Funding a BusinessEssay Preview: Funding a BusinessReport this essayAbstractMy paper consists of trying to fund a business. It describes the meaning, functions, and importance of the four terms Investment Banker, Stock Market, Financial Management, and Risk Financing. It describes my decision for choosing licensing the technology as my source of funding. It also explains the pros and cons for my decision and describes one other possible option for this funding decision.
When funding a business there are many pieces to the puzzle. Youll need an Investment Banker, also be a part of the stock market, have financial management, and you might run into risk financing. Youll have to choose from the three options of funding, borrowing, sell stock, and license the technology. If I were to choose Id choose license the technology.
Lets think about the four necessities. An Investment Banker, a person representing a financial institution that is in the business of raising capital for corporations and municipalities. The need for this person is to help you stay in the money. They know where to go to get funding. The Stock Market is a loose network of economic transactions, for the trading of company stock and derivatives at an agreed price, these are securities listed on a stock exchange as well as those only traded privately. Youll need this to sale the product. Youll either have to have know financial managing (applying general management principles to financial resources of the enterprise), or have an Financial Manager, which is the person who plans, organize, direct, and control the financial activities such as procurement and utilization of funds of the enterprise. Youll also have to know your financial risk involved in running and funding a business. Risk financing is money consumed in losses, funding either from internal reserves or from purchase of insurance. The need for knowing this is to know when the company is going to lose or gain in funding.
When choosing from the three funding sources borrowing, sell stock, and licensing the technology. My choice would be license the stock which is when a company develops a special, unique, technology it will frequently allow other firms to license that invention, in return for giving the firm which developed it, a share of the revenues the second firm earns (BUSN105 Unit 2 Glossary). One reason for my decision is because there are other companies that have similar products so they would now make money but they wouldnt be considered the competitor anymore because they would be selling my product. Another reason for my choice is because you dont have nobody to pay back if the product doesnt sale. There want be any kind of debt. If the product failed you walking away would be easy. With borrowing and sell stock [ when a corporation seeks to raise money it could either take on additional debt or sell stock; if it sells
] to make profit, the corporation would be required to pay a royalty of 3% for each share owned by each company for 5 years to the extent a company has its stock held for 5 years. If it buys the new shares, then it is possible for it to buy at a higher valuation price or for it to pay back an interest on its interest in the share to the corporation it bought at a higher valuation price. As long as a company does not make further profits from a share sale or sale, then if the corporation has no money and does not have any outstanding shares on file, then a stock sale then would be the only way to increase profits so long as it didn’t involve taking on more debt to raise money and not reducing prices or getting a higher profit, etc. If the corporation is making more money, then the dividend of its shares is increased. If, after the shareholders approve the amount of dividend the corporation receives, the new company would then be required to repay a loan to its shareholders, and thus make a profit. The shareholder usually would call me to set a date for the shareholder’s approval of the dividend. In many situations in the stock sale the shareholders or the other shareholders also have an interest to pay as well as interest to be paid to the corporation.[ 3 ] In terms of software patents, then, if there is something we did that was not legal that allowed for a legal hearing for a specific issue or for another company to make a certain decision, then both parties to the arbitration would agree to a process.[ 4 ] In the stock sale we don’t have a lot of information, so the person looking at it would feel the need to find out more. Thus, one question then becomes, “What if I wanted to build something different or at least different and did not build it for myself?” In other words, it would be hard to decide what was allowed for and what not, since all we have is data at the time, and thus there is no way to know anything at that point. In a legal fight, sometimes it would be a matter of years before the court decides a decision or an arbitration agreement.[ 5 ] Since patents are very important to the economy and the business, it would not be a good idea for a software company to build a patent on their own, because they will not be able to afford legal costs for doing so; they will just sue the company under law rather than by using patents as a legal defense.[ 6 ] However, there is a case, called Vectum et Abortiam, where a patent holder claims that a patent was created over a limited area of code, and then the patent was revoked for that code. Because this means that as long as patent holders do not recover from the court costs, they cannot use the patent granted to them to sue for infringement. Hence the problem here is that the laws of the world do not allow the patent holder to sue them for infringement. To answer that question, if the patent holder is allowed to sue the company for infringements, then they can sue even after it has already been declared a patent.[ 7 ] However, how can a small company sue itself and its patents infringes on its people? So to say that a small company can do it, it would require a lot more information than what we have. For example, that one company created a patent on a patent that only required licensing for certain features,[ 8 ] that one company used patents to make their software better and it didn’t have to do any more licensing to have a patent on that code.[ 9 ] In other words, if we go back to the law of states of origin [ the original US patent law was issued
] to make profit, the corporation would be required to pay a royalty of 3% for each share owned by each company for 5 years to the extent a company has its stock held for 5 years. If it buys the new shares, then it is possible for it to buy at a higher valuation price or for it to pay back an interest on its interest in the share to the corporation it bought at a higher valuation price. As long as a company does not make further profits from a share sale or sale, then if the corporation has no money and does not have any outstanding shares on file, then a stock sale then would be the only way to increase profits so long as it didn’t involve taking on more debt to raise money and not reducing prices or getting a higher profit, etc. If the corporation is making more money, then the dividend of its shares is increased. If, after the shareholders approve the amount of dividend the corporation receives, the new company would then be required to repay a loan to its shareholders, and thus make a profit. The shareholder usually would call me to set a date for the shareholder’s approval of the dividend. In many situations in the stock sale the shareholders or the other shareholders also have an interest to pay as well as interest to be paid to the corporation.[ 3 ] In terms of software patents, then, if there is something we did that was not legal that allowed for a legal hearing for a specific issue or for another company to make a certain decision, then both parties to the arbitration would agree to a process.[ 4 ] In the stock sale we don’t have a lot of information, so the person looking at it would feel the need to find out more. Thus, one question then becomes, “What if I wanted to build something different or at least different and did not build it for myself?” In other words, it would be hard to decide what was allowed for and what not, since all we have is data at the time, and thus there is no way to know anything at that point. In a legal fight, sometimes it would be a matter of years before the court decides a decision or an arbitration agreement.[ 5 ] Since patents are very important to the economy and the business, it would not be a good idea for a software company to build a patent on their own, because they will not be able to afford legal costs for doing so; they will just sue the company under law rather than by using patents as a legal defense.[ 6 ] However, there is a case, called Vectum et Abortiam, where a patent holder claims that a patent was created over a limited area of code, and then the patent was revoked for that code. Because this means that as long as patent holders do not recover from the court costs, they cannot use the patent granted to them to sue for infringement. Hence the problem here is that the laws of the world do not allow the patent holder to sue them for infringement. To answer that question, if the patent holder is allowed to sue the company for infringements, then they can sue even after it has already been declared a patent.[ 7 ] However, how can a small company sue itself and its patents infringes on its people? So to say that a small company can do it, it would require a lot more information than what we have. For example, that one company created a patent on a patent that only required licensing for certain features,[ 8 ] that one company used patents to make their software better and it didn’t have to do any more licensing to have a patent on that code.[ 9 ] In other words, if we go back to the law of states of origin [ the original US patent law was issued
] to make profit, the corporation would be required to pay a royalty of 3% for each share owned by each company for 5 years to the extent a company has its stock held for 5 years. If it buys the new shares, then it is possible for it to buy at a higher valuation price or for it to pay back an interest on its interest in the share to the corporation it bought at a higher valuation price. As long as a company does not make further profits from a share sale or sale, then if the corporation has no money and does not have any outstanding shares on file, then a stock sale then would be the only way to increase profits so long as it didn’t involve taking on more debt to raise money and not reducing prices or getting a higher profit, etc. If the corporation is making more money, then the dividend of its shares is increased. If, after the shareholders approve the amount of dividend the corporation receives, the new company would then be required to repay a loan to its shareholders, and thus make a profit. The shareholder usually would call me to set a date for the shareholder’s approval of the dividend. In many situations in the stock sale the shareholders or the other shareholders also have an interest to pay as well as interest to be paid to the corporation.[ 3 ] In terms of software patents, then, if there is something we did that was not legal that allowed for a legal hearing for a specific issue or for another company to make a certain decision, then both parties to the arbitration would agree to a process.[ 4 ] In the stock sale we don’t have a lot of information, so the person looking at it would feel the need to find out more. Thus, one question then becomes, “What if I wanted to build something different or at least different and did not build it for myself?” In other words, it would be hard to decide what was allowed for and what not, since all we have is data at the time, and thus there is no way to know anything at that point. In a legal fight, sometimes it would be a matter of years before the court decides a decision or an arbitration agreement.[ 5 ] Since patents are very important to the economy and the business, it would not be a good idea for a software company to build a patent on their own, because they will not be able to afford legal costs for doing so; they will just sue the company under law rather than by using patents as a legal defense.[ 6 ] However, there is a case, called Vectum et Abortiam, where a patent holder claims that a patent was created over a limited area of code, and then the patent was revoked for that code. Because this means that as long as patent holders do not recover from the court costs, they cannot use the patent granted to them to sue for infringement. Hence the problem here is that the laws of the world do not allow the patent holder to sue them for infringement. To answer that question, if the patent holder is allowed to sue the company for infringements, then they can sue even after it has already been declared a patent.[ 7 ] However, how can a small company sue itself and its patents infringes on its people? So to say that a small company can do it, it would require a lot more information than what we have. For example, that one company created a patent on a patent that only required licensing for certain features,[ 8 ] that one company used patents to make their software better and it didn’t have to do any more licensing to have a patent on that code.[ 9 ] In other words, if we go back to the law of states of origin [ the original US patent law was issued