Patent Attorney and Founder
I was sitting in a meeting when the numbers came up. “You’re going to make $300,000 pre-tax on over $5 million in sales,” someone said. My first thought? That’s solid, but the numbers don’t tell the whole story.
Then the offer came. “I’ll give you $1.5 million for 25% ownership on the West Coast.” I paused. Doing the math in my head, I realized it was basically twenty times pre-tax earnings. Crazy. I mean, the valuation felt insane. My gut said no. I had to step back.
“Thanks, but I’m out,” I said.
It wasn’t just about the numbers. I wanted to understand the vision behind the brand. What would make it sustainable? Something more than a fad? The founder started to explain.
“It’s plant-based. Everything’s healthier. Nothing’s an imitation,” they said, walking me through the menu, fruits, vegetables, whole grains, beans. Everything fresh.
I nodded, but I wasn’t sold yet. Plant-based food is trending. Lots of people are jumping in. The challenge here wasn’t the food, it was the execution. They were trying to expand from the East Coast to the West Coast. That’s tough. Really tough. And in the pitch, I didn’t see any clear strategy for handling that. My gut said no again.
So why didn’t this deal work for me? A few reasons.
First, there was a misalignment on equity. I would be getting 5% in a concept that already had traction, while paying $1.5 million for a slice of something that might not scale. Sure, I had faith in the team. But the reality? I wasn’t going to be in New York as much as they would need me to. I needed their energy focused on Los Angeles. My interests weren’t aligned with theirs, and that’s a deal breaker.
I asked, “How can we align New York and LA so it works for both sides?”
They proposed increasing the East Coast stake a little. I considered it. “How much higher?”
They offered 10%. Then came the big pitch. “Lori and I will join the deal. We’ll work together to build this company. We can cross-market everywhere, airports, stadiums, you name it. The West Coast is perfect for this kind of food. You’ll get both of us and our entire network.”
It sounded good. But even with incentives, the structure was complicated. The final offer? 30% in LA, 15% in New York. And I had three options: yes, no, or counter.
In the end, I had to pass. Not because the idea was weak, it wasn’t, but because the alignment and risk weren’t right for me.
Looking back, I also thought about the brand itself. Beyond Sushi was an interesting name. Suggestive, maybe tricky. It hinted at the type of food, but it wasn’t too literal. A trademark could work, but there were gaps.
Their existing trademark protected prepared appetizers and entrees, not the restaurant service itself. That’s a blind spot. For a restaurant that might expand, having Class 43 (restaurant and café services) covered is critical. Protecting the logo with design work is also a smart move.
On TV, they shook hands with investors, but nothing was finalized backstage. The company had been filming for a while, around 2015–2016. Fast forward to today, and they’re doing extremely well.
They faced challenges, especially in getting distribution, but they stayed the course. They partnered with groups like Vegan Dale, participated in vendor systems, and opened stores in strategic locations. Now, they’re making $5–6 million a year and running a restaurant in New York called Centier.
But the brand’s acronym, BS, wasn’t great. The logo had two carrots, but there was no additional trademark protection for it. Their USPTO filings were sparse. No patents, no design patents for specific rolls. In hindsight, a design patent could have helped if they wanted to protect a signature visual style, but food trends change fast. Colors, shapes, plating, they evolve. Patenting doesn’t always make sense for restaurants.
Anna, one of my colleagues, chimed in about IP strategy. “They’re selling the brand, but it isn’t fully protected. They need more classes. Signature dishes could be protected. Popular items should be secured.”
I agreed. Restaurants often neglect trademark portfolios until it’s too late. If you go viral in New York, you can bet someone will try to copy you in LA. Without proper protection, that’s an open door.
We also talked about the website. For food, visuals are everything. High-quality photos can make or break a decision. Beyond Sushi had beautiful images, but their website wasn’t fully compliant legally, no privacy policy, no cookie pop-up. The footer claimed “All Rights Reserved,” which is good, but there’s more to cover.
Copyrights for the images themselves are essential. Food photography can be claimed just like any other creative work. A formal photo shoot? Yes. Protecting those images? Absolutely.
Alt text was present, which helps with accessibility. That’s good. But overall, the website needed some legal and marketing tweaks.
Social media was another point. Food videos are incredibly popular. People love watching others eat. It’s oddly addictive. Beyond Sushi’s social presence was generic. They could boost engagement by incorporating user-generated content, influencer posts, and interactive campaigns.
Location also matters. A restaurant in New York or LA has an advantage because you can invite influencers and press to events, creating instant buzz. Virtual businesses can’t replicate that physical presence. Launch parties, tastings, and live coverage can make a massive difference.
Marketing for food is different from other products. You have to sell the experience, not just the product. Pictures, videos, social proof, they all matter. Beyond Sushi was doing well, but there was room to amplify their reach.
Let’s step back to the investment side. The numbers are compelling, $300,000 pre-tax on $5 million in sales is impressive. But valuation alone doesn’t make a deal right. Equity, alignment, execution, those matter just as much.
For a growing restaurant, the risk comes from execution, not concept. Plant-based cuisine is trending, but trends can shift. Saturation in the market is real. A strong, sustainable vision is more valuable than a flashy pitch.
The pitch highlighted this. “It’s all real food. No imitation. We’re in New York, and we want to expand to LA.” That’s ambitious. Expanding from one coast to another requires significant effort, local knowledge, and operational bandwidth. Without alignment, you’re setting yourself up for friction.
Trademark strategy is another layer. Beyond Sushi’s name is suggestive, which helps, but protecting services and logos is critical. They had coverage for some menu items but not restaurant services. That could be risky, especially if they expand. A robust portfolio includes:
- Class 43 for restaurant and café services
- Trademarks for signature dishes
- Design work for logos and unique visual elements
- Copyright protection for website content and photography
Without these, there’s a real chance for competitors to copy or dilute the brand.
Patent options are limited in this case. Food concepts, plating styles, and visual arrangements aren’t always patentable. Design patents work if you have a distinctive roll or ornamentation you intend to keep long-term, but trends change. The value of patents in a restaurant setting is often low compared to the effort and cost of obtaining them.
Still, strong branding can become a moat. A protected logo, consistent menu, signature dishes, and high-quality presentation create a recognizable brand that competitors can’t easily replicate. That’s worth far more than a patent for a single roll.
Operationally, expansion requires alignment. Investors need to know that the founders are fully committed to both locations. If one side gets less attention, growth can stall. Equity distribution and incentives need to reflect the effort required. Otherwise, misalignment causes tension, and it can cost the company valuable time and momentum.
The initial offer didn’t reflect this. A 5% stake in an already-successful concept doesn’t incentivize enough focus on new locations. The counteroffer tried to fix it, higher equity for New York, but the structure was still complicated. Investors and founders need clarity: who does what, where, and how will success be measured?
Looking at Beyond Sushi today, the results speak for themselves. Despite early skepticism, the company grew from a single New York location to multi-million-dollar annual sales, a restaurant in New York, and a recognizable brand nationwide. Their perseverance, strategic partnerships, and willingness to adapt helped them succeed.
They also leveraged opportunities smartly. Participating in vendor systems, collaborating with Vegan Dale, and reopening in strategic locations all contributed to growth. Even without perfect IP protection, the brand carried them forward.
But there’s a lesson here. For anyone investing or expanding a restaurant:
- Alignment is key. Equity and effort must match. Misaligned incentives lead to friction.
- IP matters. Trademarks, design work, and copyrights protect your brand. Protect what you can.
- Marketing is more than numbers. Photos, videos, and social media presence drive decisions in food.
- Location isn’t optional. Physical presence in high-traffic areas accelerates brand awareness.
- Trends shift. Plant-based is hot now, but consumer preferences evolve. Sustainability beats flashiness.
Investors, founders, and operators need to balance these factors. Numbers alone aren’t enough. Execution, strategy, and brand protection are just as critical.
In retrospect, the initial offer for the West Coast stake seemed too high relative to risk. Alignment challenges, expansion logistics, and IP gaps made the deal unattractive. But the conversation wasn’t a waste. It revealed key lessons about brand protection, scaling operations, and the realities of restaurant investment.
Beyond Sushi’s trajectory also shows what persistence, smart partnerships, and careful adaptation can do. From overcoming early investor hesitations to navigating expansion, they built a strong, recognizable brand that continues to grow.
For founders, this is a reminder: success isn’t just about capital or numbers. Vision, execution, brand strategy, and alignment create lasting growth.
For investors, the takeaway is similar. Don’t chase hype. Look beyond sales and valuations. Focus on alignment, protection, and sustainable growth.
And for everyone in the food business? High-quality products, strong branding, and smart marketing can take you further than any single investment or trend. Plant-based, vegan, sustainable, these are all great. But execution, alignment, and protection are what make them last.
In the end, Beyond Sushi’s story is both cautionary and inspiring. It shows the complexity of restaurant investment, the power of branding, and the importance of aligning incentives. It proves that success is rarely instant, it comes from strategy, persistence, and the willingness to adapt to challenges.
And while I didn’t take the deal, I walked away with insight. Insight into scaling, protecting, and marketing a brand. Insight into how numbers tell part of the story, but strategy tells the rest. Insight that I could carry forward into future investments, future ventures, and future decisions.