Those who kw him will accept that this book is a real life story. He lives by example; he practises in detail what he has described in this book. Additional Product Features Author s. Abib Olamitoye is happily married with two children. Show more Show less. No ratings or reviews yet. Best-selling in Non-Fiction Books See all. Save on Non-Fiction Books Trending price is based on prices over last 90 days. You may also like. Business, Management Textbooks. One more thing a bootstrapper does: Not only profits, they focus on cash flow indeed, unlike what many assume profits is not the same thing as cash flow.
The way I see it, bootstrappers are or should be? They understand that cash flow is king. Cash flow is crucial, of course. I totally agree with you. In my opinion Stage 1 is not seed money, but customers. That happened when professional managers came on the scene, via employment or buy-out or competitor. To us, business was about fun — enjoying and learning from the constant challenges. Yes, we often worked long hours — but that was because we were doing what we loved — not because we were forced to or because we had to. And others stopped doing their business by choice, not because they had to.
The same with writing competent copy — or competent design — or a programming or scripting language. The basics can and should be learned long before even thinking about starting a business. That so many believe business is about money rather than customers is, IMO, a modern day tragedy. Thanks for your perspective, Ed. Is it possible to start to with NO money? But you still need a lawnmower and gasoline to run it, and that has to come from somewhere. Or you start a cleaning business. You still need a bucket, broom, mop and some cleaners — and you print up a flyer to hand out.
And until you start bringing enough money in the door to support yourself and your family, most people will be living off of savings or have a working spouse or have a day job. But customers come as a result of organized effort on the part of the entrepreneur — and that usually involves at least a few bucks to get off the ground. Then you quickly get to the customer stage, and the customers fund the business. Anita: I got curios about the origin of the expression, bootstrapping, after reading your post.
Could crowd-funding be a part of bootstrapping your business?
You need a few seeds to start a garden. But the goal is to get the garden producing as quickly as possible. Anita: What a lovely analogy with a garden and business. My own chile pepper collection is only for my own enjoyment at the moment, but I will keep your sound advice with me for rest of my life! Under-funded and under-resourced companies fail, when less quality companies can thrive. Bootstrapping is the old idea, more like hazing than anything else.
When we support each other, we will do better.
That is what mentoring is, that is what investing is. Instead of people spending so much time repeating the failures, less provide the expertise to help them succeed. But entrepreneurs have been bootstrapping businesses for centuries. A business has to stand on its own two feet. But my current bootstrapped business, while it grew more slowly, is a stronger business. For me, the choice is clear: bootstrapping all the way. Hi Anita, It takes longer. When I started I knew nothing about Internet Marketing.
My first site was a test bed, actually the second was too now that I think about it. It is gaining strength and a very little bit of notoriety through my marketing endeavors. It is time however, to focus on marketing and monetize the site. I learn every bit of this business the hard way. Again thank you for the article and the site you run here. It has been one of my sources of great information the entire time.
When possible bootstrapping is the best way to go about starting and growing your business.
I would caution that do not get too worried about asking for money from external resources if that helps you grow fast. You make a great point. As long as you have a viable business model, getting funding to grow can be the best move you make. Dear Anita, I am extremely happy for your free consultancy your are providing to the public.
This concept is new to me as I have heard it a week ago, but to my surprise, I have been starting many business and all of them have failed, now I understand why, I was thinking that it is all about much money, but it how you manage what is at hand, having this change of thinking, I am going to start afresh because I was already gave up and thought that the business is not my thing. Once again thank you.
Will you agree to be my mentor? I am a Tanzanian woman doing my Master degree in Entrepreneurship. This tension between economic goals means that in developing and establishing regulations, policy makers will often need to consider whether imposing a regulation that is believed to have long-term social and perhaps nonmonetary benefits is worth its short-term economic risks and costs.
This is typically a tradeoff that is both challenging to measure and difficult to make. One possible measure of such administrative burden is page counts, as shown in Figure 3. Public attitudes about the burden of regulation may be flawed through reliance on opinions of persons not directly involved in the process. The effects of regulation on economic activity are difficult to measure and thus too often are neglected in the debates over economic policy. He continues to explain that:. The public discourse on economic policy is overwhelmingly focused on fiscal measures, monetary interventions, welfare programs and other such highly visible instruments of government action.
Thus when an economy does poorly, a disproportionate amount of our debate centers on whether or not it needs a fiscal stimulus, whether there should be liquidity easing or tightening, whether its welfare programs have been too profligate or too paltry and so on. The laws that determine how easily a business can be started and closed, the efficiency with which contracts are enforced, the rules of administration pertaining to a variety of activities—such as getting permits for electricity and doing the paperwork for exports and imports—are all examples of the nuts and bolts that are rarely visible and in the limelight but play a critical role.
Although the lack of effective methodologies for forecasting the macroeconomic and dynamic impacts of regulation may be the biggest problem facing regulators, the intentional dismissal of the cost of job displacement remains a real shortcoming of agency efforts to promote only those regulations where the benefits are worth their costs.
Diana Thomas concludes that regulation of health and safety in consumer products ends up a regressive policy—placing disproportionate burden on lower-income households by driving up the prices of consumer goods and driving down wages. Ip also emphasizes that regulations designed to tamp down risky behaviors widely deemed to be bad can often tamp down economic activity universally considered to be good.
How To Create A Business That Thrives In Your Absence: The Exciting Story Of An Ambitious Indian Hunter [Dr. Abib Olamitoye] on rapyzure.tk *FREE*. How to Create a Business That Thrives in Your Absence: The Exciting Story of an Ambitious Indian Hunter. A man cannot talk passionately and convincingly.
To judge whether a regulation will be good or bad for the economy, first one has to identify the purpose or goal of the regulation. If so, what is the nature of the failure, and is a regulatory approach and if so, what type the best way to address correct or adjust for the failure, considering both the benefits and costs of the strategy? What kinds of evidence can and should be gathered and considered to evaluate the likelihood of success before a regulation is established?
In other words, justify a role for government, find the approach regulatory or otherwise most likely to improve the economic outcome and maximize net benefit to society, and then consider and address and adjust if needed any undesirable distributional effects.
These would be the steps an impartial economist would take in building a smart regulation, but of course, impartial economists are not the ones who propose, vote on, or implement regulations. Economists are on the sidelines, ready to analyze when asked the economic effects of regulations already in motion or in place. There are both data and analytical limitations: Federal agencies currently do not do a good job of monitoring and measuring the effects of regulations and collecting data along the way for later analyses.
Having to compare effects at different points in time involving discount rates , place values on human life, and deal with uncertain outcomes is technically complicated. Robert Hahn has argued that not enough progress has been made in the actual, evolving practice of regulatory assessment in terms of the rigor and quality of economic analysis and its potential to improve regulatory policy. Although all regulations must at least implicitly pass a society-wide cost-benefit test, measurement especially of benefits and especially in the case of social regulations can be extremely difficult.
Given the limits of available knowledge, benefits can be highly uncertain. Furthermore, it is in the nature of many regulations to require investment-type activities, which provide their uncertain payoffs years in the future. Thus, even if those benefits were known with certainty which they are not decision makers still could disagree over how many future dollars of benefit are required to justify one dollar of current cost. Still further, because those remote and uncertain benefits often include claims of the saving of human lives, those decision-makers are caught in the analytical and ethical quagmire of valuing a human life, under various combinations of controversial circumstances.
The same of course can be true of the valuing of avoidance of injury or illness. Environmental regulation is a good and large example: the economic costs of environmentally motivated regulatory policies in terms of reduced economic output activities that explicitly enter GDP are much easier to put dollar values on than are the environmental benefits.
Thus, although approving or rejecting a proposed regulation is inevitably and implicitly passing judgment on a cost-benefit test, in many instances that judgment will of necessity be highly controversial. International comparisons can help researchers assess the overall, country-wide, or at least industry-wide, stringency and burden of regulations on broad measures of business and household economic activity, but they do not really help us evaluate the effectiveness of particular regulations on the particular more specific activities of particular businesses and households.
To do that, we need more micro-level data. Here the case for more adequate funding for statistical agencies and programs must be made: All stakeholders in regulatory policy should collect adequately detailed data to measure these micro effects so that regulations do what they are supposed to, in economically sensible, optimal ways.
Assessing the economic costs and benefits of particular types of regulations cannot be done using macro-level data. Given that aggregate or average, economy-wide effects are typically very small, the most significant effects are the allocative and distributional effects across geographies, industries, companies within industries, and different types of people , which require micro-level data to measure.
A great example of the kind of microdata needed to study the effects of regulations on the very activities that are being regulated and hence whether regulations are achieving their public interest goals is found in a paper by economists Joseph Shapiro and Reed Walker , which uses factory-level records from the Census Bureau and the Environmental Protection Agency EPA to isolate the effects of environmental regulations from other factors that affect pollution emissions trade, productivity, and consumer preferences.
The report went on to explain a full range of regulatory policy approaches in terms of the degree of control the regulation attempts to impose on markets. The reporting of information lies at the minimum end, and traditional directive rulemaking at the maximum. Intermediate positions include a variety of mechanisms that affect economic incentives through the price system, such as in the case of environmental policy through pollution taxes or tradable permits.
Economists of all political persuasions tend to favor regulation via market-based adjustment of prices to account for differences between social costs or benefits and private costs or benefits over regulation based on requiring changes to quantities of specific inputs or outputs which would override, rather than simply adjust, the natural market-based price incentives. Such market-based forms of regulatory policy are also more in keeping with a principles-based as opposed to a rules-based approach. Randall Lutter writes that the permit trading approach to environmental regulation has several advantages.
To widen the market and to narrow the competition, is always the interest of the dealers The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order, ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention.
It comes from an order of men, whose interest is never exactly the same with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even oppress the public, and who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it. Approximately years ago, Adam Smith cautioned the readers of his Wealth of Nations that policy actions touted by businesses and politicians as being in the public interest might actually be positions promoting their own, particular and very special interests.
Fast forward to modern times and crony capitalism: the pursuit of private gain through influence in the public sector, which is a frequent topic of discussion and debate among the citizenry. Influence over the regulatory process could be used to stifle competition, allowing existing businesses to charge higher prices. To a degree perhaps beyond even what Adam Smith appreciated, regulations could be used to preclude innovation that would challenge incumbent businesses.
Stifling innovation could, in the longer run, slow U. For that reason, building regulatory governance structures that maintain a level playing field and encourage competition is essential. Such an attempted manipulation of the regulatory process could be a quite straightforward one-on-one struggle between a particular private interest and the relevant governmental authorities. However, there have been occasional alliances between seemingly unlikely private collaborators in attempts to compound their political influence on regulation.
He first introduced the concept in a short paper in Regulation magazine in 27 and revisited it in The happy bootleggers eliminated competition one day a week, and the devoted Baptists could feel better knowing that demon rum would not be sold openly on their Sabbath day. Of course, no one will ever see bootleggers carrying signs in front of a state house seeking political support when closing laws are up for reauthorization.
For success to occur, according to the theory, a respectable public-spirited group seeking the same result must wrap a self-interested lobbying effort in a cloak of respectability. Both members of the politicking coalition are necessary to win. The bootleggers laugh all the way to the bank—and may occasionally share their gains with helpful politicians.
Instead of the partnership allowing policymakers to better account for a broad and diverse set of viewpoints in their making of government regulations as good public policy, this collaboration between Bootlegger- and Baptist-types produces economic outcomes that are, ironically, bad for society and the public interest. Capitalism has taken lots of hits recently. Everything from bailed-out banks and auto companies to subsidized solar product firms that fail spectacularly leaves the public with the feeling that the marketplace is seriously flawed.
Anti-capitalism messages seem ubiquitous. In both cases we can see Bootlegger-type special interests trying to pass off their positions as protecting Baptist-type public interests. Traditional taxi companies already subject to regulations naturally find it unfair that companies such as Uber do not have to play by the same rules.
Ironically, as Kevin Hassett and Robert Shapiro have explained in a recent paper , the imposition of a single price whereby ISP companies are prohibited from charging higher prices for higher quality services will lower investment, reduce supply, and hence raise average costs charged to consumers.
In general it seems that cronyism and capture of regulatory policy by special interests is easier when regulations are narrow special, tailor-made and complex difficult for new business to qualify or comply. From their report:. Research on the economic effects of regulation is underdeveloped, though available evidence suggests most regulations have brought benefits that are worth the economic costs. The United States used to be the trailblazer in regulatory reform.
But the rest of the rich world has caught up. Doing Business Going Beyond Efficiency , a World Bank Group flagship publication, is the 12th in a series of annual reports measuring the regulations that enhance business activity and those that constrain it. Doing Business presents quantitative indicators on business regulations and the protection of property rights that can be compared across economies—from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe—and over time.
Doing Business measures regulations affecting 11 areas of the life of a business. Data in Doing Business are current as of June 1, The indicators are used to analyze economic outcomes and identify what reforms of business regulation have worked, where and why. As the report explains page 3, emphasis added :. The 20 economies at the top of the ease of doing business ranking perform well not only on the Doing Business indicators but also in other international data sets capturing dimensions of competitiveness.
The economies performing best in the Doing Business rankings therefore are not those with no regulation but those whose governments have managed to create rules that facilitate interactions in the marketplace without needlessly hindering the development of the private sector. They cite a paper by Alesina et al.
It is our view that since the analysis of regulatory policy necessarily will require that an analyst draw from a large set of empirical analogies, these macro-econometric estimates can help researchers infer the likely direction and scale of a change in regulation. In an ideal setting, one could estimate how a given change in policy would change the index and then infer the likely impact on investment by drawing on the empirical literature.
Alternatively, one could assemble micro analogies to the policy under consideration and then collect evidence on the plausibility of the scale of these effects by performing a thought experiment based on the OECD index. Hassett and Shapiro also stress that regulatory policies often negatively impact economic activity, particularly investment, not so much because of the level of stringency of the rules per se, but because of uncertainty about the nature and scope of the rules as they are anticipated to be finally written, implemented, and enforced.
They explain that:.
Between the initial regulatory decision and the final resolution, firms may radically reduce their affected investments. All of this suggests that although U. In theory, we may know a lot about what makes for good regulations, but in practice, we are not optimizing. Our regulations could be better designed and maintained to promote a more vibrant, innovative, and productive economy.
Many researchers and research organizations U. Those 12 recommendations are quoting, with emphasis added :. Commit at the highest political level to an explicit whole-of-government policy for regulatory quality. The policy should have clear objectives and frameworks for implementation to ensure that, if regulation is used, the economic, social and environmental benefits justify the costs, distributional effects are considered and the net benefits are maximised. Adhere to principles of open government, including transparency and participation in the regulatory process to ensure that regulation serves the public interest and is informed by the legitimate needs of those interested in and affected by regulation.
This includes providing meaningful opportunities including online for the public to contribute to the process of preparing draft regulatory proposals and to the quality of the supporting analysis. Governments should ensure that regulations are comprehensible and clear and that parties can easily understand their rights and obligations. Establish mechanisms and institutions to actively provide oversight of regulatory policy procedures and goals, support and implement regulatory policy, and thereby foster regulatory quality.
Integrate Regulatory Impact Assessment RIA into the early stages of the policy process for the formulation of new regulatory proposals. Clearly identify policy goals, and evaluate if regulation is necessary and how it can be most effective and efficient in achieving those goals. Consider means other than regulation and identify the tradeoffs of the different approaches analysed to identify the best approach. Conduct systematic programme reviews of the stock of significant regulation against clearly defined policy goals , including consideration of costs and benefits, to ensure that regulations remain up to date, cost-justified, cost-effective and consistent and [deliver] the intended policy objectives.
Regularly publish reports on the performance of regulatory policy and reform programmes and the public authorities applying the regulations. Such reports should also include information on how regulatory tools such as Regulatory Impact Assessment RIA , public consultation practices and reviews of existing regulations are functioning in practice.
Develop a consistent policy covering the role and functions of regulatory agencies in order to provide greater confidence that regulatory decisions are made on an objective, impartial and consistent basis, without conflict of interest, bias or improper influence. Ensure the effectiveness of systems for the review of the legality and procedural fairness of regulations, and of decisions made by bodies empowered to issue regulatory sanctions. Ensure that citizens and businesses have access to these systems of review at reasonable cost and receive decisions in a timely manner.
As appropriate apply risk assessment, risk management, and risk communication strategies to the design and implementation of regulations to ensure that regulation is targeted and effective. Regulators should assess how regulations will be given effect and should design responsive implementation and enforcement strategies. Where appropriate promote regulatory coherence through co-ordination mechanisms between the supra national, the national and sub-national levels of government.
Identify cross cutting regulatory issues at all levels of government, to promote coherence between regulatory approaches and avoid duplication or conflict of regulations. Foster the development of regulatory management capacity and performance at sub national levels of government. In developing regulatory measures, give consideration to all relevant international standards and frameworks for co-operation in the same field and, where appropriate, their likely effects on parties outside the jurisdiction.
In their most recent October reports on regulatory policy Regulatory Policy in Perspective55 and OECD Regulatory Policy Outlook , the OECD catalogs the knowledge to date on best regulatory practices and continued challenges, with special focus on the use of regulatory impact assessment, stakeholder engagement, and ex-post or retrospective evaluation. They conclude that the ex-ante evaluation of regulatory costs and benefits is well developed in the United States, with the degree of evaluation efforts proportional to the anticipated impacts of the regulatory proposals.
The scope of current U. The federal government guidance on U.
For the current fiscal year , each agency recommending a new regulation must identify at least two to be repealed. Furthermore, the total incremental cost of all new regulations for this fiscal year must be no more than zero including the reduction of cost from regulations that are repealed , as determined by guidance issued by the Director of OMB. The Executive Order makes no reference to the benefits that accrue from any regulations, including those that are recommended for imposition or repeal. Logically, if only costs are considered, then every existing regulation should be eliminated, and no new regulations should be imposed.
Presumably, this logical inconsistency will somehow be dealt with in the guidance issued by the OMB Director. Because such a resolution would be subject to a presidential veto, and with a presumption that a president would support his own regulation with a veto, the CRA garnered little attention. However, the CRA also requires each agency issuing a regulation to submit a report to the Congress, and the deadline for a resolution of disapproval occurs after the report is filed. Because the requirement for a report may have been ignored in some instances, a new administration hostile to such a regulation could file a report on a regulation issued at any time after the CRA was enacted, and thereby empower the Congress to pass a resolution of disapproval.
The Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of section a requires OMB to report to Congress yearly on the costs and benefits of regulations and to provide recommendations for reform. The Truth in Regulating Act of gives Congress authority to request that the GAO conduct an independent evaluation of economically significant rules at the proposed or final stages.