General Overview

The competition is intended to simulate the real-world process of entrepreneurs soliciting start-up funds from early-stage investors and venture capital firms.  The judges function as venture capital investors deciding on which business venture they would most likely fund.  The quality of the idea, the strength of the management team, and the clarity and persuasiveness of the written plan and oral presentation, all influence the judges’ decisions.  Ultimately, the winning teams should be the team in which the judges would most likely invest their money.

Most of the judges of the BPC come from the investment community and are involved in making early-stage investment decisions on an ongoing basis.  Their ranking of the top teams is guided by the scorecard (described below), but should be consistent with the approach that would be used by a venture capital or early-stage investor.

We recognize that consistent with real life investment situations, early-stage companies can be in very different stages of development.  To compensate for this, we would expect that an early stage investor would require the potential for higher investment returns for an earlier stage company which has a higher level of risk involved.  We assume, in general, that this would be true for the judges in the BPC.

Teams are not required to reveal the exact desired terms of the deal (i.e., their proposed company valuation and percentage of company being offered to investors).  However, some investors prefer to have this information upfront, (while some investors feel that it is not as important until later). We recommend that teams be prepared to answer questions about their terms, given the diversity of the judges.

Unlike some venture capital funds, judges in this competition should not restrict themselves to investing in only certain types of new business ventures (such as biotechnology or information technology).  Judges in this competition should assume that they would be open to investing in any type of new business venture, assuming that other criteria such as those mentioned above, are met.    

There are two main rounds of competition: the Semifinalist Round on Thursday, May 13^th in the morning and the Finalist Round on Thursday evening.  All teams must be in Missoula on May 13^th to present their plan to the judges.

During the competition, judges should evaluate each team individually and should not discuss their evaluation with other judges until all judges’ evaluation forms have been submitted.

Selection Round

Each year the competition receives more than 30 business plans from teams across the state.  During the Selection Round a group of judges (called Selection Judges) assembles at the School of Business Administration to evaluate all business plans submitted.  Their evaluation during this round is based solely on the merit of the written business plan. Selection Judges review each submitted plan and then engage in discussions to determine which plans will be invited to the Semifinalist Round to be held on May 13^th.  These judges also designate teams to one of three specific divisions: High Growth Division 1, High Growth Division 2, and Lifestyle Division. Judges are careful to balance the two High Growth Divisions equally based on their ratings of the 10 plans (5 in each division) selected for the Semifinalist Round.

Semifinalist Round

·     Scoring – Criteria

The winners of the competition will be determined by the judges’ ranking of the teams.  This ranking will be based on the judges’ willingness to invest in the company as noted above.  The ranking will be completed by the judges during the lunch break. Judges will rank the teams in their division from 1 (team most likely to receive funding) to 5 (team least likely to receive funding).

To assist the judges in this decision process and to provide additional feedback to the teams, the judges will fill-out 3 scorecards for each team in the Semifinalist Round.  The 3 scorecards will cover:

      Part I   Written Business Plan

      Part II  Verbal Presentation

      Part III  Business Viability

Please note: The scorecards are designed to assist the judges in evaluating the individual components of each team in order to develop their overall rankings.

·     Scoring – Process

In the Semifinalist Round teams will compete against other teams assigned to their division.  Each judge will have read and evaluated each written business plan in his/her division prior to the competition. Each judge will assess the written business plans, oral presentations, and business viability of the five teams in his/her flight in the Semifinalist Round of competition.

Please note:  The scorecards will not be used in the calculation of the winning teams.  The winning teams will be determined by the judges’ rankings and discussions during the lunch break.  

The winning team from each of the two High Growth Potential Divisions will advance to the Final Round along with the winning team in the Lifestyle Division.  The 2^nd and 3^rd place teams from each of the two High Growth Potential Divisions in the Semifinalist Round will compete for the remaining Final Round spot in a Wildcard Round to be held Thursday afternoon.  The winning team from the Wildcard Round will advance to the Final Round.  This will result in a total of 4 teams invited to present at the evening event:

Finalist Round Includes:

Semifinalist High Growth Division 1 Winner

Semifinalist High Growth Division 2 Winner

Wildcard High Growth Division Winner

Semifinalist Lifestyle Division Winner

·      Scoring – Written Business Plan Evaluation

Judges will review the written business plans of each team using a double blind evaluation process and complete Part I of the BPC scorecards for each business plan.  Part I is designed to help assess the written business plan, focusing on key elements and the effectiveness of the summary financial data.  (Judges will evaluate the written business plan in advance of the competition and complete Part I of the score card by Monday, May 3, 2010.)

·      Scoring – Semifinalist Round Oral Presentations

Each judge will listen to and evaluate the oral presentations of the teams in their flight on the morning of Thursday, May 13.  Judges will use Parts II & III of the BPC Scorecard as a guide to determine their rankings:

      Part II assesses the poise and professionalism of the presentation

      Part III evaluates the perceived viability of the venture

The quantitative assessment provided by the Scorecards is only meant to serve as a guide to the judges for ranking the teams in the Semifinalist Round.  The rankings will determine the overall winners based on where judges would invest their money.

The winning team from each of the divisions will be determined by the judges ranking of the teams within each division.  This ranking will be determined Thursday during lunch after all teams have presented to the judges.  The judges will rank the teams within their division from 1 (highest) to 5 (lowest).  The scores from all judges within a division will be aggregated and the team with the lowest total score in that flight will advance to the Final Round Thursday evening.  In the unlikely event that there should there be a tie after the initial tabulation of rankings, the team with the most number of first place scores will be declared the winner.

·     Scoring – Final Round

The winning teams in the High Growth Division Final Round will be determined solely by the judges’ ranking of the teams.  This ranking will be determined Thursday night after all teams have presented to the judges.  The judges will rank the teams in the Finals from 1 (highest) to 3 (lowest).  The ranking of the Lifestyle Division will be completed during the morning round.

The rankings from each of the judges will be aggregated and the teams with the lowest total score will be the winners.  As in the previous round, in the case of a tie, the team with the most number of first place scores will be declared the winner. If there is still a tie, the tie will be broken by determining the team with the best aggregated score on the judges evaluation of the written business plan.