Business Idea ... Thoughts

[SeedPhrase]

Hmm, I dunno - what's wrong with owning 1% of a company that makes $1 mil per month ??

Lot's of online stores make that.... but it requires capital to get to that level and most people only have $1-5k (if that) so they can never get there. But if you put together 100 people like that then you stand a chance of getting there... and once you're there, you can even take the company public and trade on the stock exchange - now your 1% could become worth $1 mil. in a couple of years.

but your funnel of gathering 3 people would be hard...how you planning to make them together with the right person with money skill and idea.....

 

[t2van]

It doesn't matter - IF everyone that becomes an owner has to invest.

If you have an idea, great - you still have to invest.

If you don't have an idea, that's okay - you still need to invest if you want ownership.

If you have or don't have a skill, you still need to invest as well.

If you will work harder than everyone else, awesome - you still need to invest like everyone else.
You don't want to work, that's okay too - so long as you invest.


Basically you take 100 people each put $1000 to start an online venture = $100k in startup capital.

The 100 people are now all co-owners and limited partners.

They are all essentially directors of the company, they VOTE on who among them going to manage the company and how much he's going to get paid, if they can't find someone within the group to do the job, then can hire a project manager for around $4k/month and that person can manage the business. While the owners focus on strategy - the project manager is basically the CEO of the company taking orders from the owners, and executing their instructions through 3rd party agencies and freelancers.

I think the sheer number of hours and people required to moderate them sorts of discussions would be insane. If that's not what your willing to provide I don't see the point in doing it / offering it.

The whole thing sounds like a cluster f*ck from the get go - no offence OP!

I also don't think there is a need for that kind of thing either. If no one has an idea I don't get what I'm investing in. IF it's just for a return I might as well go put $/£/€1000 into one of them stock investment clubs

 

[Deleted member 1333509]

This is nothing like Linkedin, Producthunt, etc it's solid, and it's also a nuanced way of looking at cooperation.

People can offer a wide range of different benefits to a venture, and by creating a system which appropriately quantifies and compares the types of value that all parties bring, it allows for a fluid system to come about that increases the likelihood of profit being generated and massively reduces risk for all involved.

If I work on something as a dev for 100 hours and someone invests $5,000 into a venture to buy required equipment, who contributed more?

If you can find a way to answer any question like this where both parties are happy with the outcome, now you have the power of someone with $5k + someone who can code, but it's done in a more flexible way than a startup because of the greater variety of those that can work together (you won't typically get a startup taking off with 50 people) and the ability to establish multiple projects run by one group of people (instead of a startup which is one project one group normally).

Good idea, should be implemented. Often people struggle to believe in things they haven't seen happen before. It's natural, but it's a curse against opportunity.

The whole thing sounds like a cluster f*ck from the get go

You're right that it wouldn't be trivial to organise everything properly. If you could though, it unlocks much faster financial progress for anyone involved. It reduces risk a lot as well.

Just taking IM as an example, there are a lot of guys that do really well and set themselves up, but then also a lot that work for months/years and invest a lot of money and get suboptimal returns or loses. If all of those guys that failed had have pooled their resources (time, money, knowledge, ability to research etc) and had set a single project to work on they would have most likely outperformed their own returns, and would get a result in a fraction of the time too.

Also from any project there are multiple angles for monetisation that might missed by a single guy working on his own. It's the reason that unions, gangs, governments and corporations run the world in their own respective environments. This can be applied to any environment.

 

[IamNRE]

This is nothing like Linkedin, Producthunt, etc it's solid, and it's also a nuanced way of looking at cooperation.

People can offer a wide range of different benefits to a venture, and by creating a system which appropriately quantifies and compares the types of value that all parties bring, it allows for a fluid system to come about that increases the likelihood of profit being generated and massively reduces risk for all involved.

If I work on something as a dev for 100 hours and someone invests $5,000 into a venture to buy required equipment, who contributed more?

If you can find a way to answer any question like this where both parties are happy with the outcome, now you have the power of someone with $5k + someone who can code, but it's done in a more flexible way than a startup because of the greater variety of those that can work together (you won't typically get a startup taking off with 50 people) and the ability to establish multiple projects run by one group of people (instead of a startup which is one project one group normally).

Good idea, should be implemented. Often people struggle to believe in things they haven't seen happen before. It's natural, but it's a curse against opportunity.



You're right that it wouldn't be trivial to organise everything properly. If you could though, it unlocks much faster financial progress for anyone involved. It reduces risk a lot as well.

Just taking IM as an example, there are a lot of guys that do really well and set themselves up, but then also a lot that work for months/years and invest a lot of money and get suboptimal returns or loses. If all of those guys that failed had have pooled their resources (time, money, knowledge, ability to research etc) and had set a single project to work on they would have most likely outperformed their own returns, and would get a result in a fraction of the time too.

Also from any project there are multiple angles for monetisation that might missed by a single guy working on his own. It's the reason that unions, gangs, governments and corporations run the world in their own respective environments. This can be applied to any environment.

Thank you man, you get what I'm trying to do.....

"Just taking IM as an example, there are a lot of guys that do really well and set themselves up, but then also a lot that work for months/years and invest a lot of money and get suboptimal returns or loses. If all of those guys that failed had have pooled their resources (time, money, knowledge, ability to research etc) and had set a single project to work on they would have most likely outperformed their own returns, and would get a result in a fraction of the time too."

but your funnel of gathering 3 people would be hard...how you planning to make them together with the right person with money skill and idea.....

Please read the rest of the thread.


It's actually more like 1 group of people than anything. People that want to start a successful business - but don't have the right idea, the right skills or enough resources to go about it alone. And rather than starting "another blog" or another "amazon store" or another "aliexpress shopify store" .... you pool your resources together with 99 other people and build a REAL business.

 

[IamNRE]

I think the sheer number of hours and people required to moderate them sorts of discussions would be insane. If that's not what your willing to provide I don't see the point in doing it / offering it.

The whole thing sounds like a cluster f*ck from the get go - no offence OP!

I also don't think there is a need for that kind of thing either. If no one has an idea I don't get what I'm investing in. IF it's just for a return I might as well go put $/£/€1000 into one of them stock investment clubs

That's where systems come into play.

With systems you can have teenagers running a million dollar business, just ask your nearest McDonalds franchise owner.

If you believe you can get a better return there, then by all means go to an investment club.

This is more of a value proposition for people that want to start a LARGER corporation and be activists investors like Buffet or Carl Icahn - not passive ones.

 

[t2van]

That's where systems come into play.

With systems you can have teenagers running a million dollar business, just ask your nearest McDonalds franchise owner.

If you believe you can get a better return there, then by all means go to an investment club.

This is more of a value proposition for people that want to start a LARGER corporation and be activists investors like Buffet or Carl Icahn - not passive ones.

No the teenagers are not running it. They are employees to the system.

The difference between the franchise owner and the teenager flipping the burger is night and day.

 

[IamNRE]

Maybe activist investor isn't the right terminology since that entails controlling a public traded company.

But essentially we want put together entrepreneurs together so they can form alliances/co-ops/investment consortiums and put their skills, knowledge, networks and capital in order to establish proper businesses.

"Builder" Startup studios is also kinda similar to what I had in mind (though focusing on building 1 company at a time - due to lack of skills and capital):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Startup_studio

 

[Cyberars]

interesting idea i love the concept, but there is a need to split the shares according to the efforts,

for example that community starts by asking the "idea holders" to think about a SAAS project that can be profitable.
those raw ideas needed to be protected in a way no other member can "steal" it and use it on his own.

then the "winning idea" selected by votes of this community, the owner of that idea can't get just 1%, as his idea is the foundation of the project
also there some programers who join, need to score each member by his contribution to that project

 

[Deleted member 1333509]

Maybe activist investor isn't the right terminology since that entails controlling a public traded company.

Also activist has connotations outside of what you're talking about as well. But I think it's in the right ball park and can be adjusted over time as things become more clear.

interesting idea i love the concept, but there is a need to split the shares according to the efforts,

for example that community starts by asking the "idea holders" to think about a SAAS project that can be profitable.
those raw ideas needed to be protected in a way no other member can "steal" it and use it on his own.

then the "winning idea" selected by votes of this community, the owner of that idea can't get just 1%, as his idea is the foundation of the project
also there some programers who join, need to score each member by his contribution to that project

I agree with this. In a situation where a single person has a really amazing idea they should be rewarded fairly for it, which is a part of a holistic system of understanding relevant value. How much more valuable is thinking of an idea than designing a logo, or are either of these more valuable than investing $500, and by how much.

I think as well the ideation process can be more of a group discussion than "who has the best idea", being that everyone can source different ideas within the confines of a set of guidelines about the kinds of projects that could be considered, and then after a period of group discussion there can be a vote, or an elimination process to get rid of most ideas, more discussion about the finalists and then a vote.

Ideas in themselves are 99% of the time almost valueless without the work to execute them, and the kinds of ideas that are inherently super valuable just on their own are ones that have some kind of hidden understanding of a system that most people don't know.

Either way it's a good point.

 

[Kikerinka]

It just won't work.

There are events like that done offline (StartUp weekend is perhaps the most famous one), where people actually meet physically, pitch ideas, create teams, work on them together. Some investors are also always present. I know this first hand because in the past I took part in such events. It's 10 times better than just meeting someone online.

Still, less than 10% of teams survive after the end of the weekend... and much fewer eventually turn the idea into a successful business.
I could write a few pages why it ends this way, but just be be very brief:

• Idea is nothing in business of 21st century. Any idea you may have, be sure that 100s of people had the same idea before. Everyone likes dreaming, but nobody likes taking action...
• Guys with real skills (for example superb in coding and programming) will do jobs for 2K-10K/month (depending on a location). They don't have motivation to work on your dream with a payment that's not guaranteed...
• Guys with a lot of money ... well , they do not need to join some marketplaces (whether online or offline), to look for guys with skills or ideas. They can easily invest into established companies/stocks/real estate etc (ideas that already proved successful)

As I said I could write much more about this but do not want to waste your time with a lengthy post...

 

[IamNRE]

interesting idea i love the concept, but there is a need to split the shares according to the efforts,

for example that community starts by asking the "idea holders" to think about a SAAS project that can be profitable.
those raw ideas needed to be protected in a way no other member can "steal" it and use it on his own.

then the "winning idea" selected by votes of this community, the owner of that idea can't get just 1%, as his idea is the foundation of the project
also there some programers who join, need to score each member by his contribution to that project

Thanks for your thoughts.

At present time I don't believe in rewarding people for ideas.

So you have an idea, big whoop - can you execute on it and turn it into a business that generates money and provides value in the marketplace?!

I've been talking with someone from this thread via PM and personally I believe that nobody in the group should be doing any of the work - because;

1) They might be a charlatan and not be able to do what they claim causing you to lose time, money and cause division.

2) It makes things more complicated once you've got some people doing extra work. i.e how much do you compensate them.

3) It can cause resentment and a wedge between the group members (those doing things VS those that play a more relaxed role).

Imagine some in the group says "I'm an expert in FB ads and Google ads, don't waste money hiring an agency - let me do it".

You guys give him the green light, and he ends up wasting 1 month not getting any results and wasting $3000 running shitty ads that don't convert.

Wouldn't you feel some type of way about him?! Why would you want that person to stay in the group?!

I hope you can see how this can cause problems.

----------

That's why I feel that it would be better to have a project manager and instruct him what he should do, pay him a salary and give him the green light to work with 3rd party partners (that have a PROVEN track record) as he see fit to get the job done i.e outsource it to professional coders / ad agencies - and if THEY fail to deliver what we paid for, then we can always ask for a refund etc. but the cohesiveness of the group is still in tact.

The goal isn't to build the world's most awesome product - its to create MVPs that are functional and customers are willing to pay for.

So even when you want to build a SaaS it won't be much more than $2000-$5000 to develop the MVP version. You can always re-invest profits and improve the product down the road, OR you can raise capital from venture capitalists once you've got a proven MVP & business model.

 

[Deleted member 1333509]

It just won't work.

There are events like that done offline (StartUp weekend is perhaps the most famous one), where people actually meet physically, pitch ideas, create teams, work on them together. Some investors are also always present. I know this first hand because in the past I took part in such events. It's 10 times better than just meeting someone online.

Still, less than 10% of teams survive after the end of the weekend... and much fewer eventually turn the idea into a successful business.
I could write a few pages why it ends this way, but just be be very brief:

• Idea is nothing in business of 21st century. Any idea you may have, be sure that 100s of people had the same idea before. Everyone likes dreaming, but nobody likes taking action...
• Guys with real skills (for example superb in coding and programming) will do jobs for 2K-10K/month (depending on a location). They don't have motivation to work on your dream with a payment that's not guaranteed...
• Guys with a lot of money ... well , they do not need to join some marketplaces (whether online or offline), to look for guys with skills or ideas. They can easily invest into established companies/stocks/real estate etc (ideas that already proved successful)

As I said I could write much more about this but do not want to waste your time with a lengthy post...

I think that a lot of what you said is true, and it's very coherent.

Be aware of basing your perception of what is possible on everything that you've seen and experienced. Just because you've been to a startup event and there were high failure rates, doesn't mean a different concept would fail. It's also not guaranteed to be a successful idea, but until people try something there's no way to know for sure.

To correct you as well:

- An idea ALONE is nothing in business. Conversely, an idea within any business is incredibly important. Not just some amazing startup idea to disrupt an industry, but even which area to focus on, how to compare and assess different concepts for viability and profitability, and looking for things that can be leveraged in the favour of a project - that's all ideation, and it's incredibly important. It's also much easier to do well for a group of professionals than for a single person.

- Guys with real skills cost money. One person on their own might only have a limited amount of money. 100 guys together can afford to buy guys with skills to get things done that one person can't.

- This idea that OP is talking about isn't targeting guys with large amounts of capital to invest (necessarily). But the collective bargaining power of many smaller amounts of investment. Guys with $500, or $1,000 or $5,000 to invest do have a vested interest in working together with others to make their money go further. They can't just hire a team of devs, buy lawyers for legal work, corporate structuring costs etc etc.

 

[Deleted member 15724]

It's a good idea in theory, but I think it would cause more problems than it would solve. Not only that, but getting a good amount of members willing to invest $1,000 on a complete stranger online would be pretty tough and expensive. You'll either have to go for the gullible "get rich quick" audience, or the gullible old folks investing with their retirement funds - both of these audiences want their returns. You really won't get any legitimate investors willing to gamble on board (good luck pitching them their $1k investment could turn into $10k/mo).

But let's say you pulled it off and I decided to invest $1,000 on an idea I really liked. Now I'm in with 99 other people and remember we all want returns. Who would get and control the money earned from that idea? How do I know I can trust this person? Who's lawyer are we going to use to make sure everything runs smoothly between all these partners? The developer decided 1% isn't worth it and pulls out.. Now what?

I'd assume you'd take a low percentage being the broker, but what happens when a few people out of that 100 decide to pull out for whatever reason. Cold feet, realized it was a bad idea, developer disappeared, need money to pay rent, the returns are too slow, whatever. You can't tell them no because it just takes 1 chargeback and you already lost what you earned. Have a few more chargebacks and you risk losing you merchant account.

Like I said, it's a great idea in theory, but I'd invest my time and energy into something else.

 

[IamNRE]

The role of the 100 investors will be like the role of board of directors - where you hire/fire the core project manager / CEO - and you set the strategy of the business.

 

[IamNRE]

I think that a lot of what you said is true, and it's very coherent.

Be aware of basing your perception of what is possible on everything that you've seen and experienced. Just because you've been to a startup event and there were high failure rates, doesn't mean a different concept would fail. It's also not guaranteed to be a successful idea, but until people try something there's no way to know for sure.

To correct you as well:

- An idea ALONE is nothing in business. Conversely, an idea within any business is incredibly important. Not just some amazing startup idea to disrupt an industry, but even which area to focus on, how to compare and assess different concepts for viability and profitability, and looking for things that can be leveraged in the favour of a project - that's all ideation, and it's incredibly important. It's also much easier to do well for a group of professionals than for a single person.

- Guys with real skills cost money. One person on their own might only have a limited amount of money. 100 guys together can afford to buy guys with skills to get things done that one person can't.

- This idea that OP is talking about isn't targeting guys with large amounts of capital to invest (necessarily). But the collective bargaining power of many smaller amounts of investment. Guys with $500, or $1,000 or $5,000 to invest do have a vested interest in working together with others to make their money go further. They can't just hire a team of devs, buy lawyers for legal work, corporate structuring costs etc etc.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Welp.

 

[IamNRE]

It's a good idea in theory, but I think it would cause more problems than it would solve. Not only that, but getting a good amount of members willing to invest $1,000 on a complete stranger online would be pretty tough and expensive. You'll either have to go for the gullible "get rich quick" audience, or the gullible old folks investing with their retirement funds - both of these audiences want their returns. You really won't get any legitimate investors willing to gamble on board (good luck pitching them their $1k investment could turn into $10k/mo).

But let's say you pulled it off and I decided to invest $1,000 on an idea I really liked. Now I'm in with 99 other people and remember we all want returns. Who would get and control the money earned from that idea? How do I know I can trust this person? Who's lawyer are we going to use to make sure everything runs smoothly between all these partners? The developer decided 1% isn't worth it and pulls out.. Now what?

I'd assume you'd take a low percentage being the broker, but what happens when a few people out of that 100 decide to pull out for whatever reason. Cold feet, realized it was a bad idea, developer disappeared, need money to pay rent, the returns are too slow, whatever. You can't tell them no because it just takes 1 chargeback and you already lost what you earned. Have a few more chargebacks and you risk losing you merchant account.

Like I said, it's a great idea in theory, but I'd invest my time and energy into something else.

Thanks for your comment. I suggest you read through some of my other replies, as I've changed the direction a bit since the original post.

1) I am not looking for lazy/get rich quick investors. I am after ENTREPRENEURS like you and me, that have LIMITED capital and want to partner up with other entrepreneurs in order to build something much larger than they otherwise would be able to build on their own.

2) The 100 people will NOT be carrying out any of the work (i.e copywriting, coding, branding etc.) that will be outsourced to 3rd party partners and companies.

3) The IDEAL solution in order to foster trust would be for the 100 investors to put their money into a ESCROW account with terms that stipulates that money shall be used for business only - if its used for anything else - then they will get their money back from the ESCROW. Of course if the business fails then they wouldn't get the money back.

But in order to pull that off I'd need to come up with an extra $100k - perhaps from a bank or investor - who knows. But if I can't pull that off, then I just have to do one hell of a job persuading people to invest and taking a chance on something new.

4) Not a broker - I'll be investing with them in the projects (i.e investing $1k as well) - the idea behind charging $20/month is to keep out those that aren't serious and are flat broke.

 

[androiddeveloper]

Good Idea. I'm not gonna lie. I thought of this similar idea like 5-6 years ago. I even tried to make an android app for this but left it incomplete because of my other projects. I can give that source code for free if you want to continue on my project.

 

[IamNRE]

Good Idea. I'm not gonna lie. I thought of this similar idea like 5-6 years ago. I even tried to make an android app for this but left it incomplete because of my other projects. I can give that source code for free if you want to continue on my project.

Thanks for your generous offer.

I'll be in if I decide to down the app route.

 

[IamNRE]

I think I have enough feedback for now.

Thank you all for taking the time out of your schedule to share your thoughts with me.

Appreciate it!!