Will the Venture Capital Industry ever go back to its glory days?

By:


It seems, at first, like the logical next act in the classic entrepreneurial script. Having developed your software company on your home-built microcomputer, you pack your bags and set off on a pilgrimage to the venture capital Mecca of San Francisco in search of the help you need to turn your creation into a multi-million-dollar enterprise.

It is a well-worn path, that route from the entrepreneur’s garage to the investor’s suite. It is part of an initiation rite through which hundreds, if not thousands, of dreamers and doers had passed before.

What your company needs is capital and, equally important, the wisdom of those who had done it before in Silicon Valley’s venture capital community.

As you move from meeting to meeting, you look across the table at the people whose help you are seeking, and feel some kind of disappointment.

Are these the venture capitalists you had heard so much about? Scarcely believable. These guys act powerful and important, and they undoubtedly have access to a great deal of money, some of which they indicate they might be willing to part with. But they are hardly the experienced sages that you have been hoping to encounter, people who had built fast-growth companies from coast to coast. Some of these venture capitalists don’t even know very much about running a business, having only graduated from business school two or three years before.

Just because they have MBAs from Stanford or Harvard, they think they know everything about everything. Worse, their approach is pretty much antagonistic. ‘Why don’t you do this? Why don’t you do that?’ they say. They want you to redo everything you have done, and most of them don’t know anything about writing software. You feel you have been nursing this baby and these obnoxious morons are telling you that they don’t like the way the baby looks. But the fact is that they had done some things right…. Go figure.

In the end, you realize that these guys are a total waste of time and that you don’t even want them on board, telling you what to do. Maybe you wouldn’t go silk-stocking, but don’t care anymore. You are going to find a different route.

Welcome to the real world.

Yes there have always been young companies that, for one reason or another, have preferred to grow without venture capital, but lately it seems that more and more have.

Why?

Well as a starter, let me tell you that the vast majority of venture capitalists have no clue what they are doing. Most importantly, as I have been saying for years now, venture capital, by its very nature, distorts the process of growth.

Venture capitalists make you too ‘now’ — too profit-oriented, instead of quality-oriented. You introduce factors with venture capital that don’t really help build any company. As an entrepreneur you want to use your profits to do the things you want to do, not to please some investor who’s screaming, ‘Fifteen percent or you’re out!’ . No wonder the smartest entrepreneurs out there would rather have the steady, balanced growth that comes from pulling themselves up by the bootstraps.

That may be something of an overstatement, but it is also an increasingly common refrain in Silicon Valley, Route 128 in Boston or Silicon Alley in New York City. It reflects a growing disenchantment with an industry whose successes have become synonymous with the resurgence of the entrepreneurial spirit in America. Since the late 1950s, venture capitalists have played a crucial, even heroic, role in launching some of the nation’s most spectacular growth companies, from Digital Equipment and Federal Express to Apple Computer and People Express. At a time when the giant commercial banks, investment houses, and large corporations disdained small startups, venture capitalists were ready and willing to take the risks necessary to build their economic future.

I am afraid though venture capital today may well be becoming a victim of its own successes. Once a collection of small firms run by brilliant, if often idiosyncratic, individuals, the venture capital business is developing into a large-scale, highly institutionalized industry. The main impetus has come from pension funds, investment banks, insurance companies, and the like. Lured by annual returns as high as 40% to 60%, they have poured huge amounts of money into venture capital funds.

As the money has flowed in, the game has changed. You have to understand this is an industry where people are not used to having a lot of money. Then somebody gives you $150 million, and you start to feel you can walk on water. You read in the paper that you’re a genius, and you believe it. Some of the old constraints tend to get eroded away.

One manifestation of this tendency has been the recent emergence of so-called mega funds — venture capital funds of $1 billion or more.

Those are huge numbers for an industry in which, in the mid 80s the largest fund was about $50 million and the average fund was about $15 million. The problem of managing such mega funds, however, may be even bigger. In this business, you don’t multiply your talent with size. Stretched thin, the often illustrious general partners of the larger firms have had to depend increasingly on inexperienced subordinates for much of their investment decision-making and due diligence. This, in turn, has had an impact on the venture capital process itself. From the entrepreneurs’ standpoint, it means that they may not get the expert advice, or “intelligence equity,” which they often value more than cash. From the investors’ standpoint, it means that they are entrusting their money to people with limited knowledge of the business.

Part of the problem has to do, quite simply, with the dearth of available talent. Experienced venture capitalists are hard to come by, and their number has not kept pace with the explosion of the industry as a whole. It is a fact that venture capital is rapidly becoming a very talent-short market segment and there is a tremendous danger in this. Inexperienced people can be like the proverbial loose cannon on the battleship.

It’s like a large law firm. You can say you’re with the greatest law firm in the world, but, if a junior person is handling your account, I’d say that’s baloney. The question is: Who is your individual lawyer? This is not a profession for a lot of inexperienced “master of the universe” Ivy League rookie types in their 20s and 30s.

Then again, it would be unfair, and wrong, to blame most of the industry’s woes on MBAs, whose role, after all, is more a symptom than a cause of the problems. Certainly, there were very experienced hands involved in many of the venture-backed fiascos of the last decade…. clearly a broad pattern of mistakes and misjudgments. People get into situations with entrepreneurs or companies that they soon realize aren’t going to work out, but once you start, you often find a deal takes on a life of its own.

Exacerbating this situation is the growing involvement of major financial institutions in the venture capital process itself — not just as suppliers of capital, but as direct participants in latter, or “mezzanine,” round financing. As investment banks, insurance companies, and other large institutions have formed their own venture capital arms, they have added millions of dollars to the already huge pool of money available to companies on the verge of going public. The temptation is to pump these companies full of cash in hopes of increasing the appeal of their initial public offering. It is a temptation that some venture capitalists have found impossible to resist.

A lot of the troubles started when the institutions began co-investing with venture capitalists. It’s a fundamentally unsound process. It’s like believing in Santa Claus. The pressure is to short-cut the whole process. Instead of giving companies five or six years to grow, they try to do it in two years. Some companies have been rushed and grossly over financed as a result. The institutional involvement distorted everything. It’s a process that will lead – and is still leading — to disaster.

“Disaster” may seem like a rather strong word, and “over-financing” a rather strange concept — especially to young companies that are struggling to make ends meet. Yet that concept touches the root of the problems precipitated by the influx of new money and new players into the venture capital business. The business has become very chic. In the not too distant past, many of these same institutional investors would react to venture capital like venereal disease. Now they think it’s the greatest thing in the world, but they have picked up none of the skills.

In their enthusiasm, the new players often fail to comprehend the fundamental difference between venture capital and conventional financing mechanisms. They think it’s an investment business, but that’s wrong. Venture capital is not a business of trading stocks and investing for fast returns. Venture capitalists are not bankers. They are into building companies.

That is, indeed, what venture capital used to be all about according to General Doriot; the father of venture capitalism — building men and companies – and they have done a great job funding companies started by ARD back in the 40s to thousands of other companies since then such as Apple, Microsoft, Google, Facebook and the likes.

I think venture capital has been fantastic for the country. But this is past…not anymore today.

People then knew what they were talking about and were extremely analytical and unemotional. Exactly the reverse of what venture capitalists are today where most of them are just parallel investors who follow what other people do…Total sheep.

In my humble opinion, it is often later — after the company is up and running — that the knowledge and experience of a skilled venture capitalist becomes most important to the entrepreneur. Why? Well it is a fact that most entrepreneurs today run a tight ship and don’t need money. What they mostly need is somebody who could tell them what a big company is all about. Basically they need strategists who could tell them a problem and they set the guidelines, so you can get a solution.

People say power corrupts, but I think it’s money that does the trick. We have today the symptoms of the heightening of greed among venture capitalists and entrepreneurs. I suppose greed is okay up to a point, but it’s like wine. A glass is pleasant; a bottle will have a different effect.

This particular form of inebriation produced a variety of effects and manifested itself in a variety of ways. To begin with, it drew into the venture capital business a lot of people and institutions that were less interested in building companies than in scoring “quick hits” — that is, realizing enormous returns in a relatively short period of time. That was all right for entrepreneurs of a similar mind, but it posed a tremendous dilemma for those who were interested in something more than a fast buck.

Whether or not they were looking for weeds, that is what they found. All over Silicon Valley, companies began to spring up that were heavily promoted and heavily financed on little more than grand schemes. In place of expertise, the venture capitalists provided the companies with tons of money. The people who ran the companies often wound up spending it like oil sheiks on a weekend jaunt to Las Vegas.

There was, for example, the leading semiconductor start-up that added a totally unnecessary, albeit aesthetically pleasing, sloping roof to its headquarters at a time when losses were running at more than $1 million a quarter. An elaborate management information services staff, elegant workstations, and a host of other extravagances helped boost this company’s breakeven point as much as $4 million above that of its competitors.

Those types are still all around the Valley. Basically the hip shooters, the guys with a good front who feel they can do anything. It’s a lifestyle thing. They want to live like kings on other people’s money. What amazes me is that the idiotic venture capitalists backing them let them get away with it.

The consequences of all this are already being felt throughout the venture capital industry today. With the souring of the public market, many knowledgeable observers expect the returns of venture capital firms to plummet over the next few years, perhaps dropping by as much as half. That, in turn, will affect the supply of venture money available from institutions. If institutions are making venture investments on the basis of the returns we’ve seen over the past five years, I believe they are going to be disappointed.

The first casualties will probably be the industry’s “greener” players, particularly those venture groups set up by investment bankers and other traditional financial institutions. Venture capital doesn’t fit easily with the mentality of large corporations.

But the ripples of venture capital’s plunge are likely to spread far beyond the institutional funds. I fear in fact a backlash similar to the one following the “go-go” years of the late 1990s and early ’00s. That era, like the present one, had seen a spectacular boom in young growth companies, many of which went public with great fanfare. Aggressively promoted by stupid young brokers, hustlers and underwriters, these hot new issues soared briefly across the investment horizon, until the fundamental weaknesses of the companies brought them, and their investors, crashing back to earth.

Something like that could happen again, particularly if a significant number of the “living dead” don’t survive. Indeed, it is by no means inconceivable that a series of massive failures of venture-backed companies could send a chill across the entire entrepreneurial landscape, affecting all kinds of smaller businesses, even those that might never have been candidates for venture capital themselves. After all, the rise of venture capital helped generate new interest in small, growth companies in general; so, too, its decline could have the opposite effect. To a certain extent, this is already occurring.

But even if the worst doesn’t happen, entrepreneurs will increasingly have to look elsewhere for the money and expertise that they have traditionally counted on the venture capital community to provide.

Too many start-ups I’ve seen over the years started with too much money. The key thing is you have to go through the pain. If you sense pain in the beginning, the chances are you won’t have to deal with it later. The only way to stay focused is pain — and not being able to make the rent if you screw up.

In the future, that observation may apply as well to companies that have already received venture capital. The guys who spend lavishly will go under, and those who spend carefully will survive.

Much the same might be said for the venture capitalists themselves. While the newer firms begin to fade, some of the more traditional venture capitalists are pulling in their horns.

There’s a time to reap, and there’s a time to sow. Maybe this is the time to plant seeds and get through the long winter. The opportunities are still there at the end of the cycle. Survivorship never has been easy, but that’s the way this business has been from the beginning.

So, in the long run, the venture capital industry may yet emerge from its Big Chill stronger than ever. It will, that is, if venture capitalists put their shoulders to the wheel, and return — in the words of General Doriot — to the business of “building men and companies.”

You’ve been warned…. Now let’s see what you make of it next time you deal with venture capitalists.

Tagged:

Discerning Fact from Fiction

By:


There was a time that governments and the groups of elites that controlled them did not find it necessary to conscript themselves into wars of disinformation.

Propaganda was relatively straightforward. The lies were much simpler. The control of information flow was easily directed. The elites kept the information to themselves, and removed its remnants from mainstream recognition, sometimes for centuries before it was rediscovered.

With the success of the American Revolution, elitists were no longer able to dominate information. The establishment of Republics, with their philosophy of open government and rule by the people, compelled Aristocratic minorities to plot more subtle ways of obstructing the truth and thus maintaining their hold over the world without exposing themselves to retribution from the masses. Thus, the complex art of disinformation was born.

The goal was malicious, but socially radical; instead of expending the impossible energy needed to dictate the very form and existence of the truth, they would allow it to drift, obscured in a fog of contrived data. They would wrap the truth in a Knot of misdirection and fabrication so elaborate that they felt certain the majority of people would surrender, giving up long before they ever finished unraveling the deceit. The goal was not to destroy the truth, but to hide it in plain sight.

In modern times, and with carefully engineered methods, this goal has for the most part been accomplished. However, these methods also have inherent weaknesses. Lies are fragile. They require constant attentiveness to keep them alive. The exposure of a single truth can rip through an ocean of lies, evaporating it instantly.

The mainstream media, once tasked with the job of investigating government corruption and keeping elitists in line, has now unfortunately become nothing more than a public relations firm for corrupt officials and their Globalist handlers. The days of the legitimate “investigative reporter” are long gone (if they ever existed at all), and journalism itself has deteriorated into a rancid pool of so called “TV Editorialists” who treat their own baseless opinions as supported fact.

The elitist co-opting of news has been going on in one form or another since the invention of the printing press. However, the first methods of media disinformation truly came to fruition under the supervision of newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst, who believed the truth was “subjective” and open to his personal interpretation.

TV pundits are often trained in what are commonly called “Alinsky Tactics.” Saul Alinsky was a moral relativist, and champion of the lie as a tool for the “greater good”; essentially, a modern day Machiavelli. His “Rules for Radicals” were supposedly meant for grassroots activists who opposed the establishment and emphasized the use of any means necessary to defeat one’s political opposition. But is it truly possible to defeat an establishment built on lies, by use of even more elaborate lies, and by sacrificing one’s ethics? In reality, his strategies are the perfect format for corrupt institutions and governments to dissuade dissent from the masses. Today, Alinsky’s rules are used more often by the establishment than by its opposition.

Alinsky’s Strategy: Win At Any Cost, Even If You Have To Lie.

Alinsky’s tactics have been adopted by governments and disinformation specialists across the world, but they are most visible in TV debate in the US today.

The next time you view an MSN debate, watch the pundits carefully, you will likely see many if not all of their strategies used on some unsuspecting individual attempting to tell the truth.

The truth is precious. It is sad that there are so many in our society who have lost respect for it; people who have traded in their conscience and their soul for temporary financial comfort while sacrificing the stability and balance of the rest of the country in the process.

The human psyche breathes on the air of truth. Without it, humanity cannot survive. Without it, the species will collapse, starving from lack of intellectual and emotional sustenance.

Disinformation does not only threaten our insight into the workings of our world; it makes us vulnerable to fear, misunderstanding, and doubt: all things that lead to destruction. It can drive good people to commit terrible atrocities against others, or even against themselves.

Without a concerted and organized effort to diffuse mass-produced lies, the future looks bleak indeed.

It is a fact that not enough Americans feel a high enough level of pain yet. When they do, who knows what the results will be.  I frankly don’t think we can judge, (based on current experience trying to ‘wake’ people up), what will happen in the future.

I warned you though … Let’s see what you make out of it.

Tagged:

Living your Life as a True Activist?

By:


I believe that many people are living a life just for the sake of existence with no real purpose other than going with the flow or seeking an elusive happiness that never seems to materialize.

Have you ever thought about living your life as a true activist? What do you think this would entail?

Here are some personal thoughts.

As George Orwell once said: “Men can only be happy when they do not assume that the object of life is happiness.”

Well I believe we’re all here for a reason. There are many forces that would distract us and prevent us finding it. Seek your reason, and in doing so you will find consolation and purpose.

I’d suggest, by and large, society today is geared up to turn good people into bad. It’s a society run by bad people in favor of bad people; bad meaning the self centered and selfish. People are forced to tow the ridiculous, individualist, greed driven line in order to survive.

The metaphor I use is that of someone who’s in a hole in the ground. The hole is filling with water and they are bailing out the water just to stay alive. The bigger their wage, the bigger their cup. The problem is that no one is given the time to ask the very simple questions, ‘Why am I in this hole, who put me there?’. They’re just kept too busy bailing and become exhausted in the process.

Remember Tolstoy? “Money is the new form of slavery”.

A friend of mine refers to this as ‘the upside down world’. Such an observation of society’s contradiction is correct both in moral and practical terms. We are doomed in both respects as long as we keep believing the great lie which forms the basis of economic models around the world, that of ‘infinite growth.

If you’re interested in reading a very interesting work on the fundamentally flawed economic models used to keep us all captive and grind the Earth and its resources to dust, check out Professor Tim Jackson’s work entitled ‘Prosperity without Growth’.

Notably, the Sustainable Development Commission which commissioned and published this work was shut down in 2011. It’s stated aim was to ‘Hold government to account to ensure the needs of society, the economy and the environment were properly balanced in the decisions it made and the way it ran itself’. It was axed as part of the coalition spending cuts enforced upon the people to pay the price of the banking industry’s excess.

As mentioned above in ‘the hole dilemma’, if people had the time to stop and think how their society has been butchered by the greed driven power politics of big business, and the consequential harm to society and social services, I suspect a great many politicians would need to put their running shoes on…

Thomas Jefferson summed up and warned of our society today nearly 100 years ago. I believe it is applicable to all, if not the vast majority, of nations.

“And I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.”

In short, we are governed by the morally bankrupt and criminally corrupt. Though I am of no specific religious denomination, I pray to all and any deities that one day we find the strength to stand up and put an end to this horror.

I would also add that to my mind the idea of nations is as primitive as stone age tribal thinking and that patriotism is just nationalism by another name. We are one planet, there is no disputing that. What harms one harms us all. What helps one helps us all. The universal bond that connects us is one that cannot be broken and should not be allowed to be degraded by the politically motivated manufactured consensus based on an ideological madness.

All I can say is hold on, be strong, start contributing by educating your fellow citizens, live your life like a true activist. Change is coming.

You don’t need to change anything external like your behavior or your circumstances. You don’t need to have “worth” to society. If you want peace of mind and happiness, you must change the way you perceive your world and start doing something about it.

A person’s contribution doesn’t need to be grand or even positive, as long as we’re not stuck in solitary confinement our actions and behavior will contribute. I’ve learned and benefited from all levels of society in many countries. Lawyers have taught me, beggars have taught me, doctors have taught me and other species have taught me – everything and everybody has in some way affected and raised my awareness.

I live to cut through, endure and learn from the suffering and pain because it’s so very worth it to experience what comes as a result. I realize that for some, suffering consumes the majority of their lives and may well be inescapable. In that case it becomes an individual’s choice whether or not to continue. This is an ecosystem, it isn’t fair or intrinsically purposeful, life is a struggle with intermittent rewards.

So I say, struggle and find your rewards, use all your wits and resources to glimpse those fleeting moments of joy, share your life with others, share the struggle and the joy, bite the bullet and see if you can outsmart the system. Keep doing it, learn and fight, bite and scratch for your piece of the cake. Find solace in whichever form works for you, understand the sharks you swim with.

Life isn’t pretty but by living your life as a true activist you do create an enormous ripple effect no matter who you are.

Share your thoughts.

Tagged:

Wealth Takers v/s Wealth Creators Some food for thought

By:


The natural state of our economy is prosperity. Freedom guarantees that. The only force capable of undermining it is government. It is high time to realize that all important fact.

It is clear that we are still stuck today in the worst economic recovery since the Great Depression. Despite all the disinformation and market manipulation out there, our economic weakness has now become a top national security threat.

Did the market fail or did the government fail? If so, how? I have made my business career by asking the right questions. Are we working on the right problem? Do we have the right people? Are we close enough to the action? My strong suit is to ask questions until the bottom line is found. Are you asking yourselves these questions or taking at face value all what you’re being fed by our supposed “economic and market gurus” out there?

I believe even the most well-meaning government policies have unintended consequences that have harmed the economy. If government policies were held accountable the way private businesses are, the scoreboard would say government is failing to help people. What do you say?

In my humble opinion, there are few problems in the world that economic prosperity cannot help solve. Yet the engines of that prosperity are under fierce attack. The forces that seek power over others have gained the upper hand against those that seek freedom. By harming wealth creation, they cause even more strain on society. Historically, this is nothing new. State domination over its subjects has roots that connect statism, totalitarianism, communism, and socialism to more modern-day variants of liberalism and progressivism. It is a constant fight and we must win.

It is a fact that the forces against wealth creation accelerate when the Progressives are in power. More recently, they forced “Obamacare” and “Dodd Frankenstein Financial Deform” upon us. We now face a perfect storm. One only needs to observe the unrest across the world to imagine what life will become here if we don’t get our economy turned around very soon.

But how? It is not as though people lose sight of simple principles in a complex society as much as it is a Progressive tactic to confuse people. For example, if the world consists of two farmers, and one is paid government benefits, who pays? Exactly. The other farmer pays. Redistribution is a negative-sum game, and people understand that. In another example, if one farmer raises cattle and the other grows vegetables, they are both better off through voluntary trade. Making other people better off is the only way to satisfy your needs. Is it bad that some people make many people better off? Do you deserve a special attack by government if you make millions of people better off? Voluntary exchange is a positive-sum game.

After all, trade and wealth creation is not all upside. It is failure, too. Failure is a necessary component to growth and success. Babe Ruth struck out 1,330 times but also hit 714 home runs. We need to let failing entities fail. Only then will successful people turn these enterprises back into wealth-creating vehicles again. “Too big to fail” is a concept that perpetuates failure and saps vitality from the rest of the wealth creators to do so.

Bottom Line: Wealth creation is not a business suited to those whose skill set consists of voting “present.” It requires decision making, risk taking, hard information, discipline, insight, and intelligence.

We have clearly gotten away from the 10th Amendment. The only equal outcome for all that can be achieved by the federal government is misery for all. It is not that people shouldn’t be helped. It is that in most cases, it is not the role of the federal government to do so.

After all is said and done, in whose hands should you place your trust for improving the economy? An entrepreneur, whose job it is to solve problems for a profit? Or a bureaucrat, whose job it is to cause problems for a profit? I know where I put my trust, and I’m sure 90 percent of us agree.

We outnumber them, so let’s act like it. After all, the American Dream isn’t a house, or any property, or the consumption of any good. It is to be productive creating wealth.

It is real sad that the very people whose policies unleashed the attacks on our economic foundation are today waging a full-blown assault on the true wellspring of business formation, innovation, and job creation: the wealth creators.

When you see how the Washington–Wall Street corridor, which I call the “Chaos Industry”, profits at the expense of average Americans, what are you waiting for to take action?

The turnaround must come from outside of the Washington establishment. It must come from us.

Battle lines have been drawn. On one side of the battle are the fakers and takers. On the other side, all of the wealth creators. Who offers you more opportunity?

The Founding Fathers did their job. I strongly believe we must be the “Defending Fathers”. What do you say?

One of my favorite political lines on the campaign trail comes from former U.S. Senator Everett Dirksen. He once said, “When they feel the heat, they will see the light.”

Share your thoughts….

Tagged:

Stop Procrastinating and Find a Reason to be Rich

By:


I believe each one of us has a financial genius in him/her that is asleep and just waiting to be awakened. It lies asleep because our culture has educated us into believing the wrong things about money. We’re taught to be employees and work for money rather than to be entrepreneurs and investors and have money work for us. We’re taught to not worry about our financial future because our company or the government will do that for us.

I also believe the best revenge against liberals and corporate bosses idiots is “obscene wealth”.

The message about money we’re taught from a young age is work hard, earn money, spend it, and when we run short, borrow some more. Unfortunately, 90 percent of the Western world subscribes to the above dogma, simply because it’s easier to find a job and work for money than to make your own way and build your own wealth.

But to those who want to buck the trend, I have 10 ways to awaken your financial genius which I’ll share with you over the next couple months.

The first is Find a Reason.

If you ask most people if they want to be rich, they say “yes.” But then reality sets in. They realize it’s a lot of work to become rich. There is no getting rich quick. Facing these obstacles, they throw in the towel and take the easy route—getting a job and handing investments over to a pathetic broker.

Yet, there are clearly those in life who don’t take the easy route. And there are those who are wildly successful where others aren’t. What separates the successful from the unsuccessful? The answer is found in a reason.

A reason is simply a combination of “wants” and “don’t wants.” My reason for getting rich began with my “don’t wants,” which defined my “wants.”

I don’t want to work all my life. I don’t want what my parents aspired for, job security and a house in the suburbs. I don’t like being an employee. I don’t want to be emotionally absent from my family and friends because I’m always working to make ends meet. I don’t want to have nothing to pass on at the end of my life.

Out of these “don’t wants,” I developed my “wants.”

I want to be free to travel the world and live the lifestyle I love. I want to be young when I do this. I want to be free financially. I want control over my time and my life. I want money to work for me. I want to be a “master of the universe” and say whatever I please to anyone without fear of being fired or looked upon as an outcast. Well, money is the only way to get me there and insulates me from all the dependence crap out there.

Personally, I’ve faced many setbacks in my road to riches. I’ve lost a lot of money and seen many deals fall through. I wanted to be financially free by age 30, but it took me until I was 34, with many learning experience along the way. But through it all, my reasons pulled me through.

Today is the day to determine your reason for getting rich. Make a list of your “Don’t wants” and your “wants.” Make sure that your reason is strong and determined. If you find the right reason, I promise you that you will find a way to get real wealthy But it all starts with you.

Stay tuned to my 9 other ways over the next few months… In the meantime, share your thoughts

Tagged:
Page 7 of 11
1 5 6 7 8 9 11