http://www.bosstalks.com/ BossTalks.com Tag: business en Thu, 09 Feb 2012 12:39:50 +0000 http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/2719#post-2826 Thu, 17 Mar 2011 23:27:11 +0000 gnomesolutions 2826@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>You can think upon outsourcing with multiple aspects. Outsourcing occurs when you pay another firm to provide services which can be carried by in-house employees. If some of your duties or processes are contracted to someone else that you would otherwise have to do yourself is commonly called as outsourcing. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/65#post-188 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 12:14:06 +0000 susanvarghese2007 188@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>OH...How I wish...Apart from ideas and a ton of talent-<br /> there's also something big that these entrepreneurs have- that most of the world doesn't - including moi! The willingness to take "RISK"- now that's what I call guts! </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/79#post-172 Mon, 23 Jul 2007 17:27:40 +0000 green 172@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Does it start again? And, really, not with tiny players...</p> <blockquote><p><em><br /> "If you're an Amp'd Mobile subscriber, you're officially out of luck at midnight, when Amp'd stops providing customer service. Not that the bankrupt wireless carrier was providing much before. The Amp'd FAQ page, for example, tells customers that they can use their phones with Sprint and Verizon Wireless -- but those carriers are telling would-be subscribers that the models are incompatible. There's no graceful exit from Amp'd, in other words."<br /> <strong><a href="http://valleywag.com/tech/wireless/peter-addertons-ampd-exit-strategy-281585.php">(source)</a></strong><br /> </em></p></blockquote> <p>Numbers of investment they got sounds big, and they are big. And it is crazy how (with cell/mobile world being on the raise) there were able to waste it.</p> <blockquote><p><em><br /> "Amp'd Mobile, the high-flying, venture-backed MVNO which declared bankruptcy last month after burning through than $375M in venture capital, is set to suspend its operations tomorrow, July 24th. According to Amp'd Mobile's web site, the firm is suspending its operations tomorrow, and will not provide customer service after today. Amp'd was forced into bankruptcy by Verizon, after failing to pay its bills; the company is currently in the midst of trying to find a buyer as it works through bankruptcy proceedings. "<br /> <strong><a href="http://www.socaltech.com/amp_d_mobile_shutdown_approaches/s-0010271.html">(source)</a></strong><br /> </em></p></blockquote> <p>And according to numerous postings online we can figure out that Amp'd was giving away mobile services to people who could not qualify for credit with other cell companies. Why? May be the answer was stupid and simple -- because they could not afford it! And Amp'd became just one other (big, though) non-paying "customer".</p> <blockquote><p><em><br /> "Verizon Wireless is seeking to terminate its network capacity deal with embattled Amp'd Mobile, filing court papers claiming the MVNO is almost out of cash while racking up charges of $370,000 per day. According to the Associated Press, Verizon wants to cut ties with Amp'd unless the virtual operator secures a debtor-in-possession loan to finance its Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings: "Based on the record of this case and the fact that [Amp'd] has been given ample opportunity (over 46 days) to secure debtor-in-possession financing which has not materialized, this court should not permit this case to be run for a single additional day on Verizon Wireless' back," Verizon wrote in court papers filed Tuesday."<br /> <strong><a href="http://www.fiercemobilecontent.com/story/verizon-seeking-terminate-ampd-service/2007-07-19">(source)</a></strong><br /> </em></p></blockquote> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/78#post-171 Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:09:40 +0000 green 171@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Hi there,</p> <p>Very nice <a href="http://www.entrepreneur.com/magazine/entrepreneur/2007/july/180354.html">article</a> recently was posted in <a>Entrepreneur</a>. </p> <blockquote><p><em><br /> The best part about starting small is that there's no limit to how far you can go. These entrepreneurs launched their businesses with less than $1,000, but now they're making millions--and so can you.<br /> </em></p></blockquote> <p>What do you think - should you try to touch the sky with nothing in you pocket, or better you need some real money before even starting your way? </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-165 Wed, 13 Jun 2007 10:55:32 +0000 green 165@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>We talk about the same things, we just call them differently.<br /> Underneath it all the main goal to have the working business. The most proven way is to stick to something which you started with, but not jumping from very different and inadequate to each other areas vice-versa. But I believe that numerous changes withing your direction are just for better. Even if after all the only common thing you will have the global idea like "do money transfers for fee" or "sell stuff online". </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-164 Wed, 13 Jun 2007 03:11:35 +0000 leninkster 164@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>To be accurate, the PayPay business model has never changed. It has always been, and still is "seller pays for the right to acccept payments in a risk-free (or at least risk-reduced) transaction" (Max Levchin 2004).</p> <p>Changes came about from the formation of PayPal. PayPal was formed by the merger of two existing businesses with different business models. One, Confinity, of which Max was one of the founders, was honed in on security and cryptography, the second X.COM was primary a financial services company. Both were interested in reconciling payments from Palm Pilots. The merger of the two companies did indeed require a re-think of the business model, and it was decided upon as the which Max quoted in several interviews through 2002 to 2004. To my knowledge this has been and still is the "business-model" upon which PayPal still operates.</p> <p>We mustn't forget that although the business model never changed for PayPal it radically changed the technology model it used to deliver it's strategy, from Palm Pilot centric to all-encompassing web services. </p> <p>I wonder if there is some confusion around the terminology? </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-163 Mon, 11 Jun 2007 19:59:01 +0000 white 163@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Well, I can't agree with you about the PayPal. The Max Levchin's version of what was PayPal is different of what you say. Globally speaking, both of you can be right, however, I still think that PayPal was able to change the business model and utilized this chance. I don't know if you ever read the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&#38;location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FFounders-Work-Stories-Startups-Early%2Fdp%2F1590597141%3Fie%3DUTF8%26s%3Dbooks%26qid%3D1173729152%26sr%3D8-1&#38;tag=prokhorenkous-20&#38;linkCode=ur2&#38;camp=1789&#38;creative=9325">Founders at Work</a> book by Jessica Livingston (one of the partners in Y Combinator), but if you didn't I advice you to give it a quick pick. She interviewed Max and there is an interesting store told by Max in her book. From the other hand, there is always a different point of view, and the <a href="http://valleywag.com/tech/paypal/an-alternate-history-according-to-elon-musk-230076.php">different story of PayPal</a> told by Elon Musk. However, as it looks to me, the both of them tells that PayPal had major changes in the business models before it appeared as we know it. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-162 Mon, 11 Jun 2007 08:33:01 +0000 leninkster 162@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>I've worked with both large enterprises, and with many startups, and my advice stays the same. PaAypal didn't change their business model. Their original business model was to offer a brokerage on the internet to interface with smaller sites that couldn't go, or be bothered to got through the hoops to deal directly with the credit card companies.<br /> This is still essentially their business model. The business has grown, but the model is the same. They have incorporated extra functions and features, but their core business model is still the same.<br /> I'm not sure I understand the argument you are making in your last paragraph. You say "If the business model fails, it does not mean that you shouldn't change it", I am saying, that unless you are a large company and/or have great financial backing, if your business model fails, the business fails. I can give you many more examples of businesses that have found this, than have found otherwise. The point I am trying to make, is to be successfull in a business, you need to put in sufficient due dilligence prior to launching the business to try to ensure that the business model doesn't fail.<br /> Certainly I agree with your statement that If a business model fails you will need to think of another one, but it is very unlikely your existing business, that is using the failing business model will survive that transition. This is why so many of us enterpeneurs end up trying 4-5 times before we finally find a model that works. The secret is for each failure, learn from it, and don't repeat the same mistakes each time. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-161 Fri, 08 Jun 2007 17:32:46 +0000 green 161@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>I didn't work or deal with big enterprises with their business models/goals, but I know something about startups. I should say that startups is the most unpredictable thing, for which I would never say DO they need to change business model, or DO NOT. Just in example - PayPal started with one idea, and by doing the business they changed it to very much different (oh well, they left one thing the same -- to work with money :-). And because of that they got their success. And I can give a lot of such example, but they will prove only one thing. If business model fails, it does not mean that you shouldn't change it. I think you need to, but even if you will not, you still have a chance to succeed. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-160 Fri, 08 Jun 2007 08:07:59 +0000 leninkster 160@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Changing a business model over a long period of time is not necessarily bad. But on a start-up, if you're original business model is failing in the first year or two, it is unlikely changing it completely will save the business. In the case of someone like McDonalds or Dell for instance, not changing their business model has caused them problems. </p> <p>But these are companies that have made a huge success for a long period of time using the same business model, and have missed the fact that the demographics and desires of their customers have changed. McDonalds have pulled back some of the latest failures, they have added to their business model, and modified it, but they haven't changed their underlying business model. </p> <p>And this is what I was trying to explain. If your business model is to sell things on the internet, using low-cost and rapid service, to alter that business model overnight to one of retail sales in a shop with a higher, better more personal service at a proportional higher cost will not necessarily save a failing business. Augmenting an existing model with additional model options, and then gradually phasing out the older model may. In either case this is unlikely to save a failing start-up, and something more fundamental needs to be looked at. changing your business model every year (implied by your "last-years business model statement) is not a good business policy. Changing you business plan is. Designing a strategy for a business is a long term thing, and should be a "living document". Constant tactical changes invariably fail in the long run, and only in very few cases, and normally with a huge amount of financial backing can pay-off long-term. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-159 Thu, 07 Jun 2007 10:35:05 +0000 green 159@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>I know that quite few successful companies actually DID change their business model, and not once, but 4-5 times... World is global and agile nowadays. If you'll stick badly to <em>old and proven to work (last year) business model</em> you can end up nowhere. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-158 Thu, 07 Jun 2007 02:40:07 +0000 leninkster 158@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>So you've thought of a product or service that you can sell. You've done your market research and have decided that a business is feasible. You've looked into the costs of building your sales channel, the costs of administration, the costs of insuring yourself, your company, and your employees. You've looked 5 years down the road to see (realistically) where you could be, and you've extrapolated all those costs and profits, sales and losses into some form of business plan.</p> <p>What! You mean you haven't? OK, then you need to. One at a time, and carefully, with an objective head, not the passionate one that thinks you product or service is going to be wanted by everyone. </p> <p>Wow! You have! Well done. Now what? Take it easy! go slowly and follow your plan. Don't deviate from it. At the end of the first year, if you are still in business, analyse your plan again. Go over everything. Be realistic. Build into that plan some business strategies. Watch your overheads. make it a date, do this every year, and more often if your business grows rapidly.</p> <p>Don't make big changes to your business model, add to it, yes, but don't change it. </p> <p>Stay lean, and I don't mean fire everyone, make sure you are getting the best out of every single overhead and investment you make.</p> <p>If you get in above your head, ask for help, and where you can, get it free. Get a second, third, fourth... opinion. Don't aim for failure, but don't be afraid to fail. It's not the failure that defines you, it's what you do afterwards.</p> <p>If you are lucky you'll get rich/famous/happy whatever you want. If you are not, you'll get experience. In either case, it won't come easy, and it won't come quickly.</p> <p>Good luck and happy hunting! </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/74#post-157 Wed, 30 May 2007 08:19:46 +0000 white 157@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>This event was held at 5/29/2007 at the California State University in the Long Beach.</p> <p><a href="http://www.techcoastangels.com/Cal/PublicEvents.aspx?EventID=2541" rel="nofollow">http://www.techcoastangels.com/Cal/PublicEvents.aspx?EventID=2541</a></p> <p>It was leaded by John Morris who is past President and on the Board of Governors of the Tech Coast Angels (TCA) and Managing Director of GKM Ventures.</p> <p>Here are some notes on the events.</p> <p>It was an introductory meeting, it wasn't supposed to be very specific, it was detailed enough so everyone could get an answer for his questions. It was a pretty interesting networking for the first hour. And the very hot and spicy dinner -- it was nice, but only for those who can eat fire. </p> <p>This is the first and experimental event on the Long Beach. Few words about the TiE (the organization which runs the event). TiE provides a range of opportunities for entrepreneurs and a mentorship programs. They have a regular seminary, TiEcon, and it is going to take place in the middle of September this year. Currently, TiE is developing close relationship with TCA.</p> <p>When the time for Tech Coast Angels (TCA) presentation came, they started with the <strong>Key Trends</strong>:</p> <ul> <li>VC Funds getting bigger, investment size increasing</li> <li>Technology helping lower startups costs</li> <li>Organized angel investing has become a national theme</li> <li>VCs have grown t respect Angels, slowly</li> <li>Angel bandwidth for coaching and mentoring is major value add for seed stage entrepreneurs</li> <li>2006 nationwide Angel investments in 2006 topped $25.6 billion, matching VC investments in all rounds</li> <li>VCs affiliate program is very important</li> </ul> <p>&nbsp;<br /> <strong>Few words about the TCA</strong>:</p> <ul> <li>TCA celebrates the 10th year </li> <li>TCA is largest Angel organization in US</li> <li>TCA has completed 41 deals in 2006, among them 20 new deals, 21 follow-ons</li> <li>$11.4 millions from TCA, $96.4 millions from VCs</li> <li>TCA organizes four groups (networks)</li> <li>2005 was a break out time for TCA deals</li> </ul> <p>&nbsp;<br /> The typical TCA <strong>Deal Flow Funnel</strong>:</p> <ol> <li>Pre-screen</li> <li>Network Screening Presentations -- 40% of opportunities</li> <li>Due Diligence, Valuation and Terms -- 10%</li> <li>Network Dinner Presentations -- 4%</li> <li>Fund -- 2%</li> </ol> <p>&nbsp;<br /> Typical TCA <strong>Investment Criteria</strong>:</p> <ul> <li>Technology is a core</li> <li>Located in Southern California (within driving range)</li> <li>Addressing a compelling business need</li> <li>Protect-able IP or barrier to competition</li> <li>Validation from existing or potential customers or users</li> <li>Market size enabling more 10x return within 5 years</li> <li>Coachable and talented management team</li> <li>Ability to attract future funding</li> <li>More than just technology</li> </ul> <p>&nbsp;<br /> Thesis from the event:</p> <ul> <li>There are several Angels groups in the Southern California. They are often interconnected. In example, one of the speakers, Mr. Al Schnaeider -- one of the founders of LA Angels and Pasadena Angels networks, was one of the founder of Pasadena's one.</li> <li>Angels don't like to do follow-ons, but TCA hit a lot of them last year. </li> <li>Angels have a lot of VCs affiliates and sponsors -- can help you to get to the right firm and organization. </li> <li>The recent TCA investments was made to Make It Work, Mindbody, Coda, etc.</li> <li>VCs don't have as much time for you as Angels do.</li> <li>Angel expect to do a lot of mentoring, because can really help, but not only write a check.</li> <li>VCs can write a bigger checks and it's harder to reach them.</li> <li>Most early stage companies fail because they make a failure mistake and they are very limited in possibilities.</li> <li>TCA view of the entertainment industry -- they neither stay or go with entertainment industry. They work closely with the merger of Internet and real life social networking and entertainment media. But they are not always about technology component. Content development is very important. Entertainment is a tough industry and built on a risk pyramid and very challenging.</li> <li>Nowadays it's not about a building your website, but it's about marketing it.</li> <li>Angels try to act similar to VCs (in matter of investment rounds, etc).</li> <li>It's awfully easy to take money from Friends &#38; Family, but it's important to put it in writing properly. Every transaction should be properly documented.</li> <li>Angels expect at least 12-15 months period of time for each funding round.</li> <li>Valuation is not an academic science. Valuation depends on development stage, nature of market, risk, time range of the projects, reasonable projection, etc. In common, the valuation is a very complex question.</li> <li>Angels don't want to mess with out-of-country and different-culture problems, but sometimes they do.</li> <li>Business investor slides are for Angels, business plan for entrepreneur. Investor slides is the methodology nowadays, it's 15-20 slides and that's all. Written document (business plan) is not that important. Business plans are yesterday. Key elements of business plan should be included into investor slides. Substance is more important than a form. Quality of the answers is more critical than a business plan. Put up a chart in presentation and provide a reason why and how to get enough ROI for Angels. They take a high risk and want to get high ROI. You should be realistic in your calculations hitting the high revenues.</li> <li>The ideal situation if the Angels loose money, the founder should feel badly, too.</li> <li>Angels expect to see confidence in your business.</li> <li>The pre-screening could be a session, when you are not ready with the slides, but know the core thing, so Angels can advice you what are you missing, because they suppose to do mentoring.</li> <li>TCA have a very deep relations with UCLA, Caltech, etc and they provide mentoring and coaching over there.</li> <li>Management vs governance. Angels want to help on opening the path to customers and clients. They offer help to management, but try not to force it.</li> <li>You've got to have some customers who are interested. Needs to be a high enough pain for the problem which you're solving and a potential customer needs to want to work with the startup. Only 2% of business are willing to work with the startups.</li> </ul> <p>&nbsp;<br /> In total, it was a pretty interesting event, which helps to build a great networking. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/67#post-148 Sat, 14 Apr 2007 21:07:17 +0000 green 148@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>I was glad to see this post from Paul Buchheit: <a href="http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.com/2007/04/perfect-is-enemy-of-good-enough-and.html">"Perfect" is the enemy of "good enough"</a> -- this is like sounding my own thoughts! Did Paul read my mind? Probably so. I would like to give just few quotes:</p> <blockquote><p><em><br /> Forget about your lack of talent, skills, knowledge, time, resources, or whatever else you need to be "good enough". Start an inane blog, take bad photographs, upload boring videos to YouTube, write bad software, create useless products, play bad music, and make ugly art. Forget "good enough", and then simply indulge in the joy of creation.<br /> ...<br /> But remember, although quality is nice, it's not the point.<br /> </em> </p></blockquote> <p>This works. Really. Why? I am not sure I am qualified enough to give an answer about it, and it's hard to compose everything in a single post. But when you create something, even "okay" thing, you can pick an interest of "customers", who will be able to help making the best product. It's not about quality, perfect features or anything like that. It's about <strong>making something what customer wants</strong>. </p> <p>Just read this post and be sure you understand it. Very nice said, because it's very simple. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/65#post-146 Sat, 07 Apr 2007 16:37:57 +0000 green 146@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Many entrepreneurs working in a Web nowadays are thinking about investing their own money into their projects - and that is enough smart. Frankly speaking, it really can improve business ideas and models of many of startups -- because spending <em>your own money</em> isn't the same like <em>raise money and shut down</em>. It is different. I enjoyed this article in NY Times - <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/09/technology/09venture.html?ei=5088&#38;en=550d24cae21caac0&#38;ex=1320728400&#38;adxnnl=0&#38;partner=rssnyt&#38;emc=rss&#38;adxnnlx=1163096427-kAU/QQ1e9QOqBmLukuGR7g&#38;pagewanted=print">For Start-Ups, Web Success on the Cheap</a> telling us about <a href="http://www.meebo.com/">Meebo</a> startup. It is a good, no - terrific example of explained above:</p> <blockquote><p><em><br /> When Seth J. Sternberg and two colleagues started Meebo, a Web-based instant-messaging service, they didn’t go looking for venture capitalists. Using their credit cards, they financed the company themselves to the tune of $2,000 apiece. It was enough to cover their biggest expense — leasing a few computer servers at $120 a month each.<br /> </em></p> </blockquote> <p>This is a terrible risky step, but this way those guys putted themselves into condition where they needed a success. They didn't try to find "bridge back", they just stepped strictly ahead. Like other companies (i.e. <a href="http://www.37signals.com/">37signals</a>) they created working and good product, with all their responsibility and just followed the way up. Two thumbs up! Even me, who is not an ICQ/GTalk/IM-lover at all -- I did try their service. </p> <p>Dreaming about your startup? Create something, then launch, and prove it can work by yourself completely into it. Angels and VCs will be knocking <em>your</em> door, then, and not vice-versa. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/61#post-140 Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:39:36 +0000 green 140@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Nice article recently was published on Business 2.0 called "<a href="http://money.cnn.com/2007/03/02/magazines/business2/stocks_techs.biz2/index.htm?postversion=2007030706">As Wall Street quakes, Silicon Valley yawns</a>". Beyond this dramatic title, it speaks about (quote): </p> <blockquote><p> "<em>...<br /> A funny thing is happening in Silicon Valley.<br /> ...<br /> Silicon Valley is far different place than it was seven years ago when the dotcom bubble burst. You see, unlike the rip-roaring days of 2000 when countless twentysomething-ers and wannabe day traders bet heavily on rising stocks, Silicon Valley no longer needs Wall Street.<br /> ...<br /> What it needs are the four cash-rich superpowers (Google, eBay, Yahoo, Amazon), a handful of lesser powers with profitable niches (like Salesforce.com), and the vast co-dependent kingdoms that each has opened up for aspiring entrepreneurs.<br /> ...<br /> </em>" </p></blockquote> <p>Is it really true? I am afraid that I have to agree at this moment. I believe "potential IPO" still was forcing founders/CEOs to build <strong>better business</strong> and <strong>better company</strong> by all means. With those "to be acquired" dreams and goals those intentions getting lost. Of course, it may be better - entrepreneurs are entrepreneurs. They run one company, and then another, and loop back. But how long could it stay like that? Who will be building <em>new</em> Google or eBay, or (you name it)?<br /> Startups are fun, but it's still necessary to know that business needs to be run, not just sucessfully launched.</p> <p>Anyway. I cannot blame people with goals to sell company when it will be possible. Don't know what I'll do in the face of opportunity to sell my businesses. But, I think it's still a thing to think about. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/54#post-117 Sun, 25 Mar 2007 15:08:00 +0000 white 117@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>The five winners of our Student Startup Competition have fresh ideas - and the toughness and savvy to burn up the marketplace.</p> <p><a href="http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fsb/fsb_archive/2005/11/01/8360973/index.htm?section=money_mostpopular">Read more.</a> </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/17#post-76 Thu, 15 Mar 2007 07:46:19 +0000 peet 76@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Your problem is that you trying to sell right now and you are trying to put your expenses on the shoulders of your clients. This is not a good way of either negotiating or price building model. But no one here, in US, cares about your problems (I guess you are in Russia or somewhere around). We have got plenty of local people with no language barrier and recent equipment and no Internet problems. Keeping in mind that offshore people often screws up on paying taxes, while local people are not. My point is that I'll think about paying each person independently and the salaries over here would influence me in the latest order. I will never propose more then 10% of the local offshore salary to any remote worker. I mean, if the people in Russia get $1 grand monthly for doing PHP development, I would never give them more then $1,100 from the very beginning ($1,000 + 10%) even if here in US, I will have to pay $5 grands for the same kind of a guy (disclaimer: this is not an actual numbers, just an example). I will definitely increase his salary if he'll prove himself to be really good for me, but this is the part of other science. And I never could understand why a lot of offshore teams try to do pricing looking at US prices, but not making of a real cost. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/17#post-75 Thu, 15 Mar 2007 04:51:51 +0000 krivitsky 75@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>there are tons of hidden expenses in offshore development - it is not only about salaries, sadly</p> <p>they might need:<br /> - tools that support your remote process<br /> - IT infrastructure to enable remote communication (hardware, internet bandwidth, telephony...)<br /> - working environment that matches *your* standards<br /> - ...</p> <p>also note that the lower are the salaries, the faster they tend to grow.<br /> and also your project speed (velocity) will slow down had you been developing it with local teams before which will delay the ROI and increase your project expenses </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/19#post-52 Tue, 13 Mar 2007 06:40:42 +0000 johnw 52@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>0 (zero)<br /> I have just an idea of this project, and it is in my head. Possible calculations? I can see how this profit will be coming (I am going to sell this product), but do not have any business plan. I am a coder-right-away ;-) </p> (read more)