**DISCLAIMER: This page only represents a brief description of the “Service” in which I intend to offer to investors that are having difficulty with analyzing the proposed financial projections. This in no way is representative of a contract.**
Are you a venture capitalist that’s inundated with start-up proposal after start-up proposal after start-up proposal after start-up proposal?
Are you having a difficult time with understanding the unreal goals set forth by those pesky, money-starved, would-be entrepreneurs that are embedded underneath the dirty mounds of incomprehensible math and tricky ROI projections?
Are you sick-and-tired of having your e-mail inbox cluttered with executive summaries imparting someone’s ideas about yet another “high-tech” start-up company? Do you see them the way I do–as nothing more than another iteration of a start-up company you heard about for the first time just a week prior?
Are the people that send you inquiries in reference to a business proposal aware of the fact that the salaries of CEOs are not immune from wage stagnation, especially here in the United States? Salaries of CEOs are based on the supply and demand of CEOs. Let’s face the facts, man: a lot of Americans can barely manage their own households much less the morning shift at McDonald’s. In developing States (what the general public erroneously dub as “countries”), as their talent pool increases, they will be producing CEOs that will go toe-to-toe in competition with American CEOs, therefore, American CEOs will face the same declining, stagnating wages. Do any of the business proposals that you’re currently reading, in 2013, state this fact?
Do any of the business proposals you venture capitalists and domestic/global investors peruse through on a daily basis go deeply in detail on how the would-be entrepreneur intends to compensate his/her workers? Do they know that they, the prospective employer, cannot set wages above market rates? Doing so will violate the “laws” of Economics and eventually result in the substantial loss of jobs and also lower incomes.
Are the majority of the business proposals centered on innovations in the “high-tech” industry? Like what? 3-D television production? Do they want to end up like Zenith? I ask that because it’s practically little-to-no problem at all for companies outside the U.S. to out-compete companies here in the States seeing how American companies are having a hard time competing with the wage disparities that leave the American worker incapable of competing globally. Why do you think Ford is busy building auto plants in Southwest Asia?
Answer: Wages here in the United States will continue to decline for decades to come as major manufacturing development shifts from Southeast Asia to Southwest Asia to India and then to Central Asia and then on into sub-Saharan Africa.
Investors need someone that will be forthright about the financial projections constructed on the “hopes and dreams” of would-be entrepreneurs. That is why I, Desmond, am offering to extend my specialized skill (defined herein as the “Service”) in giving you venture capitalists optimal financial review in exchange of only 1.1856% (defined as the “Equivalent”) charge for the “Service” and doubled (2.3712%) IF–and only IF–your firm makes the sound decision to finalize the investment case based upon the inclusion of my review of the potential investment case (defined herein as the “Proposal”). Please note that the “Service” I, Desmond, intend to offer will be IN ADDITION to the review already bestowed upon you from your firm’s financial analysts. The “Service” I, Desmond, intend to provide your firm IS NOT a substitute of the analyses conducted by those employed by your firm.
So, if your firm makes the decision to permit me, Desmond, to review your potential investment case’s financial projection, then your firm agrees (in “Contract”) to compensate me, Desmond, the “Equivalent” (1.1856%) as compensation for completion of agreed-upon “Service” (the reviewing of the potential investment case’s financial projections). My offer of my service is not solely dependent as an example, let’s say a potential investment case is in need of $30,000,000 USD–the charge I would command in exchange for the “Service” will be the “Equivalent” (1.1856%, defined herein as the “Equivalent”) of the capital pursued in the investment case, i.e., the $30,000,000 USD. Let me state that the “Equivalent” is separate from the capital in pursuit by the investment case, not a part of the capital in pursuit.
So, if the capital in pursuit by the investment case (the “Proposal”) is $30,000,000 USD, the “Equivalent” (1.1856%) would be multiplied by $30,000,000 USD ($30,000,000 USD * 1.1856%), making the compensation (of the “Equivalent”) $355,680 USD the product sum of the “Equivalent”. Note that this is an example. Also take into consideration that this is the compensation for merely providing just the “Service”. If your firm makes the finalized decision to submit the capital in pursuit to the potential investment case AFTER being provided with the “Service” on part of me, Desmond, then the “Equivalent” (1.1856%) becomes doubled to the compensation percentage of (2.3712%) as the “Adjusted Equivalent”, making the overall compensation (meaning both the initial compensation for the “Service” provided AND your firm’s decision to submit the capital in pursuit) in the exampled amount of [$30,000,000 USD * 2.3712%] equaling to $711,360 USD.
That seems like a lot–and it is–however, both the “Equivalent” and the “Adjusted Equivalent” are conditional. The “Equivalent” will be subject to a division of percentages; 40% of the 1.1856%–let’s say, $355,680 USD * .40–which would be $142,272 USD (once again, this is part of the example). This condition is herein defined as the “Initial Equivalent”. Understand, that 40% of the “Equivalent” (the 1.1856%) is the amount that’s due when the “Service” conducted by me, Desmond, has been initiated. The remaining 60% of the “Equivalent” is due after the “Service” is complete (or has been closed). This condition is herein defined as the “Closing Equivalent”.
The amount of the both the “Initial Equivalent” and the “Closing Equivalent” may seem like much to you venture capitalists, and it is, but that’s dependent on the amount of the potential investment case sum (herein defined as the “Proposal”). Regardless of the amount in the “Proposal”, the “Equivalent” remains at 1.1856%; the “Adjusted Equivalent” remains at 2.3712%; the “Initial Equivalent” remains at 40% of 1.1856% (the “Equivalent”); and the “Closing Equivalent” remains at 60% of 1.1856% (the “Equivalent”). I am not afraid to put a price tag on my skill-set, especially when applying said skill-set to a specialty such as this vast undertaking.
I am an independent research engineer and intend to provide the “Service” of reviewing financial projections for the “Proposal” (the potential investment cases your firm is presented with) as a “Service” that’s IN ADDITION to the reviews of your firm’s financial analysts, however, my specialized skill (the “Service”) is largely reserved in reviewing the financial projections of low-technologically/high-technologically-based and scientific research-based investment cases, seeing how my years of experience as a research engineer is well-suited for the “Service” I, Desmond, am willing to provide. What I intend to accomplish with this “Service” is to help venture capitalists avoid making shoddy investments, specifically to wit in the “high-tech” sectors. There are so many iterations of “social media” (snicker) to the point of being ridiculous. There are so many “object-oriented programming” start-ups one would have to be on the precipice of an aneurysm from having to read through the financial filth conjured up in the mind of a money-hungry suburbanite who’s biological clock is tied to his/her iPhone®. That’s the level of ridiculousness I’m referring to.
By having me review the financial projections of start-up proposals it will help guide venture capitalists and steer them in the right direction as far as making their final decisions in sound investments.