10/31/03
09:35:11 |
Jack Lapidas |
Watertown, MA
Msg 41 of 99 |
| SBIR awards are granted based upon the technical and
business quality of the submission. This is a direct
reflection of the quality of the staff at a small
business. Venture funding received by a small
business will not affect the quality of the SBIR
submission by itself or make the playing field unlevel
with non-venture funded organizations. Submission
quality is a function of the skill of the grant writer
and the merit of his or her technology, and not a
function of the funding source or funding amount
received by the business.
Venture funded organizations generate many jobs and it
is entirely appropriate that the government leverage
the funding provided by venture capitalists to help
these small businesses succeed. The receipt of
venture capital is a form of validation that a small
business has a reasonable chance for success. Congress
should take all steps possible to assist in that
potential success and should not restrict SBIR funding
to venture-funded small businesses.
|
|
| Vote: YES | |
 Return |
10/31/03
10:52:31 |
Name withheld by request |
Wolf Point, MT
Msg 42 of 99 |
Please keep the big money guys out of the SBIR
picture. We want to build our own company for the
experience & well being gained from our own efforts.
The VC's already have plenty of money & established
businesses. One has to examine their motives for
wanting in on the SBIR cash pipeline.
|
|
| Vote: NO | |
| Return |
11/03/03
14:19:32 |
Name withheld by request |
Lafayette, IL
Msg 43 of 99 |
| The isn't about corporate welfare, unless your
referring to the small business that live off of one
SBIR after another without ever commercializing
anything. I work in a building with many small
businesses. Most of us have less than 30 employees,
but nearly all of us have venture funding. If the SBA
wants the best performance for their dollar small
businesses with venture funding are going to have the
best chance to actually commercialize the technology -
not lifestyle companies that are designed to live off
of SBIR's.
I also don't think this interferes at all with the
intended purpose of the SBIR. After reading the
SBA's "Fast Track" website I don't believe the author
at SBA was aware of this rule. They certainly seem to
encourage venture funding, and even give examples in
which a VC owns more than 51%.
The 500-employee test for a small business and its
affiliates should take care of any corporate welfare
concern. This interpretation of the citizenship test
is completely unwarranted, does not fit its intended
purpose and will have a devastating impact on the
commercialization of technology.
|
|
| Vote: YES | |
| Return |
11/03/03
14:29:17 |
David Stoltenberg |
Billings, MT
Msg 44 of 99 |
In my view it is vitally important that companies
with access to and controlled by VC organizations not
be allowed to compete in the SBIR program. Such
companies are already adequately funding their
research and commercialization efforts. The SBIR
program has already produced many significant
technology companies that started without significant
amounts of VC funding. Allowing companies well
funded and managed by large pools of capital will
simply result in significantly decreasing the amounts
of money available for qualified and deserving small
companies, while funding larger companies at their
expense. The SBIR program disperses a relatively
small amount of money used to foster small business
and entrepreneurial growth in the US, and it would
not be wise to allow larger companies access to this
funding.
|
|
| Vote: NO | |
| Return |
11/04/03
11:17:35 |
Deanna Campbell |
Bozeman, MT
Msg 45 of 99 |
It is hard enough for small business to compete with
VC backed companies without having to go head to head
with them for SBIR money. The program is designed for
SMALL businesses without access to VC money. Please
keep it that way to insure that good technology will
continue to get commercialized.
|
|
| Vote: NO | |
| Return |
11/05/03
11:10:59 |
Name withheld by request |
, WI
Msg 46 of 99 |
| Please keep the Small Business/Entrepreneurial
machine healthy and diversified by maintaining the
restrictions on VC ownership. VC involvement at the
Phase I and II level is nothing more than an
ownership grab of the future earnings and
intellectual property of the �Skilled Grant Writer�.
It�s not an issue of the government leveraging VC
money, but rather an issue of VC�s leveraging the
skill and property of the Grant Writer. In my
opinion the SBIR program is an incubator program for
technically rich but economically disadvantaged Small
Business. Please leave it alone. If the VC�s feel
they have something to offer, the Phase III
involvement is available and adequate. Let�s not
disincentives the �Skilled Grant Writer� by unduly
compromising the incentives provided in future
earnings and intellectual property.
As a side note, this effort to parse words by some of
those who have requested a yes vote is really
disingenuous at best. This program has been in
existence far to long for that logic to hold water.
In my 10 plus years of involvement with this program
the bar has never moved, and the spirit of the
program has always been to assist technically rich/
economically disadvantaged Small Business. The rules
in words and intent are not ambiguous. I believe
that those who are making these arguments are doing
it only as a diversion while the real motivation is
greed.
Vote NO
|
|
| Vote: NO | |
| Return |
11/08/03
05:18:33 |
Name withheld by request |
Norman, OK
Msg 47 of 99 |
| A small business is a small business, no matter
how it is financed. The founders of high-tech firms
are staking their careers and reputation on a high-
risk technology, the same as the 2-person garage
company. Shame on the detractors for being afraid of
competition. Because a SMALL business is well-
funded should not disqualify it from SBIR funding.
And what about Return on Investment (ROI) for
the SBIR agencies such as NASA and NSF? Do they see
commercialization activity from the "SBIR Mills" that
churn out proposals weekly? The real welfare in SBIR
is given to these sorry excuses for corporations. I
have reviewed proposals for two agencies, and have
seen firms with 150 Phase 1 awards and 40 Phase 2
awards, that have generated $130,000 in total
revenue. THAT'S OVER $60,000,000 IN SBIR AWARDS TO
ONE COMPANY, THAT GENERATED A $130,000 RETURN, FOR
YOU, THE TAXPAYER.
SBIR funding fills a critical gap between
traditional seed funding and venture and/or mezzanine
rounds. This is crucial for companies with a long-
term ROI (greater than 5 years), most of whom are not
traditional VC funding candidates. If the goal of
government is truly the greatest good for the
greatest number of people, let's spend capital where
it is best utilized. It is vital to the future of
small business in America.
Support this change to the ownership rules. Not
only will it fix the SBIR program's poor ROI to the
sponsoring agency and taxpayer, it will fix this
faltering entity called the United States of America.
Regards,
-MM
|
|
| Vote: YES | |
| Return |
11/10/03
19:34:02 |
Larry Nannis |
Needham, MA
Msg 48 of 99 |
| I do not believe that VC's should be allowed to own
SBIR awardees until such time as the awardee believes
they can commercialize without the SBIR funding.
I do believe that the ownership rules should change to
accomodate SBIR awardess who for business and tax
reasons need their corporations owned by non-
individual entities (like LLC's).
In your survey I would vote No on the question but
would suggest modified language to allow some
flexibility in the ownership without undermining the
spirit of the SBIR program.
Sorry for the confusion. My home representative is Ed
Markey; my senators are Kerry and Kennedy.
I have been a service provider to SBIR awardees since
the inception of the program.
Larry Nannis, CPA
|
|
| Vote: NO | |
| Return |
11/11/03
09:12:23 |
Matt Clay |
Austin, TX
Msg 49 of 99 |
I fail to see how this is different than a large
company creating a separate, "small" company which has
access to the resources of the parent and is
(ultimately) controlled by them.
|
|
| Vote: NO | |
| Return |
11/11/03
11:47:48 |
Name withheld by request |
Santa Clara, CA
Msg 50 of 99 |
| companies with vc money should not need govt. funding
to pursue development of their technology
it is difficult for truly small companies without vc
resources to compete with organizations that have vc
backing
|
|
| Vote: NO | |
| Return |
| PREVIOUS NEXT |