Al, Wow... you're really getting petty about this. Yes, I've started 4 companies. Quite frankly, it's none of your business why I left them. I will gladly share that information with those who are considering partnering with me, but you, sir, are looking for ways to further publicly attack my character and I won't allow you.
To answer your question about why I don't front the start-up costs myself, well, I am... I am fronting my portion as will every founder who joins me. Why would I give away ownership to others for nothing? If I do that, they may as well be employees, not co-owners, which defeats the entire purpose of this idea. Google does not know that I am using their image... and they don't need to. It's licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. You'll see that I give the proper attribution at the bottom of the page. If you like, you can educate yourself on the topic here: http://code.google.com/policies.html. On Oct 18, 1:36 pm, Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dave, > > And as a side issue, do Google know you're using one of their android > wall papers as your website? > > Al. > > Al Sutton wrote: > > As for your assertian I have never been an entrepreneur I think this > > kind of shows how misguided you may be because you have made an > > assumption which shows little in the way of research and does not > > reflect reality. > > > To fill you in; I'm co-founder of a (reasonably successful) company > > which produces a piece of software which is not in the mobile space and > > has been sold around the world to customers including HSBC, Fujitsu, > > Unisys, Nike, Red Bull, and several other global companies (as well as > > several which only have a local presence in their own country). In my > > time been involved with startups (who you probably haven't heard of) and > > global companies (such as Reuters, JP Morgan Chase Manhattan, and Cable > > and Wireless who you probably have heard of), so please don't confuse my > > comments with someone who has never see a tax return, doesn't understand > > the reposibilities of a shareholder, and has never set up a company. > > > Given your experience my concern would be; "Why aren't you covering the > > startup costs yourself?", I'm not sure what you mean by saying you've > > been an entrepreneur four times, to be being an entrepreneur is a state > > of mind, you don't sit there and say "Hey, look, I was an entrepreneur > > yesterday, better add that to the tally", you either are one or your > > aren't. If you mean you've started four companies my question would be > > "why?", did you get bored an move on? (in which case why would be get > > involved with you?), or did the businesses fail? (which, after one or > > two failures you could still be learning, but after four it kind of > > indicates your not understanding your mistakes). > > > So my main question to you would be this; Given that you've "been an > > entrepreneur", you have years of experience, and you are going to be > > vetting those who wish to join, why do you expect others to fund the > > startup costs of your idea as opposed to you funding the start-up costs > > and accept it as an investment into potential future earnings from the LLC? > > > Al. > > > AdroitAndroid wrote: > > >> Mark makes some good comments to which I will reply. Al seems to just > >> want to cast aspersions (maybe because he feels his own ventures > >> threatened?). However, I will respond to each in turn. > > >> Al, you have clearly never been an entrepreneur. Businesses have > >> start-up costs for which the founders contribute cash to cover. This > >> is the point of equity: the founders provide the entity with start-up > >> funds (capital) in return for equity (a secondary claim on the assets > >> of the firm). I have been in software development for decades as > >> well, and been an entrepreneur four times. In no case have I ever > >> seen a start-up begin with the founders not putting up some of their > >> own money. Confidence in skill is not the issue. Members will not be > >> accepted if we do not think they can produce high quality products or > >> act as contributing members of the organization. As far as educating > >> the members on the legal and fiduciary responsibilities of being a > >> member of an LLC, I intend to give a basic education, but leave it up > >> to the individual to take responsibility for him/herself. Yes, there > >> are other Android resources out there, but the idea here is that we > >> will be a cohesive team, developing a proprietary set of code which > >> the entire team will understand and not have to explain to some > >> outside person for help. > > >> Mark, thank you for your well-reasoned post. What I am proposing is > >> similar to a co-op idea... but you're right, it's for profit. The > >> difference is that the founding developers, who I am recruiting via > >> this thread, will be the ones to share in that profit. I should not > >> have used the term "founders" when I referred to myself and my > >> associates who are trying to lead the effort to organize this, because > >> everyone who gets involved now will be a founder and owner. Everyone > >> will share equally. Let me repeat that... EVERYONE WILL SHARE > >> EQUALLY. My earlier use of the "founders" term was misleading and I > >> apologize. Anyone that joins now WILL be a founder. Does this > >> satisfy your concerns? > > >> On Oct 18, 5:01 am, Mark Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>> Replying to OP via Al's post to keep this on -discuss: > > >>>> AdroitAndroid wrote: > > >>>>> The application fee was meant to provide the LLC with startup cash, > > >>> If you were proposing a sellers cooperative (e.g., Ocean Spray for > >>> cranberries), I doubt anyone would be complaining. That's because co-ops > >>> have specific structures and laws. Moreover, they are not-for-profits > >>> themselves, meaning they cannot hold onto much in the way of retained > >>> earnings and profits from sales must flow out to the owners. > > >>>>> Note that AdroitAndroid is not an agency. You won't just be talent > >>>>> farmed out for corporate profit. You will be AN OWNER who SHARES in > >>>>> the profit. > > >>> Usually, when a startup starts up, it recruits a set of founders, who > >>> then jointly decide things like business structure, ownership > >>> percentages, rough-cut plans for profit distribution, and the like. In > >>> your case, it sounds like you're dictating terms to some set of limited > >>> partners, employees, or contractors. > > >>> If you want to create a for-profit LLC, that is fine and is highly > >>> commendable. I own one myself, and in the past have owned another > >>> outright and been a founding partner in a third. However, you will get > >>> less skepticism if you treat this like a normal startup and recruit in > >>> founders, rather than whatever you consider this second tier of > >>> participants. > > >>>>> The founders of this organization are experienced technologists, > >>>>> entrepreneurs, and management consultants who have strong professional > >>>>> credentials and who can provide professional references for anyone who > >>>>> has doubts about credibility. > > >>> IMHO, a virtual corporation of the type you describe should have zero > >>> non-founders. That's zero, zilch, zippo, bupkes. The founders may have > >>> varied backgrounds, or they may all do the same thing (e.g., > >>> programming) and plan to contract out everything else, but they're all > >>> roughly equals. > > >>> I don't get the sense that's what you're doing. It feels like there is a > >>> caste of founders and a caste of workers, where the caste of founders > >>> has already been determined. > > >>> Again, if you want to create a virtual corporation, that's perfectly > >>> fine. But you will get less skepticism if you come across like a peer > >>> humbly recruiting other peers. > > >>> -- > >>> Mark Murphy (a Commons Guy)http://commonsware.com > > >>> Android Training on the Ranch! -- Mar 16-20, > >>> 2009http://www.bignerdranch.com/schedule.shtml --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
