Search This Blog

Hovertrx

Add URL

Translate

Showing posts with label computers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label computers. Show all posts

Friday, September 13, 2013

Twitter Is Going Public, Files S-1 With SEC ALEX WILHELM

2013-09-12_14h21_11

2013-09-12_14h21_11 Today Twitter confirmed that it has filed an S-1 with the SEC and is therefore on the road to going public. This is an important moment for Twitter, and for tech, as it shows that the IPO window is open. Here’s Twitter on its filing: Count to 10 and let’s hope the damn thing leaks right away. We don’t know much, but expect Twitter to go public at a valuation of roughly between $15 billion and $20 billion, roughly. Its last private money came in at around a $10 billion valuation, and those investors will want a return on their funds. Goldman Sachs is said to be the lead underwriter of the offering. Facebook’s IPO, for comparison, valued the social giant at around $100 billion on the day of its flotation. The irony here is that Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg yesterday at Disrupt told the world that it should not be afraid of going public. Twitter did not decide to go public on the back of Zuck’s axiom, but it is nicely pat that it announced this news the day after his comments. Facebook’s public offering was marred with trading errors and a slipping stock price, and the company lost tens of billions of value before it recovered. Facebook is currently trading at fresh highs, helping to set the stage for Twitter: Whatever the Facebook IPO hangover was, it is no more. Twitter’s public offering has been a very long time in coming, and contains inside of it oodles of institutional pressure: With hundreds of millions of invested capital under its belt, Twitter has a number of investors that want their money back. It has been well-managed, sure, but cash has a certain feel to it. The IPO will be a zoo. But it will be a fun zoo, and that is all that matters. The NASDAQ and the NYSE are at war a bit on who gets to host more tech offerings, but I think that we’ll be seeing the NASDAQ scoop up this deal. Now, what are Twitter’s revenue and profit figures? We’ll actually get to know soon, though the fact they are filing in this fashion does imply that Twitter had less than $1 billion in revenue in 2012. So, there’s that. Top Image Credit: Emmanuel Huybrechts

Thursday, September 12, 2013

9 Amazing (Very) Young Entrepreneurs

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

40 Unusual Websites you should Bookmark


    1. beFunky – Awesome web app that turns images to cartoonized paintings and videos to cartoons.
    2. DisplayWars – Incredibly simple tool that helps lots of people. Want to buy a new screen? DisaplyWars lets you compare screen sizes by mapping one display size on top of the other. For smaller items see SizeEasy.
    3. [NO LONGER WORKS] DocSyncer – Synchronize office documents in your ‘My Documents’ folder with Google Docs account.
    4. JotYou – By using this service you can send messages to others so they get them only when they are in the area you specify. [Video]
    5. Keybr – Online keyboard to practice your touch typing skills.
    6. Mint – The simplest way to manage your finances. More about Mint.
    7. Numbr – Free disposable phone numbers.
    8. PDFHammer – Merge, edit and rearrange PDF documents online.
    9. PhoneSpell – Ever wondered if you phone number spells something memorable ? PhoneSpell will find it out.
    10. SecondRotation / BuyMyTronics – Want to cash in on your old iPod ? Or mobile phone ? Both of these services will buy your old (broken) gadget, regardless of its condition.


Other
    11. [NO LONGER WORKS] BeamIt – Send pictures, music, videos, docs or any other file to your cellphone.
    12. BooksInMyPhone – Download and read copyright-free books on a mobile phone. Comes with its own book reader.
    13. CallTheFuture – Schedule text messages and get them delivered (as a voicemail) on any desired date in the future.
    14. CameraSummary – Extracts so called EXIF data from the images. Shows what model of digicam was used, image creation date and time, resolution settings, location and so on.
    15. CanYouRunIt – One-click web app that inspects your PC’s hardware and software settings to determine whether or not it meets gaming requirements for a game of your choice.
    16. CellSwapper – Transfer your current mobile contract to someone else. Or get a free plan with only a short term contract.
    17. CivilAnswers – Free legal assistance.
    18. ControlC – This small cross-platform (Win, Mac, Linux) monitors your clipboard and saves everything online.
    19. Definr – Incredibly fast online dictionary. It takes abt 14 ms to lookup a word.
    20. Drop.io – By far the coolest service for private file collaboration and transfers. Add files by email, send voice messages from phone, etc.
    21. File-Destructor 2 – Generates files (Doc, PDF, … ) that look genuine but won’t launch properly. Basically, it’s a tool that helps you put all the blame on your “faulty computer”.
    22. [NO LONGER WORKS] File-encryptor – Secure encryption tool to freely encrypt/decrypt sensitive files online. Quite handy for sending over sensitive files.
    23. [NO LONGER WORKS] FlashPhone – Free flash-based SIP-softphone. Simply add your SIP account and you’re good to go. No need to install anything.
    24. Google Mobilizer – Makes your fav. websites mobile friendly. Must-have for your mobile bookmarks.
    25. GetMyFBIfile – Here you can generate letter templates that you can use to request for a free copy of your FBI file.
    26. LetterMeLater – Offers one feature that your email doesn’t have, “˜the ability to schedule when an email should be sent’. Coolest part about, you can use it directly from your email program (GMail, Outlook, etc.).
    27. [NO LONGER WORKS] Mailbucket – Finally, a tool to help you forward emails to your feedreader.
    28. Mobical – Over-the-air mobilebackup and restore service. Backup phone contacts, calendar, bookmarks and settings.
    29. [NO LONGER WORKS] MoDazzle – Access Facebook, LinkedIn and dozens of other web services (weather, stock quotes, etc.) via email or mobile text messaging. Update Facebook ‘status’, get un-read messages from Facebook inbox, get someone’s profile info from LinkedIn, and lots more.
    30. Nanoscan – Super fast yet compehensive online virus scanner.
    31. OhDon’tForget – It does only one thing, but does it really well: Schedule text message reminders to any phone.
    32. ProQuo – Reduce junk mail by removing your personal data from telemarketing lists.
    33. PPCalc – Comprehensive Paypal fees calculator.
    34. Rondee – Fast, easy and free way to arrange phone conference calls with as many people as you want.
    35. SpokenText – Convert PDF, Word, plain text, PowerPoint files, ,RSS news feeds, emails and web pages to speech.
    36. Sullr – Obtain information about telephone lines in reverse mode. Get address, location, owner’s name etc.
    37. WakerUpper – Schedule wake-up phone calls. Lots of useful features.
    38. WebMarkers – Adds additional option to your ‘Print’ menu that lets you print documents (or webpages) directly to the web. [Screenshot]
    39. WhatShouldIReadNext – Book recommendation service. Simply enter the author and title of your latest book and it will give you a list of recommended readings.
    40. WorldTaxiMeter – Calculate the cost of a taxi ride in a number of top cities worldwide (London, New York, Rome “¦). Accessible both from the web and mobile phone.

Monday, September 9, 2013

If I Started Now: How to Start a Software Company That Makes $40,000 Per Month


This post is part of the If I Started Now series, which hands you the step–by–step blueprint on how to get started building a particular business.
Let me share a secret with you.
Software is the greatest tool for building a profitable business that the world has ever seen (even if you don’t have any money to get started).
Bold statement, I know.
However, once you’re finished watching today’s interview, I’m confident you’ll feel the same way.

Why Should I Watch This?

Today’s interview is with Dane Maxwell and it will cover the exact steps you need to take to go from nothing (seriously — you don’t even need an idea!) to a profitable software business.
Dane has already built four six–figure software companies and his biggest seller, Paperless Pipeline, currently pulls in over $40,000 per month. Yes, every month.
If you have ever thought about building an iPhone app, web app, or any type of software then this interview is for you.
The goal of this interview is to help you answer the question, “If I started building a software business, what steps should I take right now?”
Don’t miss this one. You’ll love it.

Click the Play Button Below


Mentioned In This Interview

Special Gift — Because Dane is my main man, he has decided to give away a free gift to Passive Panda readers. Click here to find out more.
Spin Selling — Dane mentions this book in the interview (and I promptly pull a copy off my shelf like it was planned all along). You can check it out on Amazon here.
The Foundation — Dane has also taught hundreds of students how to build their own software companies. One student, Sam Ovens, recently went from having no money to building an iPhone app that pulls in over $2,500 per month … and he did this all in 10 weeks. You can get a case study of Sam’s full story here.

What You Should Do Now

Leave a comment below and share your thoughts on this interview and on any questions you have about building a software company.
As always, I’ll do my best to help.

Thursday, September 5, 2013

Why Is Ukraine a Cage for Entrepreneurs?

The challenges of doing business in Ukraine
All Ukrainians wanted to cast off the yoke of the communist dictatorship and the planned, ration-based socialist economy. What did they obtain after succeeding in doing so? Most people did not receive a better life. The “reforms” were such that fraud and embezzlement of public property were not just permissible but even prestigious.
How can Ukrainians come to terms with this fraudulent and largely criminal business? Most importantly, how can things be put back on the right track? Without a free market and the energy of entrepreneurs, Ukraine will continue to eke out a miserable existence. In this series of articles, I attempt to expose the main problems faced by Ukrainian business and show what alternative paths of development exist. The first instalment is about the importance of free entrepreneurship for the economy and how Ukraine affects it.
It is often said that privately owned companies seek only their own benefit, and the country's economy can do well without them. Following this line of reasoning, state-owned enterprises are the only ones that secure the welfare of the entire nation. Most Ukrainian politicians and government officials subscribe to the idea of seeking an optimal balance between the two types of companies.
Another widespread opinion is that private companies require efficient owners. It follows that, lacking such owners, companies must remain property of the state. There is also the well-known view that all forms of property need to be supported and developed. Is this really true? Evidently, it is not that simple.
ENTERPRENEURIAL PROFIT AS COMMON GOOD
If there is no economic profit, there is no accumulation of capital or investment nationwide, and this  means that the conditions for growth in production, more jobs and R&D are not in place. This is axiomatic. Profitability can be found only in a market economic system with private property.
With few exceptions, there was no economic profit under feudalism and previous social systems. The dynamic of economic development was essentially nonexistent. Some people noted that both profitability and investments were part of the planned economy under socialism. Yes, profits indeed existed. But were they economic profits, i.e., the result of economic initiative put into practice? No, they were obtained by confiscating the property, goods and labour of peasants, urban workers and scientific institutions and by expropriating private capital accumulated in tsarist Russia. The Soviet government also claimed land rent and in-kind rent, exploited the military and convicts who did penal labour and earned income on war indemnities and the lend-lease in the Second World War, etc.
The profits were reaped not by enterprises that were economical, innovative or otherwise economically efficient, but by those whose products were sold at prices centrally fixed at a level higher than unit cost. Meanwhile, some other enterprises were forced to sell their products below unit cost, so they were unprofitable according to the economic plan.
Prices were fixed in a centralized fashion, which was the fundamental distinct trait of the planned economy. Profits were reaped by the state and the state then distributed them among certain economic entities. As the sole proprietor of all profits, accumulated capital and investments, it did not need other entities willing to seek and obtain them. That system was fundamentally flawed and could not be successful, because it failed to stimulate entrepreneurial activity, which is the human initiative that leads to the production and realisation of innovative consumer values, the application of innovative production technology and/or the opening of new markets.
The means of production and labour have no sense without entrepreneurial ideas and actions. It is only jointly that means of production, labour and the organisational efforts of entrepreneurs create value and become part of it. Land and monetary capital that are involved in creating value also need to be factored in. This pertains to any industry or type of economic activity, such as the manufacturing industry, commerce, transport, construction, communications, utility services, hotel and restaurant business, legal services and so on.
Some companies receive profits exclusively due to special entrepreneurial qualities, and these profits are the difference between revenue and production costs after interest has been paid on the capital received. Without ownership of a company, a person will not show entrepreneurial qualities. Nor will he channel his own and borrowed money to establish a new enterprise and develop it.
Notably, entrepreneurship plays an active, creative part in the economic process unlike other, passive components.
Entrepreneurship should be distinguished from scientific research, the creation of innovative products, design, branding and building a typical technological process. All these elements are prerequisites for manufacture and business, but without entrepreneurship, they remain on paper only.
Entrepreneurs are producers, but they do not simply implement what has already been designed and developed. On the contrary, they themselves initiate and implement the best of possible products rather than simply promote their own ideas. They also advance their products on the market, seek the best and most favourable markets, and create and increase value.
This special entrepreneurial process yields better products, the highest productivity, minimum costs and the best supply/demand ratio. The output may include any consumer goods – products, services, information, etc.
Another important trait of entrepreneurs is their contribution to creating value and generating revenue. Other components – land rent, equipment cost, payroll and bank interest – are relatively stable quantities determined by average market values.
Entrepreneurial profit, just like the efforts of entrepreneurs, is in no way linked to average values. This performance indicator is always individual and depends on the specific invention as well as on consumer perceptions.
Entrepreneurial profit is, as a rule, short-lived. Its maximum value is achieved at an initial stage when new production ideas are implemented or a new good is manufactured, as long as it is unique.
With time, others begin to master the new production methods, production volume grows and higher demand for such innovations is met. Then the size of the entrepreneurial profit decreases, while other components of net profit (rent, interest, payroll and depreciation) remain virtually unchanged.
Entrepreneurial profit disappears completely when organizational and technological improvements spread throughout the industry and when no one has an individual advantage in terms of economy, or when a new product begins to be manufactured by all competing companies and consumer demand is fully met.
Thus, entrepreneurial activity as such is creative, because it develops production. An entrepreneur cannot afford to rest on his laurels. His stimuli are of a special and extraordinary kind. Entrepreneurial profit may be superhigh if his proposal is revolutionary, as was the case with the railway and the steam engine or, more recently, the Internet and its new operational capabilities.
By standing still, an entrepreneur risks losing everything and going bankrupt. There is no development, organization, enrichment and progress of society without entrepreneurial activity.
ENTREPRENEURIAL ACTIVITY AS AN ENEMY OF THE PLANNED ADMINISTRATIVE ECONOMY
Why did socialism remove entrepreneurs, and can the CEOs of Soviet plants and factories (and chiefs of ministries and agencies) be called entrepreneurs? In some cases, Soviet directors exhibited entrepreneurial qualities: they reequipped their plants, implemented better technology, serialized new products, optimized production capacity, etc.
But they never became entrepreneurs. First, they did not receive any of the profit resulting from their innovations. Instead, they only received their salaries which, truth be told, included various bonuses and stimuli, special one-time payments for technical upgrades and personal benefits awarded by ministries.
In other words, such improvements could never materialize without the consent of the owner (the state, or its ministry), which viewed plant directors exclusively as hired labour. Second, the changes made at state-owned enterprises were not, in essence, innovations because they only replicated — in a planned economy — the achievements of other entrepreneurial entities, which were normally located abroad. Typically, they did so inaccurately, because foreign models often had to be modified or altered.
These Soviet novelties simply propagated innovations already present on other markets. The best equipment used in the most advanced sectors of the Soviet economy (microelectronics, radio electronics, electronic engineering and rocket construction) was foreign-made.
In general terms, three waves of technological import may be singled out: during industrialization; after the Second World War (American lend-lease and war indemnities imposed on Germany); and in the 1970s and 1980s, when a strong flow of petrodollars after crises in world energy allowed the USSR to purchase new equipment in the West.
Soviet constructors who designed products that were serialized by the industry, from footwear to cars to ships and nuclear reactors, were copied from foreign specimens, including those procured by the Soviet special services.
ENTREPRENEURS NEED THE OPEN SEA AND FINANCIERS NEED QUIET HARBOURS
What is the connection between entrepreneurship and investments? Where do investments come from to meet the needs of entrepreneurs? The source of these investments is citizens, groups of citizens or nations that invest in manufacture, business and transactions in order to receive profits. If investments are made by private individuals who seek the highest return, they will most likely go precisely to entrepreneurs.
Entrepreneurial activity and financial business are fundamentally different. The former seeks to bring together factors and components of the production process to create supply on the market of consumer goods, while the latter is aimed at profitable and risk-free investment of money and is not much concerned about where to invest – manufacture, bank deposits, stocks or bonds, precious metals, real estate, financial, currency or other speculations.
An enterprise is designed to make new products, search for markets and select the best technology, means of production and methods of its organization. It is, in essence, a producer of commodities. The goal of business is to preserve the value of money by receiving passive income – interest, discount, rent, etc. This type of economic activity is passive in that it only reacts to changes in prices, profits and value of capital all of which are secured primarily through entrepreneurial activity.
An entrepreneur is not afraid to take risks. He does not even give thought to risk when he starts a business. In contrast, financiers shun risks, because they do not know all the capabilities of enterprises and markets; they cannot be sure what a particular government will do or how key financial markets will change. Even in these conditions they have to meet their commitments before investors.
They are mediators with interest in financial stability and predictability. Of course, financial profiteers earn precisely on “risks” – they like instability and abrupt currency and price fluctuations which enable them to buy lower and sell higher. Entrepreneurs are interested in innovations and their implementation, while financiers are very cautious about innovations. They would rather wait until a new thing is fully implemented and guarantees stable positive results. Investing financiers spread, rather than introduce, innovations.
Entrepreneurs need free access to resources and markets, laissez-faire and independence from the state, land owners, trade unions and creditors. In contrast, financiers are not interested in freedom and resources. They are ready to cooperate with the authorities, land owners, or anyone for that matter, in order to reduce risks and share them with others. This is why bankers, exchange brokers and investors do not, quite unlike entrepreneurs, seek political freedom and instead try to find ways to cooperate with the existing government regardless of how corrupt or totalitarian it may be.
In the USSR, there were no entrepreneurs or profit-oriented private investments. The economy was deprived of an ability to generate profits by cutting production costs and offering new consumer values on the market. In socialist times, the Ukrainian community reverted to a social system in which the economy was unable to self-improve, obtain entrepreneurial profits and efficiently use them, while Soviet society was incapable of cultural and intellectual growth.
IS THE PROFIT-ORIENTED ENTREPRENEURIAL ECONOMY WORKING TODAY? IF NOT, WHY NOT?
Several prerequisites must be in place for a profit-oriented entrepreneurial economy to function. First, prices must not be set on an individual basis. Instead, an average price should result from the interaction of all sellers and buyers of a certain product on the market. This price correlates with average costs in the industry and goes up or down depending on the supply/demand ratio. This is market, rather than administrative, pricing at work. In this case, price is an external factor for a specific enterprise and a common quantity for every player, independent of individual costs.
Second, entrepreneurial profit emerges only in companies that outperform others by installing newer or more productive equipment, using better or cheaper materials or organizing the production and administrative processes more efficiently.
Another source of profit is pricing: when an entrepreneur first comes out on the market with a fundamentally new product, he sets a price that is much higher than that of traditional products.
The same thing happens when a businessman opens new markets for his traditional products. Other entrepreneurs who have not achieved similar results incur production and marketing costs that are on the level of market prices or higher, and thus their activity does not bring that much profit.
In this case, entrepreneurs are content with bonuses for special managerial functions (formulating the overall conception, finding markets, landing large contracts, involving highly qualified CEOs, etc.) or receive rent payments as owners of land, minerals, buildings, communications and so on. The corresponding expenditures are, of course, part of production cost. Entrepreneurial profit is only one part of all profits received by company owners, so when it disappears, other components remain.
Third, entrepreneurship as a special type of human activity has a special existential niche. It brings together components of the manufacturing process and marketing procedure and secures the operation of a company established for this purpose. Success depends on how well the components are made to fit together, as well as the choice of equipment, labour and technology.
Entrepreneurial activity is also special in that it involves a constant search for new businesses and technologies; other (better) use of old equipment, buildings and land; closing old unprofitable companies and creating new ones in terms of the manufactured product, branch of industry and method of production. All these changes are innovative.
A true entrepreneur lives by innovating. Innovations are what enables businesses to put products on the market whose value greatly exceeds that of similar products made by other suppliers. Products of this kind bring the owner temporary entrepreneurial superprofits. (This highly important conclusion was first formulated by Joseph Schumpeter who once taught at the University of Czernowitz and served as the Austrian Minister of Finance.)
Those who fail to constantly innovate lose the initiative and zeal and soon stop being entrepreneurs as such, because their business loses its competitive edge, becomes unprofitable and eventually goes bankrupt or is closed.
Fourth, the entrepreneur is not, for all intents and purposes, a creditor, investor or financial partner. A person who seeks to accumulate and save money, receive interest on capital and make successful temporary investments never turns into an entrepreneur. He is a financier. The goal of an investing financier is to reduce the risks of capital placement (if possible), diversify investments, pull out of unsuccessful investments in good time and move his money elsewhere. A person who has accrued savings is primarily interested in investing in property, stocks, land and whatever else might secure the highest interest, dividend or rent.
None of the above pertains to the entrepreneur. His task is to organize and improve a specific business. Thus, if he has to also search for money needed to implement his business idea, solve tasks to minimize investment risks, etc., it will only hamper him and will hurt the economy in general.
Therefore, it can be concluded that financial business has to be a separate and specialized sector. Entrepreneurship cannot develop and be successful if the economy does not have favourable conditions allowing easy access to credit and investment market resources.
Fifth, anyone can become an entrepreneur, but he must have an intellectual, businesslike, socially and politically independent personality. This enables a businessman to carry out an objective financial analysis of existing production facilities, do marketing research, select the best new ideas in terms of design, technology and production and invite highly qualified specialists.
This kind of freedom is impossible in an unfree, closed, undemocratic, utterly bureaucratic and corrupt society. It also follows from this that a government employee, a law enforcement officer, a serviceman, a tax inspector, etc. cannot be an entrepreneur. Where people like that do “business” social goods are embezzled, bribery is forced upon citizens and criminally punishable abuse of office is rampant. Moreover, if an enterprise is launched and controlled by bureaucrats who cannot possibly have entrepreneurial qualities, it will not bring profits. In other words, n most cases it is impossible to adjust Soviet enterprises to a competitive market economy.
Sixth, a profit-driven entrepreneurial economy requires a competitive environment and a free market. The entrepreneur has to seek profits that arise from new combinations and improved business. If he is a monopolistic supplier of a special product on a certain market, he will objectively be able to set a much higher price compared to products in the same group on the same market. This price will reflect the real value and will include entrepreneurial profit as payment for innovation. However, a monopoly on innovation is short-lived in conditions of a competitive market economy.
Other producers also desire to receive innovation-generated profits and will try to start producing the unique product themselves as soon as possible. The growing supply will meet the spiking demand, and a monopolistically high price will go down. In this way, the price will begin to reflect production costs. Thus, competition destroys innovation-generated superprofits, and this is a positive phenomenon. The initial monopolistic supplier will be forced to come up with new types of products.
In other words, the entrepreneurial function would not be performed without competition, and a monopolistic supplier of a certain good would be content to receive stable superhigh profits and, instead of generating new business ideas, he would abuse his position by independently hiking prices, reducing the product’s quality, misreporting his profits, etc. So the entrepreneur himself is not idealist. He wants to maintain his monopolistic position as long as possible and tries to eliminate competition.
Artificially created and natural monopolies and their protection under the government, which was part and parcel of the socialist economy (and could not be otherwise because the state, as the sole owner, also craved for monopolistic superprofits) and survives, to an extent, in the current Ukrainian realities. However, the above suggests that this is a road to degradation. Moreover, entrepreneurial activity alone – without the government's involvement to support competition and overcome monopolism – may fail to produce positive social results and may, to the contrary, lead to economically unacceptable business structures and skewing the market.
Seventh, society must work out a tolerant and reverent attitude to entrepreneurs, both at the everyday and state level. This is the starting point for the mental and physical attitude of government officials, tax inspectors and policemen to businessman as a social group and to entrepreneurial expenditures and profits (including superprofits). If these financial resources that entrepreneurs have are viewed as undeserved, unfair and earned at the cost of “exploiting the working class”, taxes will be superhigh; policemen and inspectors will be unduly biased; and the investment and business climate will be unfavourable.
Social acceptance and intolerance have to be based on the understanding that entrepreneurial profit originates from labour. In contrast, monopolistic superprofits and corrupt political rent generated by certain businessmen must become a target of social obstruction and punitive persecution on the part of government, law enforcement and judicial bodies. Therefore, it is important to discriminate socially useful types of profits, such as entrepreneurial and innovation-based profits, and harmful and illegal profits (resulting from monopolies, corruption, profiteering, etc.) and stimulate companies to focus on the former. This may not be an easy thing to do, because profits, just like money, do not smell.
UKRAINE AS A CAGE FOR ENTREPRENEURS
Does Ukraine possess the above features and meet the requirements set for a profit-oriented entrepreneurial economy? A hostile attitude to private entrepreneurs – independent, innovative and creative – is undisguised and widespread in Ukraine. The public has formed an image of in impudent and greedy fraudster. Most people perceive the state as the sole benefactor that guarantees justice and develops the manufacturing industry. Mentally, Ukrainian society tolerates entrepreneurs as the unnecessary addition to the freedoms and property rights enjoyed by the citizens. Tax inspectors and policemen have been set on entrepreneurs like hounds. Fiscal pressure has cut off energy supplies to entrepreneurs.
Only those who cooperate with officials and those who have billions command respect because they can nicely reward a judge or a journalist. Entrepreneurs are not being raised or educated in Ukraine. Specialized colleges and institutes equip students with technological expertise and knowledge of economic relations in their respective industry (manufacture, construction, transport, commerce, tourism, the restaurant and hotel business, design, etc.) but not with the skills needed for entrepreneurial activity. Neither are individual approaches or nonstandard solutions encouraged. Thus, it should not come as a surprise that college graduates look for jobs only in existing organizations and fail to find them. They do not even think about starting their own business.
Our country lacks the cult of inviolability of a private individual and the protection of personal information. The rights and freedoms of people are not a supreme value like in the Western world.
The entrepreneurial sector in Ukraine is very narrow, sparse and marginal. The authorities view it as a place for small-scale flee market transactions and related industries (delivery, transport and financial services). The entire system of financial and legal relationships between the authorities and entrepreneurs is built on this foundation.
It is still “permissible” to engage in individual activities that involve providing various intellectual and other professional services. There are few other sectors where entrepreneurial zeal can be seen: residential construction and business property development, entertainment centres, resorts, shopping malls, etc.
Due to destructive privatization and government-backed elimination of competition, the new owners of industrial, communications and agricultural enterprises inherited by Ukraine from the USSR never turned into entrepreneurs. They are content to receive other types of net profits – corrupt and monopolistic profits, various subsidies and soft loans, rent on mineral mines and fertile land, etc. Thus, most of them continue to lose their markets and revenue.
Unfortunately, entrepreneurs are unable to obtain sufficient financial means to develop production. The state is of no help, not even in R&D and socially significant projects. Instead, it sets tax traps to freeze revenue and confiscate property. Moreover, since Ukraine became independent in 1991, sky-high bank interest rates have made bank loans unaffordable. Bank loans do not account for even one-tenth of the demand in the national economy. The annual increase in credit resources has been at a mere UAH 60-70 billion in the past several years, which is less than five per cent of Ukraine’s GDP.
But independent entrepreneurs have received virtually none of this money – it is distributed among those who are close to the government, own financials institutions and who are not entrepreneurs by definition. When resources are lacking, there is no sense to seek innovations, manufacture new products and build the necessary equipment. That is the reason why there are no Ukrainian-made innovative goods to be seen.
The entrepreneurial sector accounts for an unacceptably low part of the national economy and is mostly marginal, which hampers the profitability and progress of Ukraine’s economy. An extremely heavy burden is placed on the national economy by unprofitable companies – at least 45 per cent of the total number in some years and 56 per cent during the crisis in 2009. This means that true entrepreneurs did not have access to such companies. It is also worth noting that the lion’s share of profits is secured by the financial and credit sector of the economy. Approximately one-third of enterprises in the industrial sector make any profit, and of these no more than 10 per cent are entrepreneurial, according to my calculations.
Another roadblock is the non-market character of Ukraine's economy: prices are set by the authorities, certain commodities are regulated in an administrative fashion; the central government interferes with the distribution of financial resources; the government puts restraints on foreign economic activity and so on. Therefore, Ukraine has found itself in an impasse — there is no future without entrepreneurship.


Tom Williams: Hired by Apple at 14. His full story.

I was recently in Vancouver Canada for a week, considering moving there, when my friend Ariel Hyatt said, “You have to meet this amazing guy Tom Williams. He got hired by Apple when he was only 14. I think the company had to, like, legally adopt him to do it. He's a go-getter like you. Plus his wife, Jessie is an awesome country artist.”
I met Tom for dinner, loved his story, and wanted to share it with everyone.
Especially in this environment of 10%-25% unemployment, his story and philosophy have some inspiring lessons about how to get a job or make huge deals despite a lack of experience.
So I recorded a phone call and let him tell his tale in his own words:

Tom Williams
My mom calls this story my elaborate form of running away from home, except it doesn’t have a stick and a kerchief with it.
I grew up in a very normal, middle class family in Victoria. Very, very happy. But I wasn’t a very good student in school. In fact I was a very rebellious learner. I didn’t even take pen and paper to class. I would interrupt my teachers. I would question what they were teaching us. Every parent-teacher interview was focused on having Tom be less disruptive, and a little bit more conformist.
And at the same time, my parents, in the summer break between 6th and 7th grade, announced that they were getting separated. That really just devastated me. Even though my parents were dealing with that relatively amicably, I was very distraught and quite upset.
I then realized I was quite powerless, and the solution was to find my own income.
I started out selling chocolate bars and quickly noticed I was the top seller in school. However, I only got a Nintendo even though I sold about $2,000 worth of chocolate-covered almonds.
I realized I was getting kind of gypped, so I negotiated to be the direct retailer of this wholesale chocolate bar operation, basically usurping the school. I had my dollar of chocolate and they had theirs. My dad had to vouch that I wouldn't just eat the inventory.
That summer I sold several thousand dollars worth of chocolate bars. This was not some passive kid sitting outside the store, eyes down, hoping somebody would take pity. I was literally walking backwards, chocolate bar in hand. As somebody would walk by me, I'd peddle my very refined spiel about how these chocolate bars were the world's best thing. They were actually called World's Best Chocolate, from which I derived my sales pitch.
As a child I was horrible with math, even with the rudimentary. In fact, I had to go to summer school once. However, I understood when I was being taken advantage of and when I was in control.
With my first lemonade stand I realized I'd have to actually spend money on Kool-Aid. This meant I'd have to spend the entire day selling at five or ten cents, (which was the competitive going rate back then), or I'd have to either steal the Kool-Aid pack, or figure out some way around this huge cost liability.
I managed to put up my sign in the local store, without help from my parents. They were academics and bureaucrats, not in any way entrepreneurial. For me, this thinking about what was a bad deal or a good deal was instinctive. I was hard-wired from day one, always trying to make good deals.
I always relied on my own instincts. I knew that if I wanted to get something done, I had to do it. Nobody else was going to do it for me. Nobody else was going to support me. I didn't expect to be supported. I just knew I had to do it if I wanted to do it. That's how I lived every aspect of my life.
Even when I was interested in bird-watching, I had a newsletter and charged a subscription to family and friends. I was always constantly thinking about how to make money and generate revenue.
Using the proceeds of the chocolate bar sales, I rented an office in the same building as the local sales office for Apple in Victoria. I would go to my office after school, not really having much to do but trying to build edutainment software on CD-ROM. I even had an outsourced receptionist service.
This was the stepping stone. It was clear to me that I wanted to try and short circuit life's path. I didn't want to stay in school until the 12th grade or at home. I wanted to live on my own and be free.
I read John Sculley's biography, who was Apple's CEO at the time, and my hero. As other kids had sports stars or actors, he was my hero. I wanted to be him or be like him.
So I started calling Apple in the 7th grade. Every single morning, at about 8:00 am before I went to school, I would call up the main Apple switchboard number, and ask for John Sculley's office, and they would put me to his assistant.
Every single morning I'd be talking to Jerry, his assistant, and would start for the first few weeks with just my standard pitch. I was taking the business development angle. I'm the CEO of my own company, which was called Desert Island Software, and he's the CEO of his company. Let's have two CEOs talk to each other about how we can work together.
For the first few weeks I'm sure Jerry thought that it was some kind of a prank or weirdo. Eventually I started to be less reliant on the pitch and say, “Hi, Jerry, how are you?” This is the gatekeeper to somebody that is receiving a lot of unsolicited phone calls. I think instinctively I realized that by building a relationship with Jerry, I was building a relationship with the gatekeeper. If they like you and support you, that's really helpful.
Here I was, literally for about a year and a half, calling every single morning. The relationship obviously evolved to “Hey Jerry, what's going on with you?” and “Oh, you know, school's tough this week Tom‚” blah blah blah.
In a parallel track, because I had rented this office, I was developing a relationship with the two local sales guys who at this point had taken an interest in me and who I would stop in on every single day. They wrote e-mails, which somehow came in to Cupertino. I think it was just a benevolent gesture. Here was this kind of young, highly enthusiastic, but different than just a Mac fanatic guy that was trying to build a software company.
They were able to get me forwarded all the way up, back into John's office, Jerry and some other support staff. There was now this loop of several people interested in helping me out and seeing my dream.
My dream was to meet John for five minutes, and then I just meet him, and pitch him in person. I knew that If I was granted five minutes, I was going to be able to extend that into half hour, and that half hour would dictate or drive what would happen next.
Through many, many people's generosity at Apple, they had arranged to give me a free pass to the Worldwide Developers Conference, which I think the ticket price was about $1,500 for the whole week.
Because of the divorce, my mom and I were quite poor. We had to actually borrow money from my grandmother, (it always makes me verklempt to remember her generosity), to fly my mom and I down, May 1993.
In fact the conference registration began on Sunday, which was May 15th. I remember the date because it was Mother's Day, and my mom was thinking we'd have a nice day to kind of celebrate it. We went to one of the hotels near the convention center in San Jose, and I scarfed down my breakfast because I wanted to get my registration at Apple done right away.
There I was, registered, and greeted well. People were like, “Oh, well, we're expecting only one tiny kid from Canada at the conference.” They were expecting me, and John's PR person said, “Okay, first thing in the morning, be here 7:30, bright and early, and before he begins his keynote, you'll have your five minutes.”
For me, this was the night before being able to walk on to the stadium and toss out the first pitch. It was the pinnacle dream moment. I couldn't sleep, my mind was racing with how I would spend these first five minutes to make an impression on him. I knew from his books that he was a concept guy, and loved being able to come up with new ideas on the spot, new ways of positioning things.
I knew the rumors of what technologies were being introduced at the conference and what he was speaking at in the keynote. I was really studying those technologies to come up with my own spin.
At the time it was actually the Newton that was being announced at the conference. It commercially failed later, but was successful from an innovation perspective.
I had my own business cards that said, Tom Williams, CEO, Desert Island Software. I met him and pitched him. I said, “Here's what I kind of think of the Newton....” I barfed out five minutes of stuff that I thought might be impressive to him. That five minutes extended into a full half hour - up until minutes before he was being pulled away to give the keynote.
At the end we exchanged business cards. He had two business cards, one that said “Chief Listener” and one that said “CEO”. He gave me his CEO card because he was out of the other. We promised to keep in touch.
At the conference, I was given VIP access. I sat with all the vice presidents. I was one of the first guys outside of Apple to actually be able to play with the Newton. I was anointed as an interesting guy, and I met every vice president at the company that was there that week.
Three months after the conference, John left Apple. He was booted out in a boardroom coup, and then he went into a company called Spectrum. He stayed there very shortly. It was a bit of a bad story.
As a consequence of leaving Apple, John actually had time to call me. I remember the first phone call. I'd left my office, because my cash was running out from my chocolate bar sales. At this time, I'd left my office, and had my office in my bedroom in Victoria. The phone was ringing in the upstairs bedroom. I was downstairs and could hear it ringing. I raced up, and it was John on the phone.
Because of networking deep at Worldwide Developers Conference that year, other executives at Apple and the engineering team on the QuickTime products team had organized to get me back to the conference, but this time as a speaker.
I was demonstrating a use of the QuickTime conferencing API that a developer friend of mine and I had mocked up. In the QuickTime conferencing API you could build any interface on top of the basic function of video conferencing. We built up this Star Trek-like communications interface. It was visually appealing, met the geek quotient, and I was there to demo that.
Because of that demo, my brain, and Apple being a corporate culture, which at the time was kind of the dark era of Apple, I was getting hired.
We were just at the end of this first era of human capital and innovation, and so the people that were most respected on the campus were of course the engineers. The engineers didn't matter or care what you looked like, or what your educational background was. You proved your mettle with them simply by virtue of interacting with them on the spot - what your brain was like in those conversations.
Even though I was a marketing guy, it was the engineering team, that on a Wednesday of WWDC, in 1994, had offered me a job. They said, “We want you to come work with us!”
At the same time my school year was ending, and John and his wife were doing a CD-ROM multimedia startup of their own in San Francisco, where his son lived. At this point John had become a regular mentor. I'd asked him to join my board of advisors to Desert Island Software, and he agreed. He even sent me a letter that I had framed, acknowledging his acceptance to the advisory board. My mom was comfortable with me coming down to live with his son and daughter-in-law for the summer to get some work experience.
At the same time, I was doing work experience, and going down to Cupertino once in a while trying to figure out, over the course of the summer, how I could take this invitation of work with them - become hired by them even though it was infringing upon child labor laws and immigration issues and so on. What they eventually figured out was that if I was a consultant contracted by Apple through a Canadian company, the Canadian company would be responsible for any issues.
They were able to put the blame or liability elsewhere. Now the problem was I couldn't even be a director of my own company because I was under 18.
My mom, was reluctantly, very supportive of me but always worried about the downsides to my stability, childhood, and all the motherly things that one would be concerned about.
I'd convinced her to at least start the company, that was back in the Desert Island Software days. We had the company established, and literally a week before I was to go back home and start the 9th grade, the team said, “Hey, we figured this out. Want to sign the contract?”
I called my mom on a Monday, and said, “Mom, I'm starting work with Apple on Thursday, and I'm not coming home.” It was a very hard thing for my mom, you know: the baby son, and California, whatever. My mom, knowing how stubborn I was, and all these external factors at play, agreed. She allowed me to do this even though she was very, very concerned that I had negotiated my own contract.
I was later told that she came down and negotiated a different kind of contract, which was to say, “Hey, you know, guys, you are going to be responsible for my child, not only in terms of his physical welfare, but his spiritual and emotional welfare.”
I was a cellist at the time and had a bunch of other interests, and she just wanted to make sure that I maintained a childhood and a sense of balance in my life.
It was such an amazing corporate culture at Apple. There was a lot of people that were looking out for me, and of course, especially given what I was doing there. There was a lot of opportunity to kind of be a young rebellious teen, and I did some of that, but generally I had a really great group of people around me.
I remember there was a beer bash, when we did a alpha or beta launch of a software product. There would be a beer bash on campus, and I remember having a beer, and some HR person getting completely freaked out. There was a bunch of that kind of stuff.
However, I wasn't the youngest. It was Chris Espinosa, who was actually employee number eight at Apple. Because I was never an employee, I was a contractor, I'm the youngest ever contractor I know through Apple. Chris was youngest ever employee, and actually beat me by I think a year or so. Chris actually has the title and will always likely carry that title.
I was hired in QuickTime products group, and I was savvy technically. I was able to comprehend at lower levels the technical concepts, but was a very bad, almost completely dysfunctional, programmer.
The team thought, “What do we make of this guy? What do we do with this guy?” I was put into an evangelist role. It wasn't planned. They didn't say, “Oh, Tom would be great at this.” They just thought I would be a great guy to have around. We kind of had to figure out what my role was.
With QuickTime, we were really trying to build a platform, a media platform, as a consequence of some of the technical portions of later versions of QuickTime. At the time there was a new standard called CD-plus, and CD-ROM, in the music industry. CD-plus was a totally different form of manufacturing a CD. You had a data layer, and you had a audio layer on one CD. The idea was to use QuickTime to demonstrate how we could create interactive content for artists that would increase engagements around the music on a CD-ROM.
This was 1995, and the internet was becoming more and more popular. It was coming out of the academic world and in the fringe technology world. Not so much in any way the mainstream, but becoming more and more, “What can we do with this?, How can we use it?”, etc.
Really our vision for how QuickTime and this online music stuff could interact, was that we could have individual files that would contain the music, but also contain very, very simple data structure describing the song. Being able to use an application which would then be able to look up that data and bring other relevant content in the form of commercial links. Links out to the web, that would allow for greater music discovery, but also allow for the tracking of how that music is explored, and how that fan engages with that particular track.
What we were tasked with was not only coming up with some prototypes about how that would manifest, and we'd pitch differently to artists and labels, but ultimately, I was kind of out there evangelizing to the music community.
I remember hanging out with Radiohead backstage at a show they did in San Francisco in 1995. Tom was already designing his album covers using Photoshop on a Mac. We had a tremendous number of artists who were already Mac users. We were trying to explain, “Hey, there's this new stuff coming!”
In New York, we were part of the New York Music Festival, wiring up 13 clubs. There were 270 bands playing over seven days, and we were live streaming the venues to anybody on the web. On the crappiest of connections - probably four-frames-per-minute, with the worst 8 kHz mono sound quality.
The way that I approached my work in reaching out to the music business was the same approach that I took with Sculley. We are all people, regardless of title, whatever. We were all completely equal and it was all about being likeable and liked.
What was happening before I joined Apple was that there had been several kind of high profile attempts at creating what the press referred to as, “Sili-wood” which was Hollywood and Silicon Valley coming together to create these massive studio-produced CD-ROM projects.
The industry observers were saying that the two cultures were clashing. The Silicon Valley types were saying, “Well this is how we try to impose their methodologies and their approach to business on Hollywood.” and vice versa.
Whereas I was just this happy kid that was very excited about the technologies I was working on. Just being at Apple was my dream job. That enthusiasm and passion was disarming, and the fact that I was a kid.
Literally every single meeting for the first year, any new meeting, everybody would start looking for the hidden camera. Looking at each other for either whose kid this was, or who put up this joke. Then the meeting would start, and again people would still be kind of chuckling. Then five minutes in, as a consequence of what I was saying, and how I was saying it, they realized that this was this freakish but nevertheless real scenario of this kid being at Apple.
The music industry had the exact same attitude about people. They didn't care what package or experience you came in. If you could play your part, that's all that was required for acceptance.
That was the exact same culture that got me in at Apple. Here I was living in this convergence of those two communities, which really worked for me. I was doing really high concept stuff.
I had approached Bill Bottrell, a very famous engineer and studio guy, who had also gotten quite critically acclaimed as a producer. He had produced Sheryl Crow's first album, “Tuesday Night Music Club”, and that album title was no coincidence. In her studio in Pasadena, he was organizing a Tuesday night jam session of friends and musicians that he knew.
Our idea was to wire up the studio so that the outside world could see what was going on and allow outsiders to contribute song ideas and lyrics into the studio. Then if those songs got cut, you would basically, by virtue of membership, be a contributor. You would sign up to get an audio CD compilation, of all the songs that had gotten cut, but you would get a pre-negotiated small kind of cut from the song that you had gotten cut if you were contacted had come in.
If you fast forwarded to 2009, and user-generated media contributions, collaboration online, I mean this is 1995, we just didn't have the bandwidth to do it. We didn't have a user base to do it. Even though Bill was tremendously excited about it, and so was a pretty high level executive within Apple, the concept worked up several layers above me to our vice president's level, what they were looking for was really more.
They looked at our music stuff as more traditionally corporate sponsorship stuff. So the lens was exposure in the music industry, exposure to consumers, without going into too much of Apple's history, you could argue that music was part of the brand DNA of Apple from the very beginning.
Even though Jobs was gone, it was always seen more as, “Hey, if we can do high visible stuff, get musicians endorsing what we're doing.” Remember the, “Think Different” campaign.
The actual technical business rationale of our unit was that 90% of the music industry, we had 90% share of, of computers in studios and musicians from a pure market analysis perspective, the other ten was analog, and those were the guys that weren't moving. If we could create high concept stuff, be seen as real supporters of the industry, perhaps we could move the dial, one, two percent, into that other 10%.
Remember it was Mac platform only that was hosting Pro Tools, Digidesign, and all that stuff. There was a kind of corporate culture that we were in. This was illustrative of the disconnect of the time that I was at Apple, which was under our CEO Michael Spindler, at the time.
I left before Gil Amelio came in. Spindler and Amelio were arguably two of the worst CEOs Apple ever had. Well, there's only been four. This was an indicator of their “let's sell more boxes” mentality, so our music stuff was in the rationale of, “Let's sell, let's move the dial on those analog guys.”
The reality of it, is those analog guys were analog for a reason, and they likely wouldn't be switching because of our sponsorship of Woodstock 2.
Nevertheless, that was the mentality. Whereas internally, as we moved down from the VP into the operating dynamics of our unit, it was just keeping that culture that Apple was famous for. The culture of early innovation, concept, reaching out to innovators, and empowering them through our ideas.
There was that corporate culture disconnect that was very reflective to the whole company.
With the studio deal, even though there was high levels of support, it came down to negotiating a legal contract. The legal issues that an entertainment lawyer brought to a contract, and what our Fortune 500 Silicon Valley lawyers brought, were two very, very different contract legalities.
Even though there was cultural similarity, from a legal perspective, they were so different. It was the legal cultures that were the big issue in allowing us to do deals. As a result, we did a lot of sponsorship deals.
My business card and the title on my office read, “Tom Williams, The Kid”. That was the brand that was created for me, which I quickly embraced, and owned as my own.
I left Apple as my parents were actually going through the divorce proceedings. My father didn't want to pay child support because on paper I was making more money than he was. I had no concept of money, and was spending more than I was making.
Because of the unique nature of our story, it ran in our local paper and it was syndicated very, very quickly across the country. The Canadian media got interested in doing a story on me. CBC National which was the prime-time national news hour in Canada, came calling to me in California to do an interview for a documentary.
I negotiated, and by this time had some ink on me: The Christian Science Monitor, the New York Post, A Current Affair. I had a bunch of media, and was hanging out with musicians. I very quickly understood the importance of having control over your own brand. This was not done with the Apple PR people, but directly between me and the CBC folks.
That documentary created brand awareness for “The Kid” in Canada, and as a consequence, I had a number of job offers.
Before the documentary even started, several of our new media guys got themselves hired by Microsoft. Microsoft has been involved quite heavily in promoting their own music stuff, though Apple was far better at achieving the high profile marketing wins.
Microsoft's corporate culture was far different than Apple. Even though they had way more money to spend, and they got The Rolling Stones‚ “Start Me Up” for Windows, they could buy their way only so far. I'd done an interview with Microsoft, as several of the guys I knew from Apple were keen on getting me into there.
By this time, the documentary ran and there was a lot of job offers, one of which I ended up taking back in Vancouver.
That was the launch of the brand “The Kid”, which became, for better or worse, part of my public persona, quite successfully for the next ten years of my life.
During the ten years, it was the same notion of: build the relationship, success requires a persistent misreading of the odds, have access to anyone that was famous or at a certain level. The notion that I didn't or wasn't able to have access to that didn't exist.
There was no psychological intimidation because I always had that level of confidence, or maybe it was just pure arrogance. It's either a supreme level of confidence or truly seeing everybody, myself included, as just peers of everybody else.
All this title was a function of luck, it didn't really imply any kind of specialness that I or anybody else didn't have. Hold the relationship, be friendly, be likeable, and good things come from that.
I remember working as a technology analyst for this really crappy investment retail brokerage house in Canada. Not that I'm insulting the Canadian technology community in the the mid-late 90s, but I wanted to go after the same deals that the white investment banks were going after.
There was a company called Invention Machine in Boston that had a bunch of big venture capital money put into it, and were contemplating an IPO. They needed a few million bucks raised privately before going out IPO, and this was the kind of thing that I did.
I knew that the CEO was a smoker, as we met at a conference in the past where we talked about cigars. There's a comic aspect to this. An 18-year-old talking about his love of cigars to a 50-year-old. Seems so silly and ludicrous now that I can look back on it.
Nevertheless, I literally bought a box of cigars and sent it to him a week before I was to meet with him. I wined and dined him. The night before I was to meet with his board, which included guys from these New York investment banks, and venture capital funds, I convinced him to give me the opportunity to do a private equity round for the company. We shook hands, but he said it's ultimately up to the board.
This very, very powerful board was like, “This is a joke! Why should we do it with you?” I said “Well I'll get it done in a week.” They said, “Everybody says that and nobody does it.” I said, “So then you got no liability if I can't get it done.” He said, “Well I guess you got me there.”
This was a Tuesday. Wednesday I flew to Toronto, met with a mutual fund there. By Thursday we had a term sheet. By Friday they got down there, and the deal closed on a following Wednesday. The commitment was there, pretty much right away. I gained the respect of that team and board.
My favorite quote is from author and management consultant Tom Peters, “Success requires a persistent misreading of the odds.” That's exactly what that was. I didn't know that quote when I did it, but it fit very well to describing part of my attitude and approach to this stuff.
It was about relationships, first and foremost. If people like you, they want you to succeed. If they want you to, they will help you succeed. It has to be genuine.
A lot of people approach their relationship-making as mercenary transactions. As much as you appear very genuine they can see your endgame. Take the time.
Earlier this week, I was traveling back home with my Mom and we agreed to take a particular ferry home, which would allow me about fifteen minutes of face time with a friend and mentor of mine.
She said: “Why bother if it's just fifteen minutes?” I said, “Well, because it's face time, and that fifteen minutes should be spent building and strengthening the relationship.”
What can you accomplish in fifteen minutes? Nothing other than strengthening the relationship.
Recognize that by being useful and good to others, you will eventually build a very strong team of supporters. They'll lift you up to new heights and protect you. If you falter they will be there to bring you back up and support you.
I think it's one of the most overlooked components of business. Simply, we're always able to say that at the end of the day, all you have is your friends.
But, if your friends are your friends, and they happen to be in business, and are helpful to your business, then all that much better, because those people will be there to support you.
Pithy aphorism? Probably. Absolutely true? 100%.

Followers