to start commercial activity even before their legal structure is fully established.
Case 3 – ElevateHer: The structural limits of traditional startup financing
The third case discussed during the workshop highlighted a fundamental weakness of the traditional startup financing model. The example came from ElevateHer, a company created by Inès when she was 19 years old. The project aims to support women in their career development through training and mentoring programmes. At the beginning of the venture, she accepted an investment of 50 000 EUR in exchange for 20% of the company. At the time, this implied a valuation of 250 000 EUR, which seemed very significant to her. However, three years later, she has realised that a structural imbalance has emerged.
The problem with the traditional model
Over the past three years:
- the investor has made no additional contributions;
- Inès has continued working full-time to build the company. Yet:
- the investor still owns 20% of the company;
- Inès still owns 80%. In other words, the growth in the company's value benefits both parties in the same proportions, even though their contributions have been very different.
The founder's invisible investment
In reality, Inès has been paying herself far below the market value of her work. For example:
- actual salary: 2 000 EUR per month
- estimated market salary: 5 000 EUR per month This means she effectively reinvested 3 000 EUR per month into the company. Over three years, that represents nearly 100 000 EUR of additional investment. Yet this investment does not appear anywhere in the company's capital structure.
What the FlexUp model could have enabled
If the project had been structured using the FlexUp model from the beginning, the situation could have been different. Part of Inès's compensation could have been structured as:
- a portion paid in cash
- a portion invested in the company as equity or credits Over time, she would have continued to accumulate additional ownership, reflecting her ongoing contributions to the business. This would allow the company's ownership structure to evolve dynamically based on real contributions, rather than remaining fixed based solely on an early-stage investment.
What these workshops reveal
These three examples illustrate the wide range of challenges faced by entrepreneurs:
- expanding internationally with limited resources,
- financing the development of innovative products,
- structuring fair and sustainable equity between founders and investors. In each case, the collective discussion helped identify practical solutions using the FlexUp model. More broadly, these workshops reinforce an important insight: FlexUp is not simply a tool or a platform. It is a new economic and operational framework that can adapt to many different entrepreneurial situations – often far beyond the use cases we initially imagined. And it is precisely through these conversations with founders that new applications of the model continue to emerge.
Want to join our next workshop?
Our workshops are open to all entrepreneurs and founders. You can find the schedule and register at www.flexup.org/events.
Further reading
- Check out our previous workshops
- Learn more about how FlexUp works
Startup Networking Workshop #5, Station F, Paris