by Glenn Matthews on October 19, 2009
I recently had a run in with a company that provided a money back guarantee on their product. When I tried to return the product they made up the fine print as they went along.
Several months ago I received an email from a website that I subscribe to (I should say “used” to subscribe to). The email promoted a new product; a course on how to buy tax leans and tax deeds. I’ve always been interested in the subject but thought the course was a little pricey at $495. What sold me on the product was their 90 day money back, no questions asked, guarantee. I thought that if I didn’t like the course I could send it back for a full refund.
by Glenn Matthews on October 18, 2009
I really enjoyed reading a recent post on a VC blog, discussing the “right” level of ownership you should give up to a VC.
Within the post, the author, Fred Wilson notes that the level of VC ownership is generally “20pcnt, but it is frequently 30pcnt”.
The post raises a very good point about VC’s needing a certain level of ownership, however its my opinion that the said level has no intelligent reason behind it, rather the level is set because of company policy or “just because”. Fred Wilson describes this behavior by VC’s as being unproductive and says that VC’s are putting their needs before the needs of their portfolio companies and the entrepreneurs who form them.
by Glenn Matthews on October 14, 2009
The price of gold leapt to a record peak above 1,070 US dollars per ounce on Wednesday. Most part of the increase was backed by a decrease in the US dollar against the European single currency. The euro surged above 1.49 US dollars for the first time since August 2008.
This post isn’t about gold, nor is it about currency fluctuations, more so, it’s about timing in the market.
I’ve always subscribed to the theory that if everybody is talking about something it’s time to get out.
by Glenn Matthews on October 8, 2009
It has become increasingly important for private equity firms to include drag-along rights in their standard term sheets and investment documents. Drag-along rights can provide private equity firms with an important exit strategy.
What are drag-along and tag-along rights, and what do they do? Both are clauses included within a shareholder’s agreement (and often in investors term-sheets). A drag-along right (also referred to as drag-along clause or bring-along provision) provides an up-front agreement for all shareholders to participate in a sale of shares to a third party. Say for example a third party offers to buy out a company and the majority shareholders wish to accept the deal. A drag-along right will ensure that minority shareholders accept the buy-out and in essence they are dragged into accepting the deal and at the terms negotiated by the majority shareholder. Often the majority is set at 75%, however companies can set the threshold that suits them.
by Glenn Matthews on October 6, 2009
I recently finished reading an interesting book, the 4-hour Workweek by Timothy Ferriss.
Timothy Ferriss encourages his readers to cut out all the fluff in their lives and get back to basics, and he’s a testament to his own preachings. 5 years ago Tim was stuck in his business working countless hours, approaching a nervous breakdown and with little direction to turn for an escape. In this scenario of extreme conditions, Tim resorted to extreme measures, outsourcing the majority of his work to distributors and even Virtual Assistance (Indian based companies that do almost anything asked and for a small price).
by Glenn Matthews on October 1, 2009
It is my belief that the business plan takes on two purposes. Firstly it is a means for you to truly understand your business. Secondly it is a communication tool between your business and potential investors.
I’ve written business plans for the purpose of approval by the board of directors. I’ve also taken that same business plan and re-written it for the presentation to potential investors. With hindsight it seems quite odd, even to me, that someone will write a business plan for the company only to write a different business plan for investors. The company’s purpose didn’t change between writings so why would somebody write two business plans for the one company? Before you attach blame to me, understand that most companies have mimicked this example. They write a business plan just because they were told they needed to then they go ahead and re-write the plan when they need funding from an investor or commercial lender.
