by zapnap on 2/9/12, 7:04 PM with 3 comments
On Friday, we're flying down to DC to meet with staff from all the players in the debate - two Senators (Brown, Merkley), the lead Congressman (McHenry), and the President's Office.
Some good points were raised in this thread: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3529045. What other concerns or questions can we bring up? We have a chance of influencing the legislation.
As an example, one question we plan to ask: High-growth startups obviously don't want 3000 investors on their cap table. Can the proposed funding intermediaries give a business one giant check, and manage a fund of small investors, one for each startup?
by onlawschool on 2/13/12, 10:55 PM
Sec. 7(a)(G)(ii)(XI) requires intermediaries to carry out a background check on the issuer's principals. What must such a background check consist of in order to satisfy this criteria? How is this information to be used? (kept on file by intermediary? Disclosed to potential investors? Filed with the commission?)
by anonhacker on 2/11/12, 1:33 PM
Ability to fund start-ups is a start, you might also need a parallel start-up type visa so foreign entrepreneurs can create jobs and great products.
Just for the record for me a good investor visa:
-Tie the visa to the start up, if it fails they have to leave, cant work for other companies. As a corollary they cant take a job that previously existed, they can only add jobs.
-Reduce or remove current capital requirements 500,000-1m is way overkill.
-Keep the 'must create n jobs' requirement, but give more time to create the n jobs. Forcing start ups to hire 5/10 people in one year is not cool.
by WillyBoy on 2/9/12, 7:16 PM