Reply to "Chaucer Terms of Use - need some help here"

Bryan posted:

Hey @Malkazoid I appreciate your thinking on this. It definitely feels a little cart-before-the-horse to be discussing Niche management/ownership with no place (yet) to manage it.

It's also a little eerie to be getting glimpses of a project at such an early, might we say pre-natal, stage. There's still a lot of formation that still needs to happen. And, this thing will evolve over time.

Regarding the 20% fees, I look at that as the cost of doing business. If you make $1000, you pay $200 for the privilege and collect $800. This seems as reasonable as leasing office space, buying computer equipment, etc.

The tax burden is a real thing, though... and for that, I'd suggest (if someone plans to make a living off their Niches) to incorporate under a business license and mitigate that 20% as a business expense, and not get taxed on it. 

Disclaimer: I am NOT an accountant or even particularly good at Maths. 

You are right - it IS the cost of doing business.  But that can be said of legitimate costs, and excessive costs, and of good business propositions, and very bad ones.

The hot dog stands give you a ready made clientele.  Uber gives you a ready made clientele.  Narrative, for us pioneers, does not.  We're supposed to go out and build our clientele ourselves, and Narrative will benefit from it.  I think the least we can ask in return is more reasonable renewal fees than a full 20% of earnings.  

Like I said - find me any business model out there that matches the proposed model for niches, and calls it ownership, and if that model is considered fair and is well accepted, I'll concede.

Imagine New York city is mostly muddy riverbanks and forests, with some early constructions sites, and someone tries to orchestrate an auction of hot dog stands site LEASES on streets that don't exist yet.  Sound a bit like trying to sell someone a bridge?  Well, that's because we're walking a fine line here, and bridge-selling is clearly in view, to one side of it.

It doesn't work that way.  At a stage where the entire business model of a niche, or any other enterprise, has to be built from the ground up, you get to own, and can sell it later.  Any local taxes are minimal, any unpaid taxes only result in the loss of the land if the failure to pay is recurring and unrepentant.  Income will be docked before confiscation occurs.

Lets not call it ownership if it isn't ownership.  That much, everyone should be able to agree on.  A lot of the jargon of this venture is predicated on half truths at best.  Founders are supposed to be owners at the outset of a venture.  But not here. 

Whoever set out to build a business from the ground up, knowing he's only leasing that business?  The only comparable thing I can think of is a franchise, but a franchise gives you so much from the outset: the only way they are able to sell frachises is because they have built a remarkably successful business ALREADY, so the person buying into the franchise is in fact just operating an existing, proven business.  The differences are fundamental, and stark.