|
|  |
|
|
|
| |
| Mar 01, 2006 9:25 pm |
|
re: re: Which Bootstrapping method makes the most sense? |
| James Griffin Media
| |
>Travis:
>
>
>As to your 4 options:
>
>1. In addition to creating another possible competitior,
>you may place yourself in a delicate position
>regarding "intellectual property" including customer
>lists, customer requirements and other things.
>
This is a great point. And if you are legally safe, it doesn't matter. If the other company feels wronged or is a shark they can sue you and you'll pay thousands to defend yourself. Not a good thing.
>2. AS you said , finding engineers who will work for >equity takes a lot of time. It can be very expensive and >generally creates a very different relationship between >you. (ie they are more partner than employee or >contractor!
I have experience in this and I'm just structuring a new deal now for my dating software. You have to have the right people and not only have good contracts and be on the level but make sure everyone is abiding not only to the letter of the contract but the unwritten spirit.
If you can do it great, but it's very hard work and not a given.
>3. You've already expressed your opinion and feelings
>about "giving up" equity.
>
I don't get his position here, because if he does #2, he gives up equity too. So why is it worse to give equity to a VC but not an engineer? If he could get cash for equity from the investor than use the case to purchase engineering services -- that's much easier.
>4. So therefore - if you want to move forward faster and >can make more in a job than consulting - then this is the >road I would suggest. It can be stressful - but will it >be more so than where you're at today?
I concur with this. I still think he should throw out some biz plans to investors and see if there are any nibbles or bites.
JamesPrivate Reply to James Griffin Media (new win) |
|
| |
|
