Adding a lender to the panel of sharks would give the show more depth and educational value.
In the past week’s episode of Shark Tank, Curt Campbell, an entrepreneur from the tiny town of Fish Creek, Wisconsin pitched his company www.oilerie.com to the sharks for an investment.
In his pitch, Mr. Campbell talked about putting it all on the line for his company, and told stories of having his power and cable shut off at earlier stages in the business.
While Mark Cuban did make an investment, I thought his response to Mr. Campbell was genuine. He thanked him for telling his story of his ups and downs candidly, and spoke about how he taught more to budding entrepreneurs watching the show then any of the sharks could.
As I reflect on Mr. Cuban’s comments–it reaffirmed my thoughts that there is a key component missing in the show–one of the sharks should be a lender, not an investor.
After all, every time an entrepreneur needs money for their business–they should consider debt and equity options. Sometimes the choice is very black and white–because in some cases there isn’t a lender or an investor who would do a particular deal. But in plenty of cases, the choice is gray, and this should be highlighted on Shark Tank.
I would love to see a lender on the show, sitting side-by-side with investors, asking the entrepreneur questions about their cash flow, collateral, and credit. Entrepreneurs should know that these issues matter. Additionally, I would like to see the sharks sharpen their value proposition to an entrepreneur, when and if there is a viable lending option on the table.
It would be fascinating to watch an entrepreneur have to make a decision in front of millions of watchers between taking a loan and keeping control of their company but have to risk their house a collateral or taking an investment. That’s a far tougher decision between giving “x” percent of your company up to on shark or “y” to another.
It might even be juicier to watch an entrepreneur decide between a 6 percent interest loan that requires them to put their house on the line versus a 30 percent loan that does not. Or, it could be compelling to watch an entrepreneur realize they have forfeited a loan option because they previously took on an investor who is not willing to personally guarantee a loan.
These debates would add a compelling component to the show, add to its drama, as well as its educational value. I hope the producers consider it.