[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Question



Hal Vaughan wrote:


Have you ever tried to start a business? Seriously?
Oh, yes.

If it does, you have a partner who supplies the manufacturing process.

Partner.  Ahh.  Just like the ol' repeated Slashdot comment:

1. Get an idea
2. ?????
3. Profit!

Except you've just switched step 2 with having a partner that will finance you.

It doesn't work that easily. It'd be nice, but it's not the kind of comment I'd expect to hear from someone with experience.
Really?

You perhaps handle the marketing between you.
That's not hard.
It's a field I know well.

You may know the marketing, but you make it quite clear you expect everyone to have magical connections that just fit together when you want to do something.

Let me know when you're ready to discuss real life situations.
O.K.

Common law copyright is a neat idea, but it is about as useful as someone who has written a patent and makes $75,000 a year realizing he has a law suit against Microsoft, who can basically afford to drag it out and bankrupt him and his lawyers long before he ever gets a judgement in court. While the person just might get lucky, the reality of the situation is that he'll go broke before ever getting a chance to make some money.
That's not what the problem is.
It's when Microsoft declare a patent on something you own.
That's when their money makes the difference.
This is where the fiscal imbalance proves unethical, within the context of dragged out court cases.

Poe got $100 for The Raven, but it became popular.  While
he did sign away the rights (he needed the money),

Of course he did, he was a drunk.


No, often it does not.  You've never dealt with an agent or producer.
I wouldn't assume too much here.

Good. You've assumed you knew everything about anything I've said so far. (You must be in marketing, as you claim -- you know how to make everything sound wonderful, whether you know the real situation or not!)

Some
are honest, many are not.
Yep, you've got to be street smart to survive.

Street smart != dishonest
No, it doesn't.
Some of the most honest people I've known have been in the street.
Sometimes, that's the reason they're there.
Let's substitute, 'you've got to know the territory'.

That's why you get a financial partner.

Oh, that easy, is it? Just go out and *poof* there is someone who will give you the money to do it all.

No, I didn't say that.
A little artistic licence, there.



Once again, if you have resources or a track record, it can be easy, but in this day and age, it is not easy. I've talked to loan managers at banks about financing
Waste of time.

-- and I don't mean just as an applicant. One point that came up over and over is that small business are no longer started with loans.

Of course not.
Very volatile market.
50% of small business fails in its first year.
50% of the remainder fails in the second year.
More after that.



After that amount of time, if he's not far enough ahead of the rest of
the market, that's business.
That may work in software, but copyrights apply to a lot besides software.
Every product, and I employ the terminology in its broadest sense, has
its idiosyncracies, but business principle remains the same.

Yes, and that makes my point. There are times one has resources and money and can make something happen quickly. If one does not, and one is either starting from scratch, or is the "average guy",

The average guy will remain average, and this is not a disparaging remark.
Sometimes I think he's the lucky one.
It takes a product with potential, /and /a successful strategy, along with a personality who is distinctly _not_ average.



I started with nothing, and became the third largest promoter in the history of Australia.
I didn't do it inside five years, but by then, I was well on my way.
Beginning, end, and entire middle of story.

I'm glad to hear that you're beginning to do well.
Handling everything yourself sounds like a different strategy.
I hope it works for you.

I've cut a lot from this, but we're getting distinctly OT.



Reply to: