exclusivity is one clause in that term sheet. what i don't understand is how can exclusivity apply if the investors are allegedly renegotiating those same terms. surely, if investors breach any terms along the way, exclusivity/no-shop doesn't apply any more.

i'm having some trouble believing the entire Andreessen rant. if companies get screwed during the no-shop period because major pre-agreed terms are broken, the company/founders are free to go to other investors. something doesn't add up, I wished Andreessen was a bit more explicit in his complaint.