Startup Exemption

Entries tagged as ‘Sherwood Neiss’

The 80-20 Rules Applied to Crowdfunding – Why Larger Single Investments Will be Critical

December 26, 2011 · Leave a Comment

According to Wikipedia, The Pareto principle also known as the 80-20 rule states that, for many events, roughly 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes.  The validity of the 80-20 rule can be seen throughout the economy.

Why is the 80-20 rule important to consider in relation to the Crowdfunding bills that are moving through congress?  Because where Congress sets the Crowdfund Investing limits, will determine if this legislation will create or destroy jobs and innovation. The Startup Exemption framework originally suggested $10,000 or 10% of an investors Adjusted Gross Income (AGI).  Our rationale for the $10,000/10% AGI was to cap the maximum an individual could invest based on their income but also cap the total amount anyone could put into one endeavor at $10,000. This was to provide significant investor protection for unaccredited investors who choose to invest in this high-risk asset class yet allow higher net worth individuals for flexibility to use their cash as they see fit.

The current bills before Congress each limit the maximum amount an investor can risk at different levels.  The $10,000/10% AGI we advocate matches what is in HR2930.  The Senate bills take different and more dramatically smaller positions; between $500 & $1,000.   If these lower caps from the Senate bills are enacted, it will kill the value of this legislation and will dramatically limit or eliminate the possibility of any new jobs or innovation being created via Crowdfund Investing.

Applying the 80-20 rule to crowdfunding, the theory would assume that 80% of the crowd will provide the majority of the count of contributions but the 20% of the crowd will provide 80% of the dollar value of the financing.  If this theory is true, then it is crucial that the 20% of the investors that will provide 80% of the investment dollars are able to provide larger dollar investments.

To prove this, we reached out to several of the major crowdfunding platforms and asked them for statistics on a few of their larger projects.  We specifically asked for the larger projects because we anticipate the average amount entrepreneurs will seek in their initial rounds will be $50,000.  Here’s what the data showed.

On Crowdcube, the UK’s first and largest crowdfunding platform that just successfully funded the first £1 million (approx. $1.57M) project (need we say any more about how powerful crowdfunding will be), the data revealed the following:

  • From a group of projects that raised collectively $280,800, individuals who invested less than $1,000 accounted for 81.2% of the total number of investors.
  • The remaining 18.8% of investors, who invested greater than $1,000, accounted for 93.8% of the total financing!

Indiegogo, one of the largest donation-based crowdfunding platforms which has been around longer was able to pull data from a much larger data set.  (They have funded over 25,000 projects).

  • The data indicated the more money one raises, the more reliant on $500+ contributions one is.
  • For campaigns that raised between $500 – $5,000, 24% of funding came from $500+ contributions.
  • For campaigns that raised over $5,000, 46% of total funding came from $500+ contributions.
  • For campaigns that raised over $10,000, 50% of total funding came from $500+ contributions.
  • For campaigns that raised over $20,000, 53% of total funding came from $500+ contributions.
  • For campaigns that raised over $50,000, 65% of total funding came from $500+ contributions

Profounder, one of the first to try equity-based crowdfunding but forced to augment its model for the time being, was able to share these statistics from all projects funded on their site:

  • 24% of the total number of investors contributed less than $1K.  These individuals delivered just 4% of all funding raised.
  • 76% of individuals who invested greater than $1,000 delivered 96% of all funds raised.
  • The average investment was a little over $1,700/ investor.
  • These statistics closely match what Crowdcube discovered.

The data demonstrates how important it is to allow investors the opportunity to make investment decisions at a level that is appropriate to their income/net worth, while capping the total investment level for all unaccredited investors. $10,000 or 10% of AGI (whichever is smaller) should be that limit.  The larger contributions are critically important to successfully funding companies.  If overly restrictive limits of $500, $1,000 or even $5,000 are enacted it would have a grossly negative impact in the potential for crowdfunding.

What this theory leaves out though is the importance of the small dollar donations from something other than money — a voice and a potential customer base.  While 20% of a crowd might provide 80% of the financing, if it weren’t for the 80% who expressed interest in a company in the first place by pledging small dollar funds, those larger investors would not be stepping up to the plate with 80% of the financing.  There is validity to the voice the 80% puts behind their dollars because it shows that there is interest from the crowd for the product.  Market research like that prior to launching is invaluable and something any traditional financier would look for.

We urge the Senate to enact the investment limits from our framework: $10,000/10% AGI (Whichever is lower).

 

 

Share

Categories: crowdfunding · Jason Best · Sherwood Neiss
Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Crowdfund Investing: 13 Lessons from the Guys Who Brought Crowdfunding to Washington

December 20, 2011 · Leave a Comment

Image from crowdsourcing.org

This article was originally published on crowdsourcing.org.

A year ago, Jason Best, Zak Cassady-Dorion and I were deep in the trenches either trying to launch, grow or expand our entrepreneurial endeavors. There was a common thread to all our stories: capital was scarce. The trickle-down effect of the global recession was having a negative impact on our ability to innovate. Without access to capital, how could we grow and hire? If jobs were the economic stimulus needed to lift our nation out of the recession, then someone needed to address the capital crisis facing entrepreneurs and small businesses, our nation’s job creators.

With that, we sat down and crafted a framework to allow an entrepreneur to raise a limited amount of equity capital from his friends, family or community using the tenants of crowdfunding. We then embarked upon changing outdated security laws, which were written for a period in time that did not reflect today’s technology, the internet or the flow of information. We further vetted our framework at a symposium we held in San Francisco attended by security lawyers, academics, investors, crowdfunding platforms and entrepreneurs. Buy-in was building from the community at large.

With the help of Karen Kerrigan, president and CEO of the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council, Washington started to listen. President Obama came out in favor of our proposal to make equity-based crowdfunding legal, then the House drafted the first bill — H.R. 2930, the Entrepreneur Access to Capital Act — and, in a rare burst of bipartisan support, passed it 407-17. Now there are two bills in front of the Senate. All signs are pointing to some version of crowdfunding for entrepreneurs being legal the beginning of 2012.

While we aren’t done yet, our story is one of trial and perseverance, of old vs. new. Many people have asked us what we’ve learned along the way, so here are 13 lessons from our journey to get this legislation passed…

1) Giving up is not an option.
2) When you’re in a recession and you have a solution to the jobs crisis, people listen.
3) There is power in a few voices. Showing up in Washington is more than half the battle. Making your voice heard does resonate and people on Capitol Hill can and have been incredibly gracious with their time, experience and knowledge.
4) The people trying to run the government aren’t bad people. As a matter of fact, the majority of people there work insanely hard for the good of our nation, but the bureaucracy makes it difficult to understand and the media spins public perception of our elected officials.
5) On the Hill, both sides need to feel like they are winning. In order to get to the end goal, you need to present Washington with 100% of something that will be reduced to 25%, whereby each party can add back bits and pieces, bringing it up to 85% or so. We might not get 100% of what we want, but both parties will feel satisfied that they did their job.
6) Fear is the enemy of progress. The special interests have spent countless hours and dollars to derail the discussion from entrepreneurship, opportunity and jobs to focus on fraud. Fraud sells like sex and their message resonates with the media even though it defies logic. We haven’t shut down the markets because of fraud.
7) It is true, money and special interests (lobbies) control Washington in an unhealthy way and eerily so. They don’t try too hard to hide who they represent. You quickly come to understand how the special interests can be nice to your face and stab you in the back. If only you could have been present for some of the nice chats we’ve had with the special interests only to see what they espouse in the media.
8) Believe it or not, there is logic to some of what the opposition has to say. Fraud is an important point. Social media and crowd vetting has shown how we can mitigate this.
9) It is easier for the opposition to focus on the past than craft a working solution for the future. The opposition isn’t focused on helping the American economy and creating jobs. They don’t claim to be. And yet no one asks them, if you see the problems in the capital markets firsthand, why don’t you see the solutions as well?
10) In America, one’s right to use one’s money as he see fit is trumped by the government’s right to tell you how you can invest it. Isn’t there a first amendment case here?
11) Lobbying is exhausting; it takes a lot of patience and you have to get comfortable educating and repeating the same information over and over.
12) Nothing in life is free. This has cost us a lot of personal time, energy and money. We are grateful to people that have supported our struggle and are dismayed by those who stand to benefit the most but not participated materially or financially. It is no wonder why special interests succeed with the endless flow of capital to their coiffeurs. Couch surfing — thank you various D.C. friends — is exhausting and eating up your own financial resources is painful.
13) And once more: giving up is not an option.

Helping Fund the Fight to Make Crowdfund Investing LEGAL

Changing the Security Laws isn't easy and it sure isn't cheap. Everything that you see here costs us money. If you support our cause, if you wish to see it legal for entrepreneurs to go to their friends, family and community to crowdfund money, then help us fight the cause with a small donation. You have no idea how much every dollar helps us achieve this goal!
$1,185Raised10,000Target
Choose donation amount:
Share

Categories: crowdfunding · Sherwood Neiss
Tagged: , , , , , , , ,

Podcast: How the “Crowd” in Crowdfund Investing Provides Investor Protection

December 14, 2011 · Leave a Comment

The Startup Exemption and the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council had a briefing on December 13, 2011 at the law offices of Jones Day in Washington, DC to brief Senate Staffers and the Media on how Crowfunding currently work, how it will work under the law and answer questions.  The following is a live Powerpoint Podcast of the presentation.  Sherwood Neiss is speaking during this part of the briefing.  He is one of the partners and Chief Advocates of the Startup Exemption, which is the group that brought the Crowdfund Investing framework to Washington which is the basis for all 3 bills in front of Congress.

 

 

Share

Categories: Sherwood Neiss
Tagged: , , , ,

Startup Exemption & SBE Council to Hold Crowdfunding Briefing for Senate Staffers

December 10, 2011 · Leave a Comment

Crowdfunding Briefing, December 15, 10:00 a.m.
December 7, 2011

Please Join SBE Council for this Briefing Event

Crowdfund Investing: A Modern and Transparent Platform to Help Entrepreneurs Access Capital

December 13th
10:00 a.m. -11:00 a.m.

 Featuring

Woodie Neiss, Co-FounderStartup Exemption

Freeman White, CEO & Founder, Launcht.com

Karen Kerrigan, President & CEO, SBE Council (Moderator)

Crowdfund investing legislation passed the U.S. House 407-17. Now, the U.S. Senate is considering similar legislation that would modernize SEC regulations and allow entrepreneurs to raise and identify new sources of capital through crowdfunding platforms. How will these platforms work to help entrepreneurs raise capital while protecting investors?  How do startups use crowdfunding currently?  How would startups and startup investors like to use crowdfunding in the future?  What about fraud? Experts on crowdfunding and advocates for reform legislation will answer questions about this transformative approach for raising capital.

Briefing will take place at:

 Jones Day
• 51 Louisiana Avenue, N.W.     • 
Washington, D.C. 20001-2113

  

Rsvp: (703)-242-5840, or mvaught@sbecouncil.org

  

Share

Categories: crowdfunding · Sherwood Neiss
Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Frustrating Day for Crowdfunding at the Senate

December 1, 2011 · Leave a Comment

Today was a frustrating day for Crowdfunding.  The Senate Banking Committee, one of the most powerful committees on Capitol Hill held a hearing called, ‘Spurring Job Growth Through Capital Formation While Protecting Investors.’  It should have been called, ‘Why We Need to Stop Americans From Investing $1,000 into their Community Entrepreneurs.’

Anyone attending today’s hearing could tell it was to listen to special interests and regulators talk about the risks inherent in investing under the current system and why we need to protect consumers.  There was no discussion about protecting people from spending their $1,000 paycheck on a lottery ticket, gambling it on Red in Vegas, nor spending more than that on their credit cards and being locked into interest payments upwards of 36% on the balance.   For some reason, the only area they feel we need to provide prudent consumer protection is when a person is making a decision where they want to invest their money.  Why?  Because the expectation is different.  Yes, we expect to win the lottery.  Oh wait, no we don’t.

What’s the point of having a hearing about small businesses and capital formation if there isn’t one panelist that is an entrepreneur, small business owner or crowdfunding expert?  How do you have a balanced discussion of crowdfunding if there is no one on the panel to discuss how crowdfunding works, the merit of allowing the community to back their local entrepreneurs, how the crowd will only fund those ideas they collectively decide are worth and how the social media connectivity will expose fraud and foster winning ideas.  More importantly, if you don’t have a crowdfunding representative on the panel, how do you expose the blatant misrepresentations from the other panelists about crowdfunding?

One of the most frustrating parts of the hearing was when John Coffee the anti-crowdfunding law professor from Columbia said crowdfunding could lead to a situation where unlicensed, nefarious salesmen “who look like Danny Devito,” could set up shop in a bar or coffeehouse and peddle risky offerings to unsophisticated investors. And “In its current form, [Senator Brown’s] bill could be called the Boiler Room Legalization Act of 2011,” Boy does this drama sell.  His fabrication immediately became the cover story for Investment News.

If you are reading this, you understand that the Crowdfund Investing framework we put together is based on a few main principles:

  1. Social Networking – you are raising capital from your friends, family and community.  Your 1st degree connections.
  2. Communication – you must clearly articulate to your friends, family and community what you are doing, why you need this money, why they should trust you to do what you say and why this is a good investment opportunity for the crowd.
  3. All or nothing financing – using the principles of lean startup, you should set the minimum amount of money that you need to accomplish the milestones that you set out to your investors.  If you don’t hit that funding target, you aren’t funded.

You also know that the very first thing we advocate is a fraud/background check to keep unsavory people from participating.  That Crowdfund Investing platforms will need to be registered with the SEC and that we advocate for communicating who (including name, address, social security number, etc) is raising money on crowdfunding platforms and sending that information to both the SEC and the State Regulators.

What the panelists were discussing today was another form of Reg D offering without the safeguards that we’ve been advocating for 11 months.  Not one of the panelists today acknowledged how crowdfunding works or any of the principles above. Obviously, just looking at them, it is clear that none of them have a Facebook page, have tweeted or blogged to a community that follows them.  No wonder they don’t understand how crowdfund investing would work.

Why is it that the people who are crafting the rules under which entrepreneurs can raise capital are the same people who benefit from the rules not changing or changing in their favor?

At the end of the day, why not focus on what we do know.  Crowdfunding has been around for over 5 years now.  Over half a billion dollars has been given away and while we still expect people to do what they say with their money, no one has complained of fraud.  It’s worked well enough up to now, under our framework it will continue to work well but have the added benefit of spurring entrepreneurialism and JOBS!

Share

Categories: Crowd Fund Investing · crowdfunding · Sherwood Neiss
Tagged: , , , , , , , ,

Post Rally Update

November 22, 2011 · Leave a Comment

We have a problem and we need YOUR HELP. Everyone we met with last week after the rally said the same thing:  “If you don’t get this bill passed in the Senate by the end of the year, you will have no chance of passing it at all because 2012 is an election year.”  If you read no further, please click this link to identify your Senators, call them and tell them “I support HR2930, the Crowdfunding Bill as a solution to getting capital flowing to community entrepreneurs so that we can create jobs!” It may sound crazy but grass roots calls are powerful.

12 months ago, everyone said allowing an entrepreneur to go to his friends, family and community to raise small amounts of capital to fund their startup or small business would never be made legal.  After the last 9 months of work, we have proven there IS a market for Crowdfund Investing (CFI) and that President Obama, the US House of Representatives, the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council and the US Chamber of Commerce all agree. Crowdfund investing is a part of the solution to the jobs crisis.

Now the problem, the SEC, State regulators and special interests with DEEP pockets and tons of influence are throwing a full-frontal assault at the Senate to stop our progress and they are using fear mongering by spreading nonspecific threats of fraud!

They are marketing “fraud” because, like sex, it sells newspapers.  They want you to focus on some seemly scary generic issue from the past rather than focusing on how today’s technology, Internet and social media can identify winning ideas and fund them. They don’t want you to focus on how crowdfunding by nature will expose fraud and they are avoiding the basic way all investors are taught to protect themselves against loss, DIVERSIFICATION.  WHY?  To protect their turf and dollars.

How can they claim their number one concern is ‘investor protection’ when they haven’t brought anyone to justice for the financial meltdown?  According to their argument, the financial markets should have ceased to exist with the 2008 financial meltdown because of fraud and loss of investor confidence. However, the markets DIDN’T stop functioning because people understand the risks and rewards of investing, especially over the long-term.  Why then, do special interests treat CFI any different?  CFI will do a much better job at backing winning ideas with money, experience, knowledge, marketing power and investor protection than any one investment an individual makes in a Fortune 500 company or someone they don’t know who comes to them with a Reg D offering.

Fraud historically has been one-to-one.   The principals of crowdfunding are based on many-to-many communication in an OPEN DIALOG where NO investor will partake if an entrepreneur hasn’t won over the confidence of the crowd.  We’d love to think that crowdfunding has the ability to finance 100% of the ideas, but history shows that only 40% of the ideas will be successful in raising money via CFI. Not every idea is great and the crowd is able to determine this.  That’s what we call investor protection at work.

They tell us to our faces they are willing to work with us but their quotes in the media reveal the opposite.  They need to join the Internet Age.  The way we did things in the past is NOT the way we will do them in the future.  They need to look at how we mitigate fraud through crowd-vetting.  Understand that social media is based on connectivity and trust.  And using the principles of crowdfunding we can get a limited amount of capital from our friends, family and community to innovate, create jobs and not be left behind China!

We need more of your support to stop the nonsense.  We need your financial support to help offset the costs (travel, marketing, additional rallying, etc) of getting the message to the Senate (Jason, Zak and I as well as Karen Kerrigan of the SBE Council have been incurring all the costs on our own). We also need you to call your Senators and tell them you are in favor of the Crowdfunding bill that went thru the house, HR 2930.  We aren’t looking for long-term financing.  This bill either passes by the end of the year or dies for good as everyone in Washington told us.  Remember January 1st is the beginning of an election year.  The special interests are banking on the fact that we don’t have the interest, support or money of those that this would most benefit.  We need to prove them wrong!

Please donate here:

Helping Fund the Fight to Make Crowdfund Investing LEGAL

Changing the Security Laws isn't easy and it sure isn't cheap. Everything that you see here costs us money. If you support our cause, if you wish to see it legal for entrepreneurs to go to their friends, family and community to crowdfund money, then help us fight the cause with a small donation. You have no idea how much every dollar helps us achieve this goal!
$1,185Raised10,000Target
Choose donation amount:
Latest donations:
  • 2015/03/06 12:27 AM Chris Scheppler donated $ 10.00
  • 2013/04/12 5:22 PM Shaan Sharma donated $ 10.00
  • 2013/02/07 1:27 AM Daniel Cavallaro donated $ 25.00
  • 2012/12/14 4:20 AM James Wheeler donated $ 25.00
  • 2012/08/28 12:59 PM Daryl Bryant donated $ 100.00
Share

Categories: crowdfund investing · crowdfunding · Jason Best · Sherwood Neiss
Tagged: , , , ,

More Proof that Crowdfund Investing is Less Risky than the Special Interest Opponents Say

November 22, 2011 · Leave a Comment

The following is an excerpt from Kevin Lawton, the author of the Crowdfunding Revolution.

I recently re-ran a quick study of the risk-vs-reward profile of penny stocks vs initial angel investments in startups (data from the Kauffman Foundation’s AIPP).  See below.  It’s yet another confirmation that early stage investments are actually less risky and have better returns than “penny stocks” (which the public has access to without limitation).

Fraud has been trotted out as the ad naseum bogeyman, but it’s been nothing but a red herring.  Failure is the issue.  Given any degree of risk, a portfolio is necessary to mitigate against investment failure.  So far, I can not find a person (at least one who has any wealth left) who does not have a portfolio.  And thus, for any high-risk asset class where one can lose 50% of the time, having 1% of fraud is a tiny and noisy component in investment failure.

The issue has always been an education thing (i.e. the portfolio).  Beyond that, if a system suppresses crowdfunding in a futile attempt to fight the 1 unit of fraud, it will not only suppress the 99 units of investment, but often a 3x .. 10x economic multiplier (so up to a 1000 units).  Most of the crowdfunding projects tend to have a geographic locality component.  And as Amy Cortese points out in Locavesting, local businesses have a strong local economic multiplier.

But I’m most curious why we are starving private equity of some serious profits and deal flow.  Please see my brief post about how I applied a black-box hedge fund technique to amp up Venture Capital IRR from 30% to 46%.  Allowing crowdfunding platforms to flourish, opens up the door for some bigger players to access investments in smaller companies, and frankly eat some of the VC pie.

Crowdfunding platforms will include crowdsourced diligence & fraudster detection, which will rival the response time and accuracy of anything that Venture Capital has ever seen. We just need the government to get the heck out of the way…

-Kevin Lawton

Author of The Crowdfunding Revolution and serial entrepreneur

Share

Categories: Crowd Fund Investing · Jason Best · Kevin Lawton · Sherwood Neiss
Tagged: , , , , , , , , ,

Crowdfund Investing – The Future of Startup Financing

November 21, 2011 · 13 Comments

Want to learn everything you need to know about crowdfunding to be a success?  Click here or click the image below.

Screen Shot 2014-05-15 at 4.47.39 PM

Buy our Book!

Buy our Book!

Startup Exemption is the name entrepreneurs Sherwood Neiss, Jason Best and Zak Cassady-Dorion created to describe their Crowdfund Investing (CFI) framework.  The framework is an exemption under Regulation D Securities Offerings that would allow startups and small businesses to raise a limited amount of seed and growth capital from their social networks using SEC-registered websites.  Their framework was the basis for the four Crowdfunding bills introduced in Congress and endorsed by the President.  Their first bill passed the US House in November, 2011, 407-17 and the US Senate on March 22, 2012 as part of the JOBS Act with a vote 73-26. The path from idea to law in 460 days can be found at: www.startupexemption.com & www.legalizecrowdfunding.org.

Since the President signed the bill into law, they have started Crowdfund Capital Advisors, a strategy and technology consulting firm for investors, entrepreneurs, governments and NGO’s.  They can be found speaking globally about the shift crowdfund investing is going to make, how it will spur entrepreneurship & innovation and create millions of jobs!

 

Share

Categories: Funding Gap · Petition · Uncategorized · Woodie Neiss · Zak Cassady-Dorion
Tagged: , , , , , , , , ,

VIDEO – What Does Crowdfunding Mean?

November 21, 2011 · Leave a Comment

Thanks to Congressman McHenry’s staff for putting together this amazing video on the Rally 4 Crowdfunding

McHenry Addresses Crowdfunding Rally

 

Share

Categories: Congressman Patrick McHenry · Crowd Fund Investing · Jason Best · Sherwood Neiss
Tagged: , , , , , , , , ,

Post Rally Update – Progress and Backlash by Special Interests

November 19, 2011 · Leave a Comment

Dear Crowdfund Investing (CFI) Followers,

The rally was a HUGE success.  How do we know?  The regulators have launched a full-frontal assault against us in the Senate and are trying to kill Crowdfund Investing for good in the next 6 weeks.  Here’s what you need to know in 3 sections: 1) What you can do now, 2) What’s happening next week (SENATE HEARING Dec 1st!) and 3) Highlights from last week:

WHAT YOU CAN DO NOW:

o   Click this link to identify your Senators, call them and tell them “I support HR2930, the Crowdfunding Bill as a solution to getting capital flowing to community entrepreneurs so that we can create jobs!” It may sound crazy but grass roots calls are powerful.

o   We need your financial support to help offset the mounting costs (travel, marketing, additional rallying, etc.) of getting the message to the Senate.

o   We need you to recruit other supporters!  Please send this to your friends, family and community and say, “I NEED YOU TO HELP ME STOP THE REGULATORS THAT REFUSE TO JOIN THE INTERNET AGE.  WE HAVE A SOLUTION TO THE JOBS CRISIS BUT THE REGULATORS ARE STAGING A TURF WAR THAT DRAMATICALLY HINDERS ENTREPRENEURSHIP. ONLY THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE CAN CHANGE THE LAW TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR ENTREPRENEURS TO ACCESS CAPITAL, INNOVATE, AND HIRE AMERICANS!”

WHAT’S HAPPENING NEXT WEEK:

o   The Senate Banking Committee is holding a hearing on December 1st for which they still haven’t guaranteed us a seat at the table (crazy how you can bring this stuff to Washington and not be included in the hearing on the subject).

o   We plan on hosting a luncheon for Senate Staffers the beginning of December to walk them through how CFI works and answer any questions/fears they might have about letting entrepreneurs raise capital from their social networks.

o   We MUST push for a vote before the end of the year!  If we do not get a vote by the end of 2011, it is unlikely the laws will change because next year is an election year.

HIGHLIGHTS FROM LAST WEEK:

–       NPR, The Wall Street Journal and Fast Company covered the event.   Much thanks to everyone who came to the rally, everyone who sponsored the rally and Representative McHenry & Maloney for speaking at the rally.

–       We confronted our most vocal opponents at the SEC Small Business Capital Forum.

o   Heath Abshure (Arkansas Securities Dept.) told us while they are in favor of crowdfunding (funny how this isn’t what he says in the media) their number one concern is ‘investor protection’ and market confidence.

o   We responded with 2 questions that fell on blank stares:

1) If investor protection is so important, why haven’t they brought anyone to justice for the 2008 financial meltdown?  

2) If fraud leads to the collapse of the markets due to lost confidence, why haven’t the financial markets ceased to exist with the 2008 financial meltdown?

o   NOTE: If the broader markets are where the fraud is being perpetrated why isn’t the SEC focusing their energies on combating and stopping fraud there while letting the crowd take over in their community?

–       We met with 9 Senate offices.

o   Republicans are in favor of the legislation from a Jobs perspective and cutting the bureaucratic tape which inhibits access to capital for entrepreneurs.

o   Democrats (including the President) are in favor of Jobs and democratizing the financial market so that not only the rich are allowed to participate.

o   Both sides understand that the Internet has fundamentally changed the way we do business and hence it only makes sense that it should change the way we also do financing in the future.

–       HOWEVER, State Regulators and special interests are throwing a full-frontal assault to stop our progress and KILL CROWDFUND INVESTING.

o   They are using nonspecific cases of fraud to halt our progress because fraud, like sex and war, sells newspapers.

o   They are doing this because they think we are encroaching on their territory and money.

o   They are detracting from the conversation (JOBS via access to capital) without taking time to understand the advances in technology, the Internet, and how social media has led to transparency and accountability.

o   They want you to think there will be millions of cases of fraud when the bigger issue is failure. The hedge against failure is portfolio diversification.

o   Less than 40% of CFI ideas will ever be funded, and those that are funded, will be by people who know the entrepreneur (true investor protection at work).

o   They want you to focus on fraud because they don’t understand that Crowdfund Investing is based on many-to-many communication between an entrepreneur and many investors in a open dialog as opposed to one-to-one fraud.

o   They want to distract you from the benefits of this bill because they know that January 1st starts an election year and this bill will die if it isn’t passed into law before then and focus shifts to election politics.

Entrepreneurs, ideas, capital, businesses and jobs.  You can have many entrepreneurs with thousands of ideas but you’ll NEVER HAVE ONE BUSINESS NOR JOB WITHOUT CAPITAL.  We need to pick up where Wall Street and the Banks have left off.  The Regulators are standing in the way simply because they don’t stand to earn a commission.  Join the cause.  Spread the word and let’s get Joe the Entrepreneur back to Innovating so that we can create JOBS and get us out of this recession!

Sincerely,

Sherwood, Jason & Zak

 

 

Share

Categories: Jason Best · Sherwood Neiss · Woodie Neiss · Zak Cassady-Dorion
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , ,