Posts Tagged venture capital

The Small Business Financing Disconnect


Most small businesses start with a business plan to get financing for a venture, but entrepreneurs prefer managing risk through effectuation. Effectuation entails entrepreneurial control over what an entrepreneur can do to achieve a wanted result when the means to that result involves taking an uncertain action. The effectual thinker takes action toward an imagined state incapable of continuous planning because the entrepreneur is uncertain about the result of the action (Gabrielsson & Politis, 2011; Read & Sarasvathy, 2005; Sarasvathy, 2001; Sarasvathy & Dew, 2005).

Entrepreneurs create business plans to achieve early financing and develop plans like they understand the outcome of their actions, but this often is not the case. Entrepreneurs performance typically is significantly off from early plans not because of bad planning, but because of uncertain actions taken toward imagined outcomes. Planning is valid when actions are certain to produce a known result.

Financiers fail to recognize this disconnect, and conventional planning does not fit when an entrepreneur works toward an imagined outcome. Financial planners rely on existing business models and not newly created ones. Not until the entrepreneur perfects the model can planning have true substance in predicting a wanted result.

Financial planning done for business plans at best presents a plan conforming to existing conditions. When an entrepreneur wants to create a new market or product conditions do not yet exist to support such plans. Such conditions cause financiers to rely on risky projections.

This disconnect raises a question about how to evaluate a venture without a financial track record when future actions are dubious. What can an entrepreneur do to convince a financier of the merits of the venture when financial planning projections are so far-off from true results? I want to know your thoughts. Do you want to learn more?

References

Gabrielsson, J., & Politis, D. (2011). Career motives and entrepreneurial decision-making: examining preferences for causal and effectual logics in the early stage of new ventures. Small Business Economics, 36(3), 281-298. doi: 10.1007/s11187-009-9217-3

Read, S., & Sarasvathy, S. D. (2005). Knowing what to do and doing what you know: Effectuation as a form of entrepreneurial expertise. Journal of Private Equity, 9(1), 45-62. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=19164962&site=bsi-live

Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001). Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 243. Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=72362644&Fmt=7&clientId=13118&RQT=309&VName=PQD

Sarasvathy, S. D., & Dew, N. (2005). New market creation through transformation. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 15(5), 533-565. doi: 10.1007/s00191-005-0264-x

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

Entrepreneurial Lessons Learned: Twinkie, Twinkie, Little Cake How I Wonder What’s Your Fate


As the song goes the bankruptcy of the Hostess Brands, Inc. brings to mind how many companies today rest on their laurels. Many companies have forgotten how to compete because rapid growth has gotten in the way. Kalson (2012) noted how the Hostess company blamed the company’s problems on its unions and dispelled the idea bad corporate decisions, financial shenanigans, outdated strategy, and inept management could have caused the problems.

The Hostess brand emerged from a troubled history at Continental Bakeries. Interstate Bakeries later bought Continental pursuing its strategy of growth by acquisition and mergers. Interstate had a history of run ins with its workers and focused on rapid growth instead of its products and people. For example, in 1982 Interstate Bakeries raided an over funded pension fund to pay off debt on its inefficient plants (“Hostess Brands, Inc.,” 2012).

The Continental merger brought new enzyme technology to the company allowing its products to have a longer shelf life, lowering delivery costs, and improving profitability. Continental like Interstate engaged in an acquisition strategy. Similarly, the company had disputes with its workers and in 2000  lost a suit in San Francisco brought by 19 black workers claiming racial discrimination (“Hostess Brands, Inc.,” 2012).

Again in 2004 the government probed the company’s worker’s compensation reserves and problems with a new financial system the company installed. In 2004 the company filed for bankruptcy still under investigation for how it set its worker’s compensation reserves. In 2009 the company emerged from bankruptcy and relocated to Kansas City only to file for bankruptcy again in 2012 (“Hostess Brands, Inc.,” 2012).

The lesson learned is growth through acquisitions often is a poor strategy leading to financial difficulty if not managed carefully. An entrepreneur would do better by focusing on products and people to grow organically. Entrepreneurs should learn from the Hostess story, acquisitions and mergers often leads to discord between workers and management, and financial problems. Duplication of duties is costly without a plan to remove these costs. A company’s business strategy can become blurred, and the company can lose its focus on its vision and how it best serves its customers.

Kalson (2012) noted how Hostess sold its soul to private equity firms, hedge funds,  and investors while amassing over $1 billion dollars of debt. Acquisitions seemingly erase the competition, but can also serve as the deathbed of a company. Entrepreneurs should think about losing their Twinkies before entering such a strategy.

Entrepreneurs should understand both sides of this strategy before committing to it. If you want to know more about the pros and cons of different strategies contact us to learn more.

References

Hostess Brands, Inc. (2012). Hoovers Academic. Retrieved from http://subscriber.hoovers.com.ezproxy.apollolibrary.com/H/company360/history.html?companyId=15324000000000

Kalson, S. (2012). When all else fails, blame the union hostess gives the twinkie defense a whole new meaning Pittsburgh Post – Gazette. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1220357399?accountid=35812

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

Evidence Social Entrepreneurship is on the Rise


I have expressed the view previously the next great wave of entrepreneurship will come from social entrepreneurs. I found evidence the rise of social entrepreneurship is on the horizon in an article I found in this week’s Bloomberg Businessweek.  The article is about a firm headed by Chamath Palihapitiya called Social+Capital Fund. Palihapitiya is a former Facebook executive, who left about a year ago to launch the new venture capital firm (Bennett, 2012).

Palihapitiya believes properly placed venture capital can solve the world’s biggest problems left from gaps caused by the shrinking scientific ambitions of government, foundations, and other global organizations (Bennett, 2012). Politicians demonize government handling of social problems leaving  social entrepreneurs as the suitable outlet for dealing with these problems. Universities have dwindling funds devoted to research and can no longer deal with social problems.  Bennett explained how Kauffman Foundation, an independent organization, has failed to produce results in dealing with issues it funded over the last 20 years. Palihapitiya believes private equity or as he puts it “purpose-driven money” is the answer to solving such problems (Bennett, 2012).

Social+Capital has amassed an army of technologists and entrepreneurs to find and build products aligned with solving problems in the health care, education, and the financial services industry. These people include Reid Hoffman (LinkedIn), Sean Parker (Napster and Facebook), Kevin Rose (Digg), and Joe Hewitt (Mozilla and Facebook). Several companies funded by Social+Capital have already started to deal with social problems in these industries. The idea is for these companies to make money while solving societal problems. Palihapitiya’s idea is to find brilliant people of the Steve Jobs variety and invest in them to develop solutions to societal problems (Bennett, 2012).

Palihapitiya admitted inequities in the global economic system precipitated his idea to find brilliant leaders to solve societal problems by making money (Bennett, 2012). Between 1987 and 1997 nonprofit organizations grew to 1.2 million or by 31% (The new nonprofit almanac & desk reference., 2002; Noruzi, Westover, & Rahimi, 2010). These numbers show a growing need exists for social entrepreneurs to solve societal problems. Palihapitiya has started his firm to fund innovation solutions and allow entrepreneurs to make money, while solving such problems.

Social entrepreneurs will play a major role in the global economy. Innovative solutions from social entrepreneurs will create great value by addressing societal needs. I encourage prospective entrepreneurs to start now to take advantage of this opportunity. We can help you get started and I encourage you to learn more.

References

Bennett, D. (2012, July 30 – August 5). The league of extraordinarily rich gentlemen. Bloomberg Businessweek, 54-56.

The new nonprofit almanac & desk reference. (2002). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Noruzi, M. R., Westover, J. H., & Rahimi, G. R. (2010). An exploration of social entrepreneurship in the entrepreneurship era. Asian Social Science, 6(6), 3-10. doi: 2233824571; 56997641; 137930; SSCS; INNNSSCS0000567695

 

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

Credit Unions: An Alternative to Community Bank Financing of Small Business Loans


I read a blog post today about how banks have started to lend to small business again. Considering the bad treatment banks have given their customers I wonder how they will treat small businesses after cutting off lines of credit and other lending to them during the financial crisis. I suggest considering the credit union as an alternative to a bank for small business lending. Personally, I like getting treated as a person instead of as a commodity and credit unions have many advantages. I just opened an account with a credit union and I found the I received much better treatment and the credit union valued not just my business, but me as a person.

I remember an SBA loan I had with a small bank that a larger bank later took over. For several years the bank and I had a good relationship. One day I received a notice the larger bank had bought the bank and the new bank no longer wanted SBA loans as part of its business. The new management made it difficult to preserve the good relationship by charging new fees for everything imaginable. A few years into the recent financial crisis I saw this bank on a list of the banks the Fed had shut down.

Because small business financing sources have evaporated during the global recession, small business should consider using credit unions. Credit union unlike small banks are cooperative nonprofit organizations. As nonprofit organizations credit unions have an exemption from tax resulting in lower costs allowing them more latitude in making loans. Credit unions also enjoy  lower costs from volunteer labor and employer sponsorship giving them the ability to offer lower rates. Besides offering small business loans, credit unions also offer other products like credit cards and car loans (Feinberg & Rahman, 2006).

The trend is for large banks to buy smaller banks especially in larger markets. This trend has resulted in less lending to small businesses causing a need for alternative funding sources like credit unions to service small businesses. Consolidating small banks has created less of an interest in small business lending. The lack of interest stems from the difficulty large banks have dealing with soft data, the more hierarchical bank’s need for more approvals, and lower credit supplies by the larger organization (Ely & Robinson, 2009).

Oriz-Molina and Penas (2008) found one way to mitigate opaque risk from small business is to shorten loan terms to watch the progress of small businesses. The more conventional approach is to want greater collateral over a longer term. Credit unions also have the ability to gain a better understanding of owners’ personal wealth. Although credit unions can focus on better addressing opaque risks using these approaches, larger banks often rely on credit scoring to approve small business loans to achieve a competitive advantage (Immergluck & Smith, 2003).

Despite the ability of larger banks to gain a competitive advantage in lending to small business, credit unions are closer to small business customers and able to forge better relations. Large banks have shown poor behavior in recent years making them less attractive than more personal, smaller thrift institutions. For example, banks have added new fees and restricted lending to only the strongest small businesses. Improved relations with small businesses promotes long-term relations despite shorter lending terms.

Consolidating small community banks into larger banks has caused banks to become less personal and more selective. Credit unions fill a social gap in the market because of consolidation of these community banks and the cost advantage they have from the nonprofit status. Credit unions can expand from solely personal to more commercial lending to fill this gap.

What sources have you considered for your business in achieving financing? Are credit unions part of the mix? Do you want to know more about the value of commercial lending by credit unions? Find out more about how you can benefit.

References

Ely, D. P., & Robinson, K. J. (2009). Credit unions and small business lending. Journal of Financial Services Research, 35(1), 53-80. doi: 10.1007/s10693-008-0038-3

 Feinberg, R. M., & Rahman, A. F. M. A. (2006). Are credit unions just small banks? Determinants of loan rates in local consumer lending markets Eastern Economic Journal, 32(4), 647-659. doi: 1241333261; 35361511; 11879; EEJ; INNNEEJ0000065491

 Immergluck, D., & Smith, G. (2003). How changes in small business lending affect firms in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 8(2), 153-175. doi: 502848551; 8351081; 38473; DVEN; INODDVEN0000469300

Ortiz-Molina, H., & Penas, M. F. (2008). Lending to small businesses: the role of loan maturity in addressing information problems. Small Business Economics, 30(4), 361-383. doi: 10.1007/s11187-007-9053-2

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

Small Business Financing: Let’s Play Where’s Waldo


Finding financing for a small business is like playing Where’s Waldo. Where’s Waldo is a game in which a player looks for a funny guy in a red-striped shirt and stocking cap in a maze. Waldo blends into the crowd and is difficult to find.

Small businesses look to find a source of financing among a maze of potential financiers and hazards. Financing can include angel investors, venture capitalists, banks, and other sources of equity and debt. Ma and Gui (2010) classified direct small business financing in the United States into venture capital and securities financing. Ma and Gui explained indirect financing comes from commercial bank loans. Some commercial bank loans have a government guarantee from the Small Business Administration. Mezzanine financing is another hybrid source of financing valuable because a company can treat much of it as equity even though it combines features of debt and equity (Silbernagel, Vaitkunas, & Giddy, n. d.). The maze is difficult to navigate because the terms differ from one source to another. The small business should target equity financing whenever possible because debt financing is more risky. Micro financing and crowd funding are some new entries to the maze, but an old favorite is bootstrapping.

A person playing Where’s Waldo has to examine the maze with great scrutiny to find Waldo blending in to the crowd. Waldo is a friendly guy, but is crafty in making himself inconspicuous among the crowd. Waldo may have hidden motives in avoiding making himself obvious.

A small business needs to have an awareness of the hidden motives different financiers may have. Some financiers use convertible features to gain control of a company. The small business should have an awareness of these features to prevent a takeover. Small business founders work hard to find a working model for their business and should protect themselves from possible takeovers by reviewing the terms of the financing. Protecting a controlling interest in the firm is a critical role for a small business founder to keep control and avoid the board from firing him.

When one finds Waldo, the game is over and the player can start a new puzzle. A small business founder looking for the right financing locates it the search is over, but he must remember to make sure the terms allow for keeping control of the company.

What sources of financing have you considered? Want to learn more about small business financing and how to preserve a controlling interest? Learn more.

References

Ma, J., & Gui, J. (2010). Study on the small and middle enterprises financing mode in financial crisis. International Business Research, 3(1), 76-79. doi: 2225515451; 56706961; 137934; NBRS; INNNNBRS0000568443

Silbernagel, C., Vaitkunas, D., & Giddy, I. (n. d.). Mezzanine Finance, from http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~igiddy/articles/Mezzanine_Finance_Explained.pdf

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

How a Turnaround is Like Founding a New Company


Once I took a position as the chief financial officer of an organization with a history of over 100 years. The institution in its early years thrived because of its location bordering a city nearly the size of Chicago with a booming coal mining industry. The location bordered on the one of the Great Lakes cutting off half the circumference of the target market.

Eventually, the coal mining industry declined and the city bordering the organization dwindled in population because of lack of other industry in the area. Recreation supplied the next biggest industry in the area because of ideal conditions for snowmobiling, cross-country skiing, and other winter sports. In the summer, the area provided ideal conditions for hunting and fishing. These industries failed to provide enough jobs and opportunities to keep the city alive.

The organization I worked for had its numbers drop by nearly 70% because the organization depended on people within a hundred mile radius of it. When I arrived I found the finances in a shambles and an accumulated deficit resulting in a negative net worth. At first, this condition alarmed me, but I knew I had a calling to turn this ship around.

A turnaround of this magnitude is like starting a new business because it needs a radical transformation. Fortunately, the executive team committed to a radical transformation of finding a new model for the organization that would turn around the organization and create positive cash flows. Weekly we explored new ideas and acted on cutting drains on the organization’s cash flows. In this way, the turnaround is more difficult than starting a new business because a new business does not have to deal with getting rid of existing programs causing a drain on cash flows.

The result of these efforts balanced the organization’s budget and identified new programs capable of producing positive cash flows. When I did my doctoral research I discovered that many companies that go public have accumulated deficits of the same magnitude and about 70% of them eventually fail. This revelation surprised me and I thought about how many companies can use the same help a turnaround expert provides. Big and small companies have similar failure rates. ‘

Although the cause is different, the need to identify a working model is the same. Without transforming an organization by finding a working model that produces positive results any organization will subject itself to failure. This revelation also caused me to think about the benefits of going public versus remaining private. Often, companies go public far before they rightfully should and prematurely remove the founder whose role it is to find a working model.

Public companies start to create more bureaucratic settings, while the organization needs to stay nimble enough to allow the working model to develop and meet consumer needs. Bureaucratization adds costs and reduces flexibility to adapt to make the model work. I believe many companies act too fast to go public because they believe it provides a safety net for raising capital. I believe a slower more deliberate growth may benefit many companies and allow the founders to keep their company and learn how to manage it instead of getting shown the door.  Founders work hard and if they are serious should hold on to their creation and learn how to improve it.

I believe other consultants place too much emphasis on getting big too fast. Companies might do well to slow down and grow organically than fall prey to seeking the safety net of a public company. Slowing down allows the founder to start to see the forest from the trees and build a sustainable model without risking the founder’s position.  

My company works to build organic growth by building on gaining the experience and education needed to grow organically. I believe a serious entrepreneur has an attachment to his or her creation and needs a different focus to preserve an identity with the company the founder creates.

What is your goal in founding a company? Would you prefer to stay involved in the company you create or do you want to exit and put the company in someone else’s hands? Please leave a comment to let me know your view.

If you are serious about preserving your identity with the company you want to create I urge you to try the services of my company by signing on now.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

Small Business: Divide and Conquer


In this election year the country has seen the political parties jockeying for votes of small business, but whether either party represents the needs of small business is questionable. Ide (2009) showed that small businesses account for 99.7% of businesses in the United States and 50.7% of employees in 2004.

Although small business should have significant  political power, the parties are lukewarm about  supporting important interests of small business. Each party encourages some of the interests of small business, but neither party makes a strong case for small business.  As Young (2008) suggested, policymakers since the New Deal have taken the strategy to fragment small business interests.

Each party has a script it follows to divide and conquer small business, but what if small business unites? Small business by the sheer numbers should have a more powerful influence on policymakers than big business.

Baumol, Litan, and Schramm (2007) listed several political issues benefiting small businesses. Bankruptcy protects tops the list because the cost of failing is too high. Big business benefits by Chapter 11 reorganizations. Although Chapter 11 is affordable for big business, this provision of the bankruptcy law is costly for entrepreneurs. The stigma attached to bankruptcy penalizes small business, but rewards big business. The notion big businesses can clean up their act, but entrepreneurs have little value to the economy is a bad idea. Why can big businesses make mistakes, but not entrepreneurs?

The next item on the list is access to finance. Joseph Schumpeter (1911) explained the importance of banks in making financing available to small business to spur innovation and drive economic growth. The role of financial markets is to channel savings to investors wanting to earn higher returns. Banks today are not lending and policy makers have done little to help small business find the funds they need. Lending to innovators drives economic growth and job creation. Large companies have access to capital through the capital markets. Why not lend to small business?

Baumol et al. (2007) argued small businesses need rewards for engaging in productive entrepreneurship that innovates and finds ways to make and deliver products better than those existing. For example, small businesses should find it easier to protect intellectual property and pay lower taxes. Small business should have an equal ability to enforce contracts as big businesses enjoy. Unfortunately, existing law favors big business and the cost of protection is too heavy for small business.

Another item on the list is antimonopoly regulation. The policymakers in recent years have ignored antitrust laws and made it easy for big business to crowd out small business. Savino (2009) explained how Supreme Court Chief Justice Louis Brandeis championed efficiency in business by enforcing antitrust legislation in the late 1920s and 1930s. Capitalism relies on equal opportunity for small business to compete.

A final item on the list is to support innovations resulting from inventions coming out of university research and development efforts. Making patent protection easier would benefit these efforts and federal funding can help, but policymakers are overzealous about austerity measures (Baumol et al., 2007).

Unlike others willing to accept current conditions for small business, I believe the time has come for small businesses to come together and foster a small business agenda. I want to see the United States return to the prominence it once achieved as the hub of small business creation.

Please leave a comment on what you think is important for small business. I am interested in knowing your thoughts. What should be part of small businesses political agenda?

Visit us by clicking here!

References

Baumol, W. J., Litan, R. E., & Schramm, C. J. (2007). Good capitalism, bad capitalism and economics of growth and prosperity. New Haven, Conn. and London: Yale University Press.

Ide, T. (2009). How to rectify unfair trade practices and to establish appropriate supply chains and better business culture under the global market economy. Pacific Economic Review, 14(5), 612-621. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0106.2009.00475.x

Savino, D. (2009). Louis D. Brandeis and his role promoting scientific management as a progressive movement. Journal of Management History, 15(1), 38-49. doi: 10.1108/17511340910921772

Schumpeter, J. A. (1911). Theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Young, M. (2008). The political roots of small business identity. Polity, 40(4), 436. doi: 10.1057/pol.2008.20

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

1 Comment

Small Business Finance: Bootstrapping Will Set You Free


The biggest problem I hear most entrepreneurs have in starting their business is how to raise the funds they need. The truth is 91% of entrepreneurs start their businesses by using debt, while only 7% use their own equity (Lam, 2010). This statistic is almost perfectly correlated with the failure rate. The high failure rate associated with the use of debt is no coincidence.

Many small business consultants offer services to develop a business plan to find financing. I suggest avoiding borrowing as much as you can. Bankers and other lenders are not your friend, but the enemy. Entrepreneurs pay dearly on borrowed money leading to high failure rates. How do you expect to earn a return high enough to cover the double-digit cost of capital when first starting out?

I find finances work better for a small business entrepreneur who can manage his or her own finances. An entrepreneur can control his or her own destiny by following this simple advice. Bootstrapping will set you free and make you independent of the loan sharks. What is bootstrapping? Quite simply, bootstrapping is “using other people’s money.” Moreover, bootstrapping is a continuing course of action, not a onetime affair. A savvy entrepreneur will learn how to use bootstrapping to lessen the need to borrow (Lam, 2010).

Some ways an entrepreneur can use bootstrapping include working out of your house, leasing rather than buying equipment, buying second-hand equipment, taking advantage of trade credit, hiring inexpensive labor, and employing family members in the business. An entrepreneur can also develop a savings club to raise capital for start-up (Lam, 2010). Using these techniques avoids the need for external financing and reduces the financing gap. A good entrepreneur balances the cost of funding with the returns the business can earn. A good entrepreneur manages the gap between immediate demand and the firm’s funding needs.

By using bootstrapping the small business entrepreneur shows the ability to manage capital in an efficient way. The small business entrepreneur does not need to give up control to find external financing and can highlight his or her management ability. Bootstrapping shows the small business entrepreneur has the ability to manage relations with others including family, customers, supply-chain partners, banks, and suppliers.

The small business entrepreneur who employs this strategy shows financiers the ability to manage capital so these financiers are more likely to want to offer external financing. The best time to find financing is when the business least needs it. Showing this ability allows the small business entrepreneur to find external financing at more desirable rates without sacrificing ownership and control.

Please let me know why you need financing to start your business by leaving a comment. Do you want to learn more about how to attract financing to your business using this proven forumula?

References

Lam, W. (2010). Funding gap, what funding gap? Financial bootstrapping: Supply, demand and creation of entrepreneurial finance. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 16(4), 268-295. doi: 10.1108/13552551011054480

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

1 Comment

Start Your Business or Quit Right Now


I remember when I started my first business how frustrated I became when everyone wanted to reject my business plan. Everyone wanted to say, “Your plan is not good enough, “You can’t do that,” “Your numbers don’t add up,” or some other lame reason to reject me. I don’t even remember them all. The average person might just say, “I’ve had enough,” I tried,” “I give up,” or “Maybe everyone else is right.” I thought who are these people who do not know the first thing about my business to make these disparaging remarks. Do these people even care?

After finally getting the loan I needed to start my business, these comments didn’t even make a difference to me. I was free and I could put my focus on my passion. Now is the time to prove the naysayers wrong!

Unlike some I am not a quitter. Think about it! Would you rather work with someone who is persistent, diligent, determined, vigilant, and deliberate or would you prefer to work with someone who quits? Do you want someone who helps take a project to reach its final conclusion or someone who simply walks away without giving it the effort it deserves?

I know what I prefer, and it’s not quitting. I know I have it in my DNA to never to give up. I yearn to achieve what I set out to achieve and do not let little setbacks stand in my way.  I am energized by learning more about my business so I can serve my customers better. For me the fun is in getting to my goal, not settling into a comfortable position. If you want a comfortable position get a job. What I do is not a job; it’s an eternal fire I need to put out.

If you don’t have the fire, I suggest quitting now.  Do you want to learn more?

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

A Tale from the Past: What it Takes to Start a Successful Business


I read a blog a few days ago that said you do not need experience to be a successful entrepreneur. So what do you need? Do you need a degree from an Ivy League school or a large pot of money from a notable investor?

Let me tell you a story from my personal experience. I once worked for a man who came from humble beginnings. Sam was the man. Sam’s family had a hard time putting food on the table coming over from the old country. Sam had a brother that did not fit in anywhere so the Sam felt a duty to take care of him. Sam did not make it through high school because he was pressed for his family’s survival.

So what did Sam do? Sam went into the screw business. Now your first thought might be, “who did Sam try to screw?” If so, you have the wrong idea! Sam’s business had to do with making screws in the fastener industry. Sam started in a small garage at home and at first started with selling products, but Sam often told me his success came not from selling, but from buying. Before starting his company Sam worked as a buyer for another company.

As Sam’s business grew, he started manufacturing screws and with a few of his friends formed a partnership and eventually a corporation. Sam had an absolute passion for the business and made it his business to learn every facet of the business. Over the years Sam and his partners grew the business in to an extremely successful business in the industry. The company grew out of the garage to a large manufacturing facility with thousands of high-profile customers.

Sam led the company from obscurity to a thriving business and Sam mastered every person’s position in the entire company. I kid you not! Sam was faster than a marathon runner and would see how every employee performed in their job. Sam followed this routine the entire day, each and every day. Sam showed his passion for the business and did not think of it as work.

I did not mention I came to Sam’s company late after his partners had left or retired. My role at the company was vice president of finance. By this time, the company was already a public company. By the way, Sam could do my job even though he did not have a high school diploma. Sam made it a point to know everyone’s job inside and out. Sam drilled me at lunch each and every day to keep me on track. Sam would let me know when I eventually mastered my job.

Sam started thinking about retirement and sold the company to a Harvard MBA. By the way the Harvard MBA’s name was Ned and he was a marathon runner. Ned bought the company with money inherited from his wealthy father. Every company that Ned bought he started to bring in his own people to manage the company and do everything by the book. One-by-one each company Ned took over started to lose money and eventually failed. Ned was a turnaround expert in the wrong direction.

Sam saw the handwriting on the wall and decided it was time to get out and semi-retire, but Sam loved the business too much and went back out on his own. During our final time together, Sam told me to look for another job because Ned wanted to bring in his own people after he left. I learned more from this job than any job I ever had thanks to Sam.

So why did Sam succeed? Sam did not graduate from high school, but admired others like myself who had a good education. Sam did not have a large pot of money to start. Yet, Sam grew out of his garage to a manufacturing facility and eventually became a public company. What do you think it takes to build a successful company? Did Sam have experience, and, if so, what role did it play in his success? Did Ned have experience in the companies he took over?

Do you have some ideas about why Sam could build a successful company? Do you want to know more about what I think it takes to start a successful business. Learn more.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 Comments