I have a client that has a group of medical clinics that could be very interested in this app as the base to store a variety of different values along with prescription schedules - can you send me an email (see profile).
As a kitesurfer and investor in renewable energy (solar) I really love this company. The founder is one of the pioneers of kitesurfing and was the chief designer for Naish kites when the industry was just starting out. He realized that you didn't need a tower and giant blades to generate power from wind. Neat. Would be great if someday they have a system that can propel boats.
Maybe (eventually) crowdfunding, assuming it ever gets through the rulemaking process of the SEC. And it's not just the $1M from unaccredited investors, you can raise unlimited amounts of money from accredited investors, so the amount of capital you need wouldn't be a limiting factor. Given the numbers of investors who are looking for large returns, plus those that have an affinity for a particular technology, idea, or solution to a social problem, this could be big competition for VC's and maybe the only route to funding for some ideas/industries/technologies.
Please don't hesitate. I am serious and I like talking to customers. Reactivating someone who already decided to trial or subscribe to a product is a fun sale.
This is such good advice and it works. For anyone who's afraid to do this, let me know and I'll do it for you, I'll call it CCCAAS (calling cancelled customers as a service) and I'll generate a report that shows all customers contacted, why they cancelled, or didn't renew, and as a bonus, how many we reactivated for you!
One relatively cheap way to learn about how to observe corporate formalities is to google "legal MCLE" in your state of incorporation/residence/doing business and look for a one hour MCLE course that covers the subject. It will be cheap ($20 or less) and you will have no problem understanding the content. It may also come with checklists and a presentation. I just finished my legal MCLE requirements for California and there are tons of valuable information for entrepreneurs on these types of basic subjects that you can access much more cheaply than using a lawyer.
While it's true that an LLC or other corporate entity CAN protect you from personal liability, it's only a starting point. To insure that the entity is respected (meaning it's assets alone are solely liable for satisfying any judgment) it's important to do at least the following (not an exclusive list):
1. when you form the company, have a decent amount of capital in the company's bank account (yes a separate account in the company's name);
2. make sure you follow all corporate formalities, including:
(a) regular meetings with minutes
(b) updated books and records containing minutes, authorizations/resolutions for company officers to act on behalf of the company, etc.
3. Try to have more than just yourself as an officer (have more than one officer);
4. Keep separate accounts and don't commingle personal and corporate money;
5. Purchase a reasonable amount of liability insurance;
6. Make all required federal and state filings (including employment development department, etc.)
I always get the feeling that lots of startup entrepreneurs get the impression that just setting up a corporation through an online provider is the end of the process, in reality it's just the beginning. If you don't follow through you might as well save your money and just operate as a sole proprietorship.
I can only speak to California utilities, but in CA, by law, utilities are permitted to earn 11% return on capital. As there is no customer choice when it comes to electric power (you only have one provider running a wire to your home), the utilities simply get the rate approved that they need to generate the allowable return. So prices don't "fall", because the utility is constantly investing in new assets (generation, transmission, smart meters, new power purchase agreements) raising their capital base and thus either sustaining or raising the rates (price) to consumers.
Fixed revenue usually. Actually to be more precise, fixed price, but declining revenue because the production goes down as the panels (and inverters) degrade. Usually assumed to be .5% per year. The contracts with SCE are typically not based on market prices.
Nope. The tax incentives go to the investor involved in building the project and are usually captured by a bank that trades the tax credit for an equity investment which lasts for about 5 years (the minimum period to avoid recapture).
I don't see SunPower as being like the others. It's very, very hard to build a new set of railroad tracks so a railroad is pretty much of a monopoly. Anyone can (and does) build solar plants. It just takes capital and patience. Also railroads (and utilities) have immense lobbying capabilities and so are able to get very sweet, ever increasing rates (although for railroads they do of course have to compete with other modes of transport, but I'm sure with rising fuel prices they have huge advantages compared to over the road). SunPower however, as a developer, has to SELL to utilities and have NO pricing power nor real competitive advantage. They also typically sell on long term fixed price contracts in order to obtain financing and because that's typically all the utilities offer. I would be interested to know if Buffet has some kind of swap or other financial product that trades the long term fixed price stability of the investment (although low yielding) for something that provides more yield but is more variable.
Unfortunately they almost always are. The utilities are in the enviable position of buying wholesale power from renewable generators on 20 to 25 year fixed price, flat contracts. Of course they would never agree to sell power to the customers on the same terms - which is why it is great being a utility!
If you're not sure if there is a pain you are solving, try the Nail it Then Scale it cold call test. Cold call 10 target customers and briefly describe what you think their pain is and how your solution eliminates it. Usually you will have to leave a voicemail. If you don't get at least 50% return calls, you haven't identified a pain bad enough to support "a 2 person startup that nobody has ever heard of with a rudimentary solution" - which is what you will be!
As shown by the gentleman that publishes HackerNews Monthly, there's definitely a market for the collection/curation of content, and that business probably scales pretty well.
There have to be all kinds of audiences out there that don't have time for a deep dive into the 'net to find the content they are regularly interested in, setup RSS feeds, etc. Bringing quality content to them that either entertains, educates, or enlightens (not to mention enriches) would seem to be a good business with a very good future.
I think that's a great move by Udacity. I am trying to catch up on unit 6 right now in CS101. It's definitely a challenge to keep up if you are doing the course as a "hobby". Of course I also don't really care about the certs so as long as the course material is available I'm happy.
For noobs like me I highly recommend the CS101 course, I found that a lot of stuff I was struggling with in Learn Python the Hardway (a great resource as well by the way and many thanks to Zed for making it available) and other sources online became clearer to me during the CS101 course.
I am looking forward to CS253:Web Application Engineering next.
1. the only time the pre-prospectus info can differ from the prospectus is before the prospectus is filed.
2. the only people that can legally receive the pre-prospectus information are qualified investors (accredited) or institutions, who supposedly can take care of themselves.
3. if you don't want to read the prospectus but want other information that's "guaranteed" to match the prospectus and you are an individual investor, just read the information that is provided after the prospectus is filed (which is all you should be able to get your hands on anyway, absent the above exclusions).
See my analogy above to income tax filing requirements. It's not an argument against any law but rather reporting requirements. If you lie, cheat or steal, it's against the law. However what you have to do to prove you have not lied, cheated or stolen(prior to any accusation being leveled against you) is the point of reducing the regulatory burden.
I agree that civil litigation can be a terrible method of enforcement, however it's like the criticism of democracy being a terrible form of government but better than the alternative.
The problem with "ex ante" regulations governing conduct is you force a lot of wasteful work on a lot of people and companies that becomes a drag on the economy, productivity, whatever you want to call it.
Let's make an analogy that's appropriate for this time of year. Some people cheat on their taxes. Some cheaters get audited and caught, some don't. Since we know that some people cheat on their taxes and an audit will uncover it should we force every tax filer in the US to submit receipts and other documentation for every deduction claimed on their return, at the time of filing?
Can you imagine how much time that would take for filers and the IRS? Can you imagine the outrage on the part of filers?
The Taibbi article sites to a Bloomberg opinion piece that baldly states that people can lie in their pitch and get away with it. However, if you read the legislation (or at least credible legal analysis of it): A) the pre-prospectus presentations can only be made to qualified investors and institutions (meaning you are supposed to be a sophisticated investor, not the general public and will read or pay someone to read the prospectus when it is filed) and B) the actual regulations that will enact the law haven't been written yet.
There definitely will be (and need to be) reasonable regulations to enact this law, I don't argue that at all. I just think the whole tone and content of this article is over the top and biased. I enjoyed reading his evisceration of GS, but I do think it has influenced his writing about anything having to do with the securities markets or finance in general.
The link does in fact mention auditing but you have to go to the "Jobs Act Alert" linked on that page. I wanted to cite to the "Jobs Act Alert" link, but it's a PDF, so I thought it was easier to cite to html page containing the link.
Your citation to the NY Times only governs "a company's internal financial controls" - not it's financials or independent accounting requirements (which is essentially audited financials).
My original criticism of the Rolling Stone assertion as reproduced by quote in the 37Signals blog post was and is that companies are exempt from independent accounting requirements. That's supported in the information I cited.
Thanks!