Success is not an overnight occurrence for most businesses. Years of hard work and struggle are a common denominator for most enterprises. Success as a concept can be complicated because it may involve more than profits on a balance sheet. The MSN Encarta dictionary defines success as:

1. Achievement of intention: the achievement of something planned or attempted;

2. Attainment of fame, wealth, or power: impressive achievement, especially the attainment of fame, wealth, or power;

3. Something that turns out well: something that turns out as planned or intended;

4. Somebody successful: somebody who is wealthy.

What is business failure? It may be that most businesses don’t die or fail; the owners close them for reasons unrelated to whether the business is making money. According to David Birch, former head of a research firm specializing in studying small business data, would-be entrepreneurs don’t realize what’s truly involved with running a business. He estimated survival rates:

o First year: 85%

o Second: 70%

o Third: 62%

o Fourth: 55%

o Fifth: 50%

o Sixth: 47%

o Seventh: 44%

o Eighth: 41%

o Ninth: 38%

o Tenth: 35%

“Once you’ve hit five years, your odds of survival go way up,” Birch said. “Only two to three percent of businesses older than five shut down each year.” Hard statistics on business success vs. failure rates are hard to establish. Mark Twain once said, “The news of my death has been greatly exaggerated.” The same may be true for many businesses.

Accounts receivable financing can help to make the difference between success and failure for many B2B businesses that need capital to grow. The terminology: invoice financing, invoice funding, factoring, factoring receivables and accounts receivable financing are all terms that mean essentially the same thing: the process of selling your invoices, your accounts receivable, to a commercial finance company to accelerate cash flow. You sell the account receivable. The commercial finance company advances you 70% to 90% of face value. Your customer pays the invoice to the commercial finance company. They rebate to you the difference between their fees and the remaining cash. If your business sells products or services to other businesses or to the government, with a gross margin of 25% or more you can grow profitably with accounts receivable financing; and you can give terms to your customers.

Asset based financing is a form of accounts receivable financing for larger transactions. The main difference between asset based financing and accounts receivable financing is price: larger transactions may be priced with a spread of 2% to 4% over the prime rate plus an administrative fee compared to factoring fees of 1.5% to 4% per month. The actual amount of charges depends on the contract terms which vary widely. In this author’s article, Financial Myths vs. Financial Facts there is an extensive discussion regarding various pricing methods and outcomes.

Imagine if your business were like a flower with the chance to bloom the first time in years. There is a plant known as Agave parryi, also known as the Century Plant. They often take forty to sixty years to flower. Then they die. Few businesses can wait that long to flower.

The asset based lending industry is a multi-billion dollar business. Companies large, small, and startups participate in accounts receivable financing and asset based lending. Purchase order financing is available to pay for the cost of goods when purchase orders are too large for the business to self-fund the product. If you need help with capital to grow, these are important financing techniques to consider for your business’ success.

In August 1965 The Beatles released a Studio Album called: Help! The song was a number one hit single. The song was written by John Lennon and Paul McCartney. At this point in the career of the Beatles, they had not personally made much money and they may have been on the brink of failure because of artistic differences and financial naivety. John Lennon said that the lyrics to Help! were a cry for help and a clue to the confusion and despondency he felt. He also regretted the commercial pressures to make a successful upbeat record that compromised his artistic sensibilities. The Beatles succeeded in writing many of the most popular songs in music history; they were one of the most successful recording artists of all time. Nevertheless, the Beatles failed to stay together as a live performing group after 1970. There were only ten years of live performances. Decades of royalties and riches followed.

Many startup companies believe that they do not need a lawyer to help them with their business dealings. In the early stages, this may be true. However, as time goes on and your company grows, you will find yourself in situations where it is necessary to hire a business lawyer and begin to understand all the many benefits that come with hiring a lawyer for your legal needs.

The most straightforward approach to avoid any future legal issues is to employ a startup lawyer who is well-versed in your state’s company regulations and best practices. In addition, working with an attorney can help you better understand small company law. So, how can a startup lawyer help you in ensuring that your company’s launch runs smoothly?

They Know What’s Best for You

Lawyers that have experience with startups usually have worked in prestigious law firms, and as general counsel for significant corporations.

Their strategy creates more efficient, responsive, and, ultimately, more successful solutions – relies heavily on this high degree of broad legal and commercial knowledge.

They prioritize learning about a clients’ businesses and interests and obtaining the necessary outcomes as quickly as feasible.

Also, they provide an insider’s viewpoint and an intelligent methodology to produce agile, creative solutions for their clients, based on their many years of expertise as attorneys and experience dealing with corporations.

They Contribute to the Increase in the Value of Your Business

Startup attorneys help represent a wide range of entrepreneurs, operating companies, venture capital firms, and financiers in the education, fashion, finance, health care, internet, social media, technology, real estate, and television sectors.

They specialize in mergers and acquisitions as well as working with companies that have newly entered a market. They also can manage real estate, securities offerings, and SEC compliance, technology transactions, financing, employment, entertainment and media, and commercial contracts, among other things.

Focusing on success must include delivering the highest levels of representation in resolving the legal and business difficulties confronting clients now, tomorrow, and in the future, based on an unwavering dedication to the firm’s fundamental principles of quality, responsiveness, and business-centric service.

Wrapping Up

All in all, introducing a startup business can be overwhelming. You’re already charged with a host of responsibilities in which you’re untrained as a business owner. Legal problems are notoriously difficult to solve, and interpreting “legalese” is sometimes required. Experienced business lawyers know these complexities and can help you navigate them to avoid stumbling blocks.

Although many company owners wait until the last minute to deal with legal issues, they would benefit or profit greatly from hiring an experienced startup lawyer even before they begin. Reputable startup lawyers can give essential legal guidance, assist entrepreneurs in avoiding legal hazards, and improve their prospects of becoming a successful company.

This startling figure comes from a recent review of the financial advice offered from the big four banks by the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC).

Even more startling: 10% of advice was found to leave investors in an even worse financial position.

Through a “vertically integrated business model”, Commonwealth Bank, National Australia Bank, Westpac, ANZ and AMP offer ‘in house’ financial advice, and collectively, control more than half of Australia’s financial planners.

It’s no surprise ASIC’s review found advisers at these banks favoured financial products that connected to their parent company, with 68% of client’s funds invested in ‘in house’ products as oppose to external products that may have been on the firms list.

Why the banks integrated financial advice model is flawed

It’s hard to believe the banks can keep a straight face and say they can abide by the duty for advisers to act absolutely in the best interests of a client.

Under the integrated financial advice model, there are layers of different fees including adviser fees, platform fees and investment management fees adding up to 2.5-3.5%

The typical breakdown of fees is usually as follows: an adviser charge of 0.8% to 1.1%, a platform fee of between 0.4% and 0.8%, and a managed fund fee of between 0.7% and 2.1%. These fees are not only opaque, but are sufficiently high to limit the ability of the client to quickly earn real rates of return.

Layers of fees placed into the business model used by the banks means there is not necessarily an incentive for the financial advice arm to make a profit, because the profits can be made in the upstream parts of the supply chain through the banks promoting their own products.

This business model, however, is flawed, and cannot survive in a world where people are demanding greater accountability for their investments, increased transparency in relation to fees and increased control over their investments.

It is noteworthy that the truly independent financial advisory firms in Australia that offer separately managed accounts have done everything in their power to avoid using managed funds and keep fee’s competitive.

The banks have refused to admit their integrated approach to advice is fatally flawed. When the Australian Financial Review approached the Financial Services Council (FSC), a peak body that represents the ‘for-profit’ wealth managers, for a defence if the layered fee arrangements, a spokesman said no generalisations could be made.

There are fundamental flaws in the advice model, and it will be interesting to see what the upcoming royal commission into banking will do to change some of the contentious issues surround integrated financial advice.

Many financial commentators are calling for a separation of financial advice attached to banks, with obvious bias and failure to meet the best interests of clients becoming more apparent.

Chris Brycki, CEO of Stockspot, says “investors should receive fair and unbiased financial advice from experts who will act in the best interests of their client. What Australians currently get is product pushing from salespeople who are paid by the banks.”

Brycki is calling for structural reform to fix the problems caused by the dominant market power of the banks to ensure that consumers are protected, advisers are better educated and incentives are aligned.

Stockspot’s annual research into high-fee-charging funds shows thousands of customers of banks are being recommended bank aligned investment products despite the potential of more appropriate alternatives being available.