Post: #726

(09-13-2017 03:00 PM)Ranch Hand Wrote:  

(08-19-2017 10:19 AM)redbeard Wrote:  How liberal are you guys with "meals and entertainment" write-offs?

I'm thinking there are countless coffee/dinner meets that I can use to save money.

My understanding is if "it" (meal, ball game, golf rounds, etc.) is with a customer or vendor, then it is 100% written expense. If it is internal, employees only event (company "lunch and learn", lunch with a sales rep, etc.), then it is 50% expense write-off.

We have employees write customer names on receipts so it can be appropriately categorized.

Still, I remain pretty conservative about this just as a leadership issue at expense reduction. I have 7-10 employees with my credit card and have to reel in expenses from time-to-time. Some guys think "write off" = free and they just are hard-headed about it.

If I was a sole proprietor, one man show, I'd be all over that stuff.

You need a new accountant ... Meals and Entertainment is 50% with clients and vendors, always assume to be safe. As I explained above, sometimes it can be 100% in as an example a company event or advertising, and in other specific scenarios. The topic is very specific and mildly complex if you haven't read the law, but straight forward once you read and understand it. There are things you can do like an accountable plan, but the company it will still be 50% (100% for the employee); but in your case employees use the company cc so the company is paying it directly. Please stop deducting 100% on this category, switch to 50%; and pray you don't get audited for back years. Errors in tax returns are common, just hope it flies under the radar.

If you have any questions feel free to PM.

Post: #727

(09-01-2017 02:18 AM)BelyyTigr Wrote:  Well my view is that its not a debate about whether ethics should be considered in business. Its a debate about what ethics should be adopted in a particular business. Coke importers have a type of ethics. Otherwise they wind up dead... sooner or later. Its the same principle in other businesses. Ever wondered why some guy gets his business flooded with negative reviews online? Same thing.

BTW its easy to find to download for free.

Kind of a moot point. Sales skills are like game or a gun. It's nothing more than a tool, and you use it for whatever you want to.

(09-12-2017 08:23 AM)JonnyOxford88 Wrote:  Hi there all, thought I would share this with you...

I work in the health industry, and had decided that I was effective at my job, and would like to work with clients outside of work also. My current situation is that I have started a business in my particular field, have 4 regular clients and I am currently making an extra £400-£500 a month from doing so. I've now got a good website, logo designed and have recently had business cards designed which I hope to be distributing around the local area this weekend. I know this is all just a start, but it shows what can be achieved in 3 short months. Only 4 months ago, I never believed any this would ever be possible. I quickly learned that there is no better feeling than receiving money while working for yourself.

I owe you all a thank you. I don't have any friends who own their own business, so being able to heed advice from ambitious people has been extremely helpful. Currently considering creating courses on Udemy as part of a passive income plan, while marketing my business in the local area trying to get new clients.

I guess my question for this thread would be, what other effective ways could I build a client base? I've recently taken on two people for free to get more testimonials. The intention is to be solely working for myself within the next year or two ideally. I know I've got a long way to go, but I've never felt more determined.

Generally speaking, working IN PERSON is your most effective business development strategy.

It's no different than what they're talking about in the "Game" forum. You need to figure out who your target client is (most likely people similar to your existing ones), where they're found, and what your unique value is.

So, your first choice should be to work through your existing network. Just ask your existing clients or any contacts you have a good relationship with if they know of anyone who could benefit from your work. It's your best bet because you already have social proof, get past the gatekeepers, and they'll sell for you.

After that, start working through any IN PERSON networking venues available to you. This varies somewhat by industry but make sure that you're participating in any local or regional industry associations. Use networking groups to find people, referrals from your network, and even use social media (NOT advertising, throw out the word to friends and family...e.g. LinkedIN).

Also start doing what other professional firms do and document your projects/results. Doesn't need to be specific. For example in my industry it would be something like "Thrilled to work with a client in x industry. We were able to successfully execute an acquisition on their behalf that will lead to a merger of their operations for X amount of growth".

Make that easy to find. I've been working on some buy-side engagements (working with a company client looking to acquire a business) and it is extremely attractive to me when I see a B2B company that has a "projects" section up on their website showing me exactly the kind of work they do. That tells me both how solid the company's work is and whether they're capable of supporting the types of projects they would need to do.

(09-15-2017 08:59 AM)Plus Oultre Wrote:  

(09-13-2017 03:00 PM)Ranch Hand Wrote:  

(08-19-2017 10:19 AM)redbeard Wrote:  How liberal are you guys with "meals and entertainment" write-offs?

I'm thinking there are countless coffee/dinner meets that I can use to save money.

My understanding is if "it" (meal, ball game, golf rounds, etc.) is with a customer or vendor, then it is 100% written expense. If it is internal, employees only event (company "lunch and learn", lunch with a sales rep, etc.), then it is 50% expense write-off.

We have employees write customer names on receipts so it can be appropriately categorized.

Still, I remain pretty conservative about this just as a leadership issue at expense reduction. I have 7-10 employees with my credit card and have to reel in expenses from time-to-time. Some guys think "write off" = free and they just are hard-headed about it.

If I was a sole proprietor, one man show, I'd be all over that stuff.

You need a new accountant ... Meals and Entertainment is 50% with clients and vendors, always assume to be safe. As I explained above, sometimes it can be 100% in as an example a company event or advertising, and in other specific scenarios. The topic is very specific and mildly complex if you haven't read the law, but straight forward once you read and understand it. There are things you can do like an accountable plan, but the company it will still be 50% (100% for the employee); but in your case employees use the company cc so the company is paying it directly. Please stop deducting 100% on this category, switch to 50%; and pray you don't get audited for back years. Errors in tax returns are common, just hope it flies under the radar.

If you have any questions feel free to PM.

This shouldn't be a debate. It's not as if the rules for what constitutes an entertainment expense are posted online or anything:

https://www.irs.gov/publications/p463/ch02.html

Or other 3rd parties have posted relevant info: https://quickbooks.intuit.com/r/taxes/ho...eductions/

Post: #728

Something that really hit me in the face recently:

It's better to have a great model for getting in front of customers plus a terrible business idea...

...Than to have a terrible model for getting in front of customers a great business idea.

You can make all sorts of scams and terrible businesses work, provided you can get in front of enough people to find those 1% of fools that are willing to part with their money.

But a great business will never work if you can't get in front of customers.

Once you have customers, a great business is great to keep things sustainable, but it's not actually a condition for initial success.

The pet rock is proof of this. An utterly stupid idea that was presented to enough people that even if 99% of people refused to buy into it, there was 1% that were willing to buy it, but only because it was right in front of them. The pet rock fizzled out because it was stupid and stupid is not sustainable, but initial success doesn't require intelligence or usefulness, only the numbers.

It's like game - if you approach enough chicks, you will get laid; but being in a happy LTR requires a somewhat different rule set. Being good at LTR's is useless if you can't approach; having a good business model is useless if you can't find customers. The initial success is detached from continuing success.

Post: #729

(10-15-2017 07:02 AM)Thomas the Rhymer Wrote:  Something that really hit me in the face recently:

It's better to have a great model for getting in front of customers plus a terrible business idea...

...Than to have a terrible model for getting in front of customers a great business idea.

You can make all sorts of scams and terrible businesses work, provided you can get in front of enough people to find those 1% of fools that are willing to part with their money.

But a great business will never work if you can't get in front of customers.

Once you have customers, a great business is great to keep things sustainable, but it's not actually a condition for initial success.

The pet rock is proof of this. An utterly stupid idea that was presented to enough people that even if 99% of people refused to buy into it, there was 1% that were willing to buy it, but only because it was right in front of them. The pet rock fizzled out because it was stupid and stupid is not sustainable, but initial success doesn't require intelligence or usefulness, only the numbers.

It's like game - if you approach enough chicks, you will get laid; but being in a happy LTR requires a somewhat different rule set. Being good at LTR's is useless if you can't approach; having a good business model is useless if you can't find customers. The initial success is detached from continuing success.

I strongly disagree with this, unless you're advocating being a crook. This is pretty shady, and you're essentially conning people out of their money. It's also an incredibly short sighted, short term sales plan.

An excellent business idea can get funding, or you can hire someone to get you in front of the right people. If you've got something great, there are things you can do to get in front of customers. If you've got something shitty and rely on your customer's stupidity, you are setting yourself up for a fall. The customers will cotton on, and then you will spend all your time dealing with complaints, and potentially legal action. You'll be left with no time to make sales, and you may find your costs spiraling.

Post: #730

(10-15-2017 07:02 AM)Thomas the Rhymer Wrote:  Something that really hit me in the face recently:

The pet rock is proof of this. An utterly stupid idea that was presented to enough people that even if 99% of people refused to buy into it, there was 1% that were willing to buy it, but only because it was right in front of them. The pet rock fizzled out because it was stupid and stupid is not sustainable, but initial success doesn't require intelligence or usefulness, only the numbers.

The pet rock was a gag gift in the 70's with a very funny care and feeding manual.

Like it says in the Wikipedia entry, the real gift was the manual.

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


The guy who invented it was just a dude who got tired of his friends complaining about all the trouble it was to own a pet.

His attitude was, I got a pet for you.

It came in a box with breathing holes and lined with straw.




People only bought it with sarcasm and irony in their hearts, or to annoy a friend they owed a present. It didn't fizzle because it was stupid, it fizzled because everyone eventually gets tired of even a funny joke.

There is not one percent of the population who think a rock makes a great pet.

It was MAKING FUN of lame gifts. Right after the pet rock ended, someone tried to sell powdered water, just add water, and it went nowhere because it was obviously a rip off of the pet rock.

The pet rock was a great idea with a great presentation, at the right time, and the dude who invented it sold enough of them to be a millionaire and then it was over.

I get what you are saying, but the pet rock is not an example of it. The pet rock was a great idea because it was clever.

Or maybe I am just being defensive because my parents bought me one. I know the seventies are a long time ago, but not so long ago that people thought rocks made great pets.

The seventies was also the time that Chia Pets were invented too.

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

But that doesn't mean that those long ago folks thought they were pets.

They knew they were plants.

Post: #731

(10-15-2017 05:03 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  The pet rock was a gag gift in the 70's with a very funny care and feeding manual.

You probably remember this beauty then. haha

Post: #732

(10-15-2017 05:15 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

(10-15-2017 05:03 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  The pet rock was a gag gift in the 70's with a very funny care and feeding manual.

You probably remember this beauty then. haha

Now that was good copywriting! Got me to order some from the back of a magazine when I was a kid.

What a con.

Fucking brine shrimp.



Here's something else from the seventies, a poster, that sold millions and millions for a long time. Also the first lolcat as in, who would have thought that tormenting your cat, taking a picture, and adding a caption would be so popular.

Everyone had this poster in the seventies.

Post: #733

(08-16-2017 09:04 PM)tonysoprano Wrote:  

(08-15-2017 08:10 PM)colblionel Wrote:  Has anyone read Efficiency by Wall Street Playboys.

Read the book and will probably re-read again for finer details.

Curious to hear what you guys feedback is.

Yeah I picked up a copy the other day and read it.

It was a nice summary of what it takes to succeed, although it didn't really tell me anything I didn't know already. With that said, I've already read most of WSP blog posts about business and have been consuming business/entrepreneurship content for about 3 years now from various sources.

It's definitely nice to have as a handbook to refer back to, and great for people whose eyes are just opening to the world of possibilities in life/business.

Haha! I wrote one of their more popular posts!

Post: #734

(10-15-2017 04:32 PM)H1N1 Wrote:  

(10-15-2017 07:02 AM)Thomas the Rhymer Wrote:  Something that really hit me in the face recently:

It's better to have a great model for getting in front of customers plus a terrible business idea...

...Than to have a terrible model for getting in front of customers a great business idea.

You can make all sorts of scams and terrible businesses work, provided you can get in front of enough people to find those 1% of fools that are willing to part with their money.

But a great business will never work if you can't get in front of customers.

I strongly disagree with this, unless you're advocating being a crook. This is pretty shady, and you're essentially conning people out of their money. It's also an incredibly short sighted, short term sales plan.

I strongly doubt that TtR is advocating actually producing a shoddy product. Rather, I believe that he is simply pointing out that many would be entrepreneurs overthink the product itself while failing to create a plan for marketing that product.

He's uncovered one of the essential truths of business. It doesn't matter how good your product is if no one knows about it.

The conclusion to this is not to try to sell garbage, but rather to understand the concept of a minimum viable product, something that once produced, will allow you test various marketing ideas and determine the demand for both the MVP and estimate the demand for a theoretical full-feature product.

Post: #735

(10-15-2017 10:39 PM)Suits Wrote:  

(10-15-2017 04:32 PM)H1N1 Wrote:  

(10-15-2017 07:02 AM)Thomas the Rhymer Wrote:  Something that really hit me in the face recently:

It's better to have a great model for getting in front of customers plus a terrible business idea...

...Than to have a terrible model for getting in front of customers a great business idea.

You can make all sorts of scams and terrible businesses work, provided you can get in front of enough people to find those 1% of fools that are willing to part with their money.

But a great business will never work if you can't get in front of customers.

I strongly disagree with this, unless you're advocating being a crook. This is pretty shady, and you're essentially conning people out of their money. It's also an incredibly short sighted, short term sales plan.

I strongly doubt that TtR is advocating actually producing a shoddy product. Rather, I believe that he is simply pointing out that many would be entrepreneurs overthink the product itself while failing to create a plan for marketing that product.

He's uncovered one of the essential truths of business. It doesn't matter how good your product is if no one knows about it.

The conclusion to this is not to try to sell garbage, but rather to understand the concept of a minimum viable product, something that once produced, will allow you test various marketing ideas and determine the demand for both the MVP and estimate the demand for a theoretical full-feature product.

Well, yes and no. This is certainly the business coach/web blogger/business studies lecturer approach, and it is true for one man bands where you wear all hats all the time, and your product is yourself/your service.

As soon as you are building a business that involves any kind of product development, or the provision of more complex services, then you really need to focus your attention on the product itself. Sales and marketing staff are cheap - anyone you can buy for under £100k to solve a problem is cheap if you have a good product. There are not that many good products on the market, and with interest rates as they are, there is plenty of money around.

You can run up serious costs extremely quickly if your product is in any way defective - especially if you've misjudged what constitutes 'MVP'. For example, really top engineering companies like IBM typically shoot for a less than 2% failure rate on anything they put to the market. If your failure rate is over 10%, then the cost to the business is astronomical, particularly when you are an early stage entrepreneur. If you do what you suggest you will spend all your time troubleshooting, and you will not have the resources to develop your product to maturity, or to launch a proper sales and marketing campaign.

Most serious entrepreneurs I talk to (NW £10mil +) hate the concept of an MVP. It's an idea that belongs solely within the company engineering department, and is mainly useful for internal testing and benchmarking. Personally, I don't believe it has any business whatsoever being placed in front of the customer. You should strive to deliver an excellent product, one that can earn your company a reputation for quality. You can buy sales skills, marketing skills, and with patience and perseverance you can get access to almost anyone.

Post: #736

^^^It's a tool that like all tools is not always the right one for the job.

I have mixed feelings about it myself. Actually putting a product out into the marketplace isn't the only way to test the demand for a product and with certain types of widgets, you may be shooting yourself in the foot if you put out something underwhelming.

It's a tool that I plan on using with my current venture because I'm a shoestring operation and I could really use the feedback that early adopters could supply.

That being said, what I plan to initially release will be less a MVP and more of a full-featured product that I plan to add even more features to in the future, but far from the absolute minimum that I could release.

Post: #737

Yep.

I'll second that having a "great business idea" counts for jack shit. It doesn't benefit you to have a great idea unless you can also present that story in a masterful way to investors. Otherwise none of that funding is going to happen.

Post: #738

Have you had much experience of fundraising? I've seen loads of good ideas that have been badly pitched get funded. Happens all the time with hardcore nerds pitching new battery technology, medtech, biotech, fintech etc. I presented earlier in the summer at a pitch event where 10 companies were selected to pitch out of 200 applications (pitches only by invitation in the first place), and all of us got investors, regardless of whether the presentation was good or bad. There were some awesomely smart people with really exciting products, who pitched terribly, and just wanted to tell you about the science. Investors backed them, because you can buy sales and marketing talent anywhere you look, there are thousands of good engineers leaving university every year, and you can't throw a bean in the street without hitting an accountant or lawyer. If you've got a good idea/product, and aren't a sales guy, you just allow for a salesman's salary, which is two fifths of fuck all and hire someone to do the bit you can't.

Investors want a great idea (ideally with material progress already made on it), and they want to see that you can execute it. That doesn't mean they want to see that you're an all star salesman, accountant, programmer, mathematician, manager, administrator etc. Can you deliver on a product, can you put the people in place (with their help) to deliver the return on investment they are expecting? If you can do that, I promise you noone gives two fucks whether you yourself as the entrepreneur can deliver a sales and marketing plan.

Noone's saying sales isn't important, but if you're building a business rather than selling your time then you can buy the talents you don't have. You can't go out and buy a better product or idea - if you can you're going to go out of business pretty quickly anyway.

Post: #739

There's a big difference between approaching investors with a good idea that you are unqualified to correctly sell and having a good idea, but no ability to reach customers.

Post: #740

Eric Weinstein was on the Joe Rogan podcast recently, and I think he is addressing the very dilemma you guys are talking about.





H1N1 is saying you have to be able to deliver.

Thomas is saying you have to be able to get people on board.

Weinstein in this interview (later in podcast, don't know exact point.), not only addresses this dilemma, but believes that it explains why women aren't as successful in tech as men.

He says you have to be willing to risk overpromising and underdelivering, and that men are willing to do it, and women are not.

He says that you will be competing against a bunch of people promising investors the moon even if they can't reach it yet, and you have to do that too. (Nod to Thomas.)

He also says that it is the fact of overpromising that forces you to do your best work, and that overpromising actually leads to overdelivering. (Nod to H1N1.)

The problem is that there is always a risk of underdelivering, and it is the willingness to take that risk that men seem to have and women don't.

He has said that as a coder, it has been the times that he promised things he didn't even know he would be able to do, that he did some of his best work.

I don't know if this resolves your disagreement or not, though to my eyes, it is an explanation that takes both sides into account.

Post: #741

(10-15-2017 09:33 PM)qwertyuiop Wrote:  

(08-16-2017 09:04 PM)tonysoprano Wrote:  

(08-15-2017 08:10 PM)colblionel Wrote:  Has anyone read Efficiency by Wall Street Playboys.

Read the book and will probably re-read again for finer details.

Curious to hear what you guys feedback is.

Yeah I picked up a copy the other day and read it.

It was a nice summary of what it takes to succeed, although it didn't really tell me anything I didn't know already. With that said, I've already read most of WSP blog posts about business and have been consuming business/entrepreneurship content for about 3 years now from various sources.

It's definitely nice to have as a handbook to refer back to, and great for people whose eyes are just opening to the world of possibilities in life/business.

Haha! I wrote one of their more popular posts!

Which post?

Post: #742

Fuck, it's satisfying seeing the different pieces come together when you're working on a larger project composed of many related, but different elements.

I've been working on a curriculum product for well over a year now and my classroom testing activities and the occasional idea that just pops into my head (my process doesn't involve any intentional brainstorming) has resulted in a lot of product features, many of which are technically stand-alone items of added value. Obviously, they are far more value as a product-set and considerably less useful alone, but each require an independent development process and somewhat independent testing process (although tests of multiple different products can be tested in one testing session).

Right now the pieces are starting to come together more than even as I get caught up on certain elements that I've gotten behind on.

The results are inspiring.

It's one of those situations where each added element has a multiplication effect on the whole the other elements.

Exciting.

Post: #743

Sorry if this has been asked in this thread before. I'm looking at potentially having my website redone. Any one have any recommendations on creative people who can create great websites with good SEO?

Post: #744

(10-19-2017 02:55 AM)Suits Wrote:  Fuck, it's satisfying seeing the different pieces come together when you're working on a larger project composed of many related, but different elements.

I've been working on a curriculum product for well over a year now and my classroom testing activities and the occasional idea that just pops into my head (my process doesn't involve any intentional brainstorming) has resulted in a lot of product features, many of which are technically stand-alone items of added value. Obviously, they are far more value as a product-set and considerably less useful alone, but each require an independent development process and somewhat independent testing process (although tests of multiple different products can be tested in one testing session).

Right now the pieces are starting to come together more than even as I get caught up on certain elements that I've gotten behind on.

The results are inspiring.

It's one of those situations where each added element has a multiplication effect on the whole the other elements.

Exciting.

Don't be afraid to launch / start selling with the product not "perfectly" how you want it. Its often better to start and make adjustments later than to wait until it is so heavily developed you miss a window to launch. Others may have similar ideas and launch an even crappy product and get market share while your superior product is being developed at length. Especially true with intellectual property which is easily modified as you go.

Post: #745

(10-15-2017 04:32 PM)H1N1 Wrote:  

(10-15-2017 07:02 AM)Thomas the Rhymer Wrote:  Something that really hit me in the face recently:

It's better to have a great model for getting in front of customers plus a terrible business idea...

...Than to have a terrible model for getting in front of customers a great business idea.

You can make all sorts of scams and terrible businesses work, provided you can get in front of enough people to find those 1% of fools that are willing to part with their money.

But a great business will never work if you can't get in front of customers.

Once you have customers, a great business is great to keep things sustainable, but it's not actually a condition for initial success.

The pet rock is proof of this. An utterly stupid idea that was presented to enough people that even if 99% of people refused to buy into it, there was 1% that were willing to buy it, but only because it was right in front of them. The pet rock fizzled out because it was stupid and stupid is not sustainable, but initial success doesn't require intelligence or usefulness, only the numbers.

It's like game - if you approach enough chicks, you will get laid; but being in a happy LTR requires a somewhat different rule set. Being good at LTR's is useless if you can't approach; having a good business model is useless if you can't find customers. The initial success is detached from continuing success.

I strongly disagree with this, unless you're advocating being a crook. This is pretty shady, and you're essentially conning people out of their money. It's also an incredibly short sighted, short term sales plan.

An excellent business idea can get funding, or you can hire someone to get you in front of the right people. If you've got something great, there are things you can do to get in front of customers. If you've got something shitty and rely on your customer's stupidity, you are setting yourself up for a fall. The customers will cotton on, and then you will spend all your time dealing with complaints, and potentially legal action. You'll be left with no time to make sales, and you may find your costs spiraling.

I agree with H1N1 but maybe Thomas was just saying obscurity will kill a business, albeit using bad examples of scams and pet rocks.

Post: #746

^^ Agreed. I apologise - I meant what I said as an abstraction, and it certainly wasn't my intention to suggest the Thomas was actually pushing criminality or anything shady - but apparently that is how it has come across, so that is my careless phrasing.

Post: #747

Has anyone ever been involved with network marketing? I have a chance to get into it but I'm a little skeptical.

Post: #748

I have to disagree with the anti-MVP argument. An MVP does not imply a shoddy or buggy product. It means developing a product that solves the target customer's main pain points and strips away all the unnecessary junk features that aren't needed. If you develop 20 different features before bringing the product to market, you're going to find out that 3/4 of those features aren't needed and you've wasted a ton of time in product development for nothing. Start with something simple and iterate from there. Get market feedback and perfect the critical components before adding in more.

A great example is Instagram, which started out as a multi-faceted social network. They weren't successful until they stripped away everything and focused solely on the photo sharing concept. That's when it blew up, because they zeroed in on the market's main need and pushed it hard. Forget all the other junk at first. Simplify, launch, and learn.

Post: #749

(10-22-2017 11:30 AM)Stroked351w Wrote:  Has anyone ever been involved with network marketing? I have a chance to get into it but I'm a little skeptical.

Oh man this is hilarious.

Sure there is a chance of making it work. But any other thing is almost better and easier to make it work.

Post: #750

First biz is starting to gain traction. I've hired a few people part time for now as freelancers.

Can't and won't hire permanently until this shit is comfortably profitable. RIP CC.

I think a few deals from work will cover it for now.