This week, two North Bay organizations deserve a round of applause!Amy's Kitchen opens an on-site health care clinicFirst, congratulations to Amy's kitchen for its innovative approach to employee health care. They…
That’s the phrase one of my oldest and closest banker friends always used – he became the President of a major division of a major bank before he retired. You may not know that word – and it’s at least a “50-center”, maybe more, but he loved it and used it on me all the time.
… pause … have you looked it up yet or are you waiting for me to tell you? … come on ….
Yeah, that’s what I thought. Okay. It means charitable, as in “we’re not a charitable organization” … meaning we do have a few basic rules:
We expect to get paid … so we’d like to confirm that your projections provide sufficient free cash flow so you can actually pay us back.
We like to have some collateral in case something goes wrong.
We’d like to see some owners’ capital invested in the business so we know we’re in this together.
We’ll probably ask for your personal guaranty, too, to be sure you’re dedicated like the “bacon” and not just committed like the “egg”.
It would be nice if you had some kind of demonstrable track record and relevant management experience so we can assess whether you know what you’re doing in the business you’re in now.
Those are the basic rules … which is why I’m getting pretty tired of the endless news articles and blog posts about the lack of adequate capital for small business. (more…)
I’m sure this will be a popular post … but set aside your emotions for a moment about the BP disaster… and consider the insistence by the federal government that an independent agency take over the claims resulting from the oil spill, purportedly overriding BP’s authority, and that of the other 12 entities on board the oil platform, in those matters. The suggested prototype is the independent examiner appointed to handle claims resulting from the events of 9/11 … but recognize that those events were NOT directly caused by a legal entity with rights and responsibilities and shareholders, or that was subject to a myriad of legitimate national and international governing bodies.
Who should decide how much to pay whom for oil spill claims?
What I wonder is whether BP … in most cases, any corporation … shouldn’t have some rights and control over the claims paid from funds ultimately belonging to their shareholders? Take special note that in BPs case, a powerful example of the global economy in which we live, 18 million British citizens own stock in BP, many of them retirees.
Emotions are running high and many people would prefer to see BP hanging from the nearest rafter. At the same time, shouldn’t a company be allowed to settle claims in a fair and reasonable manner? There are plenty of ways in which individuals and organizations can seek redress if they disagree on the results, either through appeal or in claims or civil courts if a reasonable settlement cannot be made.
Like we need more bad news in or about California ... but the Chief Executive organization's survey of Best and Worst States for Business 2010 finds the Golden State's golden…
I wish had the time to write about all that’s on my mind about the SEC charges vs. Goldman. The crux of my most recent post was that institutional investors – not individual investors – have few excuses for making unsuccessful investment decisions except their own lack of due diligence or the fact that what they thought was a good decision … wasn’t.