Category Archives: Film & Video

We proudly invite you to 4th Annual Crowdfunding USA on May 4-5, 2017 National Press Club Washington, DC.

Crowdfund Beat Media Presents: 
 
The Important gathering will discuss what’s new on State of Investing and Risk Mitigation through evolving Internet finance space under the label “2017 the Year of 2.0 Equity & SME Finance-Online Lending or Investing- Crowdfunding “Jobs Act” under new congress & President Trump administration”

 See Conference website & Full Agenda Speakers 

 
For Promotional Opportunities, Group Discount, Sponsorship, and how to become a panelist call 1-888-580-6610 or email to info@crowdfundingusa.com

CF USA AGENDA’s  SNAPSHOT

SEC – FINRA – JOBS ACT – Early Investing
Family Offices – IRA Trust
Rules and Regulations Consideration
Rule 506(c) – Title II Tittle III REG D REG CF
Definition of accredited investor?
Liquidity for the private securities space
Redefining Securities Distribution through Crowdfunding

Real Estate Crowdfunding

Why Hot Real Estate CrowdFunding Is The Next  New Frontier?
Impact of crowdfunding on real estate finance and deal-making
Is Real Estate Crowdfunding Offers An Attractive Alternative For Secure Investments?
The Impact of Technology and Internet on Real Estate Crowdfunding

Trump to Lift Community Bank Regulations (and what that means for house flippers)

Shadow Banking
Dodd-Frank: A Republican Congress
will likely be looking for ways to scale back time and money on business regulation.
Real Estate Crowdfunding and Community Development

Pros & Cons of Internet finance and lending 

2017 State of CrowdFunding

Business of Crowdfunding & Reaching the Goal – How to Make It Happen

Multiple Faces of Crowdfunding on Equity

Future of EB-5 Business Finance & Crowdfunding
Disruption of Equity Crowdfunding on VC’s – Angel Investors
Is Online Lending & Fintech industry here to stay?

Exploring Title II
Why it dominates and will continue to dominate crowdfunding
What initiatives are being pursued to create secondary markets or other means
Effect of IPO window

Regulation A+ Mini IPO
Many of the Reg A deals got pulled this last year.
Is this offering type holding up to investor interest.
Need research on Reg CF, Reg A+ and other offerings.
How much was raised, and how have they performed.
Aftermarket performance of Reg A+ deals

After hours Networking 

Round table discussion

 

Crowdfunding Beat Media Announces 2017 Conference & Expo USA Tour

 

You are invited to attend:

Crowdfunding Beat Media, Conference & Expo Tour 2017

New York – Silicon Valley – Washington DC.-  Denver

By Sydney Armani, Founder / CEO / Publisher / Speaker, 

Happy Holidays 

Crowdfunding Beat Media, Conference & Expo – Tour 2017 will explore new methods of finance, as well as review existing and developing legal considerations and international initiatives.

We will bring together investment community and the new generation of social entrepreneurs – crowdfunders. The event offers you unique opportunity to promote your business in the center of private investments and innovations. We have several options available for those who will participate in the conference. Also, we offer packages of the virtual exhibitor and advertiser, for those who won’t be in the conference.

As you know, we have built CrowdFund Beat  into a leading media platform covering the crowdfunding and marketplace finance space.  Our viewership continues to grow daily as we are Internationally recognized as the definitive “Go-To” for all news & trends Crowd Fund Related. . .

Before we do our normal general Marketing, we are offering you first rights of participation to personally “touch” the eager CrowdFunding National Community and showcase YOU to this ever growing community by Inviting you to be a Conference Speaker and/or Sponsor of any of the following exciting 2017 Opportunities:

We are looking forward to your participation and much appreciate if you share these events with your social network.

Furthermore, we are now advancing our efforts into proprietary research on the space, and are pleased to introduce “2020 Vision”,  a  prognostication report on equity crowdfunding that will be released with much fanfare at our 5th Annual Silicon Valley Fintech Conference that will now have a new, and even larger home, at the Santa Clara Convention Center.  The Report will have general distribution to the International Crowdfunding Industry as well as being promoted at each and every 2017 CrowdFundBeat USA Tour Conferences. 

About:

CrowdFund Beat Media International ” Established  2012″ is an online source of news, information, events and resources for crowdfunding. We e-publish latest news and expert view related to the crowdfunding industry in the USA, Canada, UK, Italy, Germany, France, Holland and coming soon in Spain, Australia, Japan and China on a daily basis. With support of a group of crowdfunding professionals and experts, We are including an editorial column to our journal, in order to present a better perceptive on this new industry to our readers. At crowdfundbeat.com we think of our effort as an educational and informative service to the crowdfunding community, and appreciate your suggestions to make our work more helpful and efficient.

Crowdfunding Beat Media, Conference & Expo Tour 2017

cropped-crowdfundingusa2017tour-y

REGISTRATION – SIGN UP NOW!

Crowdfunding- The Good, The Bad & The (really) Ugly Part II –The Bad

By Shane Liddell is the CEO and chief Crowdfundologist at Smart Crowdfunding LLC,. Crowdfund Beat Guest post,

Introduction

In Part 1 I covered all of the good things that we have seen as crowdfunding continuously gathers momentum across the world. The future looks bright indeed!

However, as with any new industry forging ahead and desperate for acceptance, the surrounding hype that comes with it often blurs reality, with any form of negativity simply  ‘brushed under the carpet’ so to speak. Naturally, those fully vested in the industry (including yours truly) have a lot on the line, as everyone charges ahead in full promotion mode. The ‘painted picture’ is a rosy one and for a very good reason, but there is a dark and sometimes sinister side to the industry as well.

gbu_banner

Part 2-The Bad

 The Industry Evolves

 

 

Let’s rewind a little. In an interview with Film Threat back in October 2010, Indiegogo co-founder, Slava Rubin said “… what we are now and what we are for the future is we’re all about allowing anybody to raise money for any idea” Although this may have been true at the time, it’s certainly not applicable today. Reality is that not ‘anybody ’can raise money through crowdfunding unless they are a) extremely lucky, or b) have a substantial amount of money to begin with. Let me explain a little further.

My own entry into the crowdfunding space happened by default during June of 2012 when confronted with a desperate plea for funding from a lady by the name of Louise Joubert of the Sanwild Wildlife Sanctuary. Louise put out a post on the Sanwild Facebook page saying that sponsors had pulled up to 70% of the funding for Sanwild due to the recession, so she was unable to feed the 16 lions she rescued from the ‘canned hunting’ industry, and she was getting to the point of desperation and was seriously considering euthanizing them. Louise saw this as the kind way to put an end to any potential suffering. This sad story really pulled at my heartstrings and after a phone call or two to South Africa, I volunteered to see if I could help by using this new fundraising method called Crowdfunding. To cut a long story short, we did manage to raise over $20,000 through an Indiegogo campaign and in turn bring a happy ending to this story with the 16 lions being saved. It was an exhausting process, especially with little to no budget to market the campaign; but through teamwork, perseverance and leveraging off of our social contacts, we made it. The point here is that with almost no campaign budget (but instead 100’s of hours invested) we were able to do what we set out to achieve – Save Our Lions.

During 2012 we saw on average 30-50 campaigns launching on the Indiegogo platform each week and probably around 60-70 per week on Kickstarter. These low numbers made things much easier for anyone crowdfunding their ideas, as competition for ‘eyeballs’ was almost non-existent, the media was receptive to any crowdfunding news at all, and the public was in a state of confusion as to what they were really doing when contributing to these campaigns, with many thinking they were simply making an online purchase just as they would do on Amazon.

How things have changed.

Fast forward to 2016 and with approximately 300-400 campaigns launching per week on the Indiegogo platform and up to 600 per week launching on Kickstarter, the competition is fierce. Add to this that there are now well over 1000 (and counting) crowdfunding platforms globally and you’ll begin to see the real picture.

The corporate world is now waking up to this new, low cost way of validating and funding projects and products. Big names such as Sony and GE’s entry into crowdfunding gives the small guy very little chance of competing with them.

In a recent article published by The Verge earlier this year titled “Indiegogo wants huge companies to crowdfund their next big products” and a sub heading which reads “Indiegogo wants big brands to start crowdfunding” we see how they have changed for the worse. Their “Enterprise Crowdfunding” clearly showing that they are not in any way ‘democratizing access to funding’ but instead are an entity solely in the business of making a profit at all costs (more on this particular story in Part 3 –The Ugly).

I guess the most disturbing words I read in that article are these:

“Large companies can also pay for special placement on Indiegogo’s site, making them more discoverable than other campaigns.”

So, Indiegogo now earns revenue from advertising placements only available to corporates? Shocking to say the least!

This whole scenario stinks and reminds me of a certain politician, who now as president elect, has already made several ‘about turns’, continuously going against the words he used to gain popularity.

I hope you all now realize why the small guy has little to no chance of success, especially now that the heavyweights enter with the resources to squeeze them out. In fact, a well know marketing agency recommends a campaign budget today of a whopping $40,000. I don’t know too many ‘little guys’ with that kind of cash to spend on an upcoming crowdfunding attempt, do you? Wasn’t the whole point of crowdfunding to raise money and not spend it?

Although crowdfunding was originally pitched as democratizing access to funding for the small guys, this is no longer true. Without a good chunk of capital to start with, their campaigns are doomed before they begin.

 

Equity Crowdfunding – The SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission)

Background

On April 5th 2012 president Obama signed the Jump Start Our Business Act (commonly referred to as “The JOBS Act”) giving the SEC 274 days to write up the necessary rules and regulations. The main purpose in the implementation of the JOBS Act was to stimulate the creation of jobs through small business access to capital.

The JOBS Act substantially changed a number of laws and regulations making it easier for companies to both go public and to raise capital privately and stay private longer. Changes include exemptions for crowdfunding, a more useful version of Regulation A, generally solicited Regulation D Rule 506 offerings, and an easier path to registration of an initial public offering (IPO) for emerging growth companies.

The titles of the bill that make equity crowdfunding work are:

  • TITLE II – Access to capital for job creators (REG D)
  • TITLE III – Crowdfunding (REG CF)
  • TITLE IV – Small company capital formation (REG A+ or mini IPO)

What’s with all this jargon you may ask? Good question, and the answer is one which I hope many academics will learn to answer in their writings. Effective communication is always better crafted to suit a broader audience. Within crowdfunding, I feel it is important for all – lawyers, accountants, broker dealers etc. – to understand that in our attempt to educate the market, we need to simplify the language used so as to be better understood by the majority.

Back in the 70’s the KISS acronym and methodology – “Keep It Simple Stupid” was very popular for good reason. The simplicity of this methodology should be more applicable today than it ever has been.

For clarification:
REG D allows the issuer to raise funds from accredited investors only meaning in essence from a select few rich people.

REG CF allows issuers to raise funds from both accredited investors and non-accredited investors (the general public) but is subject to limitations.

REG A+ allows the raising of up to $20M through Tier 1 and up to $50M through Tier 2.

Titles I, V, and VI of the JOBS Act became effective immediately upon enactment. Understanding these within the context of this article is not really important so I won’t bother explaining.

The SEC approved the lifting of the general solicitation ban on July 10, 2013, paving the way for the adoption of REG D which went into effect in September 2013. Following this was REG A+ which went live during June 2014 – 2 years after the signing of the Jobs Act – and finally the long anticipated (and most beneficial to small business) REG CF on May 16th 2016 – more than 4 years since the signing of the Jobs Act!

Yes, you read that right – 4 years later. A whole 4 years of lost opportunity. Why 4 years you may ask? Well, through a series of meetings, mountains of paperwork, a change of chair, commenting periods, rewriting this and rewriting that and a whole heap of other hurdles to jump through in between, a whopping 685 pages of regulations was created. Certainly no KISS methodology involved there!

During this period, how many small businesses have folded because they had no access to much needed capital? How many could have been saved from collapse? How many precious jobs were lost during this lengthy and tedious process? The answers should be fairly obvious to fathom.

Based on current information from successfully funded campaigns, we see that so far around $175M has been raised under REG A+ crowdfunding and about $15M over the past 6 months through REG CF. Imagine what these numbers would look like had the SEC been more efficient in the role they played during the entire rulemaking process.

On the other hand, the United Kingdom took a fairly relaxed approach to rulemaking which has led to the creation of the most dynamic alternative finance market in the world. In real terms they are 5 years ahead in the game and are seen as the leaders in this space. The United States is seen as a failure.

Were the SEC attempting to break records as the slowest crowdfunding rulemakers in the world? Maybe not, but it appears they are well positioned to claim this shameful accolade!

 

The Pretenders – Self –Promoters and the Charlatans

Before I begin, let me just say that there are many among us who have ‘earned their stripes’ in this industry. I hold these people in the highest regard for their dedication and commitment to the cause. Far too many to mention of course, but you know who you are, so thank you for doing what you do! Through the many long days of hard work, dedication, countless hours of research, and in some cases, hands on experience with crowdfunding projects of all shapes and sizes, they stay true to their objectives of making the crowdfunding industry one to admire. These people gain respect naturally through their words and actions alone. They generally keep a fairly low profile too, with little need to go on the self-promotion bandwagon, as people naturally migrate to them anyway.

Let’s briefly return back to 2012, when crowdfunding was really still in its infancy and there were very few players involved. To put things into perspective, at the time of launching my own crowdfunding marketing agency Smart Crowdfunding under the crowdfunders.us domain, there were only four other active crowdfunding marketing agencies globally. The industry was tiny and it was very easy to know who was who.

This leads me to a telephone conversation I had one day during early 2013 with one of the other agency founders who had taken issue with the fact that I was now actively competing with him. After listening to his concerns, I politely brushed them aside and ended the call saying “If you are concerned about competition now, then wait to see what’s coming over the next few years”. He grumped and the call ended. Move on to 2016 and we see a whole load of entrants into this space.

Back to the point:
There are those who clearly try to take shortcuts in an attempt to get to the top, with integrity thrown right out the window in their pursuit of money and stardom. Many of these types have little care for the health of the industry as a whole, but instead their own greed drives them forward. They are quite easy to spot though. Lies are abundant and a little due diligence goes a long way in discovering the truth about them. The wonderful world of the Whois lookup is a great tool to confirm some claims of “we’ve been doing this for the past 5 years” as domain registration dates tell the truth. Some have woken up to hiding these details and hide behind a proxy registration service. In fact, a little while ago I had discovered exactly this with a crowdfunding marketing agency who made such claims (and still do) of having been around for the past 6 years. I did a Whois search many months ago to only find that their domain was registered in 2013 – and not 6 years ago as claimed. Further investigation confirmed this. Today their domain registration information is now hidden via a proxy.

One of the most common things I see today is those with very little industry experience becoming self-proclaimed “Experts”. Let’s elaborate on this for a moment.

During 2014 I attended a crowdfunding industry conference, and as I sat in the audience while the proceeding began, the moderator allowed the panel give a brief introduction of themselves. There were 4 on this particular panel, 3 of whom I knew of. To my amazement, one particular character was introduced as a crowdfunding marketing expert. I listened intently to this persons ‘pitch’ and also the advice they gave to the audience when confronted with questions such as “What’s the single most important tool to use when crowdfunding? Their answer? PPC (Pay per click). Wrong! In disbelief, there were a few shaking heads in the audience, mine included. Had this person’s earlier claim of “I’ve worked on 80 Kickstarter and Indiegogo campaigns” during their introductory pitch been true, they would clearly know this was incorrect information. Following up from this and after checking out the real facts it turns out that today, this person has run a single Indiegogo campaign of which struggled to get to $10,000 funded. I suspect a fair share of self-funding activity there too. This example is one of many we see as the industry powers forward. Being able to spot these “experts” is fairly easy when you know what to look for.

You see, I have followed Indiegogo campaigns in particular like a hawk. My early career in crowdfunding was built around this platform so it’s rare that even a single campaign that’s raised more than $5,000 gets by me without notice.

The biggest telltale sign of those who attempt to take shortcuts to stardom is the lack of consistency in their pitch. Many appear to have short memories! The character I reference above has since spoken at numerous industry events and their pitch varies from “I have 8 staff and have worked on over 100 Kickstarter and Indiegogo campaigns” to “I have 25 staff and have worked on 80 Kickstarter and Indiegogo campaigns” In reality, as of today they’ve worked on a handful at most and only 1 on the Indiegogo platform can be confirmed under deeper investigation.

I have major concerns! Besides ‘the blind leading the blind”, the entire industry is at stake here, and addressing the real issues now can only bode well for a healthy and prosperous industry for all.

As a colleague recently said “….the integrity of the entire industry is on the line, and if the charlatans are allowed to run roughshod it’ll soon turn into a house of cards.” No truer words have ever been spoken.

Scampaigns – Yes and No

Now this section will be fairly short.

Let me start by saying that intentional scams are really very rare. During my time in the industry I have seen no more than 3 or 4 which were clearly scams from the very beginning ( I’ll elaborate more on this in Part 3 – The Ugly).

What I have seen, however, even from some of my earlier clients may surprise you. They begin the crowdfunding process with good intentions but unrealistic expectations (a common trait among those crowdfunding today).This is their real downfall.

Many are young, inexperienced men and women whose entire focus is on how great their product is. They are emotionally invested and in some cases spend lengthy periods developing their concept or prototype. When the time comes to go crowdfunding, in many cases they lay everything on the line. Some win. Some lose.

Even after running a successful campaign, for many the process of handling large amounts of cash and developing their idea into a real manufactured product, leads to failure due to lack of experience. A weak team adds to their woes and they burn through cash at an alarming rate. In time, they sit in disbelief that they no longer have enough cash to actually finish the product. At other times their concept was flawed from the very beginning but they only discover this when attempting to go to the prototype stage. Facing the inevitable truth is hard for them, and with the angry abuse from their supporters awaiting, they are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Many come to the conclusion that their only route of escape is a disappearing act.

What do the backers, journalist and millions of other disgruntled people call these people? Scammers. Many of their backers didn’t know at the time they were backing a concept in the first place and shout to the high heavens in disgust when they don’t get what they thought they “ordered’ a year prior.

A very recent case of the scam label being attached to something that was not a crowdfunding scam from the very beginning is Healbe GoBe – “the first and only wearable device that automatically measures the calories you consume and burn, through your skin” which raised over $1M. Despite being slammed by all and sundry – including backers, engineers, scientists, and journalists – they eventually brought their product to market, albeit with many ‘teething problems’ still to be ironed out.

Conclusion

My biggest challenge when writing  part 2 of my article, was in trying to condense as much as possible, but to still get the message(s) across. I hope I have achieved this even though we still ended up with over 3,000 words.  I promise a much shorter part 3. Thank you for reading and I hope this has been helpful.

Look out for Part 3 – The (really) Ugly, where I delve deeper into the real scams of the crowdfunding world, as well as extortion and blackmail attempts and the platforms that seemingly turn a blind eye to it all.

About The Author

aaeaaqaaaaaaaalraaaajgqxmjkymde2ltawm2utndlkzi1indg3lty3ytk0ogriztu1nw

Shane Liddell is the CEO and chief Crowdfundologist at Smart Crowdfunding LLC, the crowdfunding marketing agency. He became active within the crowdfunding industry early in 2012, seizing the opportunity to offer help to crowdfunders from all corners of the world. He has delivered successful campaigns for entrepreneurs, startups, corporations and filmmakers and has assisted over 500 crowdfunders with campaign development, consulting, marketing and promotion services, some of whom have raised millions of dollars in the process. He has attended numerous equity crowdfunding industry events, including the SEC Small Business Forum and the CfPA Summit in Washington DC. Shane holds the position of Executive Director of the Crowdfunding Professional Association (CfPA).

Crowdfunded Cars To Exhibit At Crowd Invest Summit December 7th & 8th

Crowdfund Beat Newswire,

Regulation A+ Conference Proves to be Compelling Destination for Consumer Products Companies Looking to Extend their Brand Equity

LOS ANGELES, CA  / The Crowd Invest Summit, a new conference connecting everyday Americans with crowdfunded investment opportunities, is proud to announce the addition of three innovative companies that will exhibit their unique cars at the event, December 7-8 at the Los Angeles Convention Center in downtown Los Angeles.

The Crowd Invest Summit was developed with the vision that every American, through the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (also known as the JOBS Act), can now be a venture capitalist – or shark.

ronn-motor-group-prototype-600x450

Motors Leads the Pack

Elio Motors’ Regulation A+ crowdfunding campaign, launched in June, 2015 and completed this past February, did more than just allow individuals to participate in the company’s vision of disrupting auto transportation – it has been one of the most successful campaigns to date, raising $17 million from 6,500 everyday Americans. In February, Elio Motors became the first crowdfunded IPO in the United States when it listed its shares on the OTC Markets’ OTCQX (“ELIO”).

Although Elio Motors will not be exhibiting this year, the company has inspired other automotive innovators – including Campagna Motors, Ronn Motor Company, and HyGen Industries – to participate.

Campagna Motors

Campagna Motors is a forward-thinking car company that has been designing and producing three-wheel vehicles with a focus on performance since 1988. Located in Montreal, Canada, the company’s most popular models are the T-REX and V13R, both of which will be featured at the conference. The company plans to create a sister company in the United States to facilitate an upcoming Regulation A+ campaign.

CEO of Campagna Motors, André Morissette said, “Campagna is a vehicle manufacturer that wants to expand and grow to be a serious player in the emerging three-wheel vehicle market. We looked at all sorts of financing avenues and opportunities and we chose the Reg A+ route because it will provide us with the possibility of engaging our large fan base to become investors and partners in our business, and it allows us to raise the required capital in conditions that are interesting for us and our investors to realize our vision.”

Ronn Motor Company

Through its current Regulation A+ campaign, Ronn Motor Company has enlisted the support of its community and beyond, asking for one million partners to co-create technology that has “the face of a supercar.”

Ronn Ford, Chairman and CEO of Ronn Motor Company said, “This new investment approach through crowdfunding allows us to partner with many to take on the big automakers and give the small guys a way to bring their collective dreams to fruition by joining us as investors and partners. We celebrate this community approach of building cars by capitalizing community effort through crowdfunding.”

HyGen Industries

HyGen Industries, based in Los Angeles, California, produces fuel to power eco-friendly vehicles, distributing the fuel through partner locations throughout the state. HyGen’s hydrogen refueling pumps coexist with current gasoline dispensers without additional infrastructure. The company is currently running a Regulation A+ campaign to build hydrogen fuel stations.

HyGen’s technology will be on display at the conference; the company will feature a Toyota Mirai that runs on hydrogen fuel.

Paul Dillon, CFO of HyGen Industries said, “What really excites me about Reg. A+ is the ability to connect directly with impact investors. The transition from fossil fuel vehicles to zero-emission cars, buses, and trucks presents unlimited opportunities for innovation, jobs, and economic growth. HyGen is at the forefront of this sea change. We believe Reg A+ lets small investors put their money to work for a sustainable future by opening up access to promising startups.”

About The Crowd Invest Summit

The Crowd Invest Summit was founded by three pioneers in the equity crowdfunding sector: Josef Holm, Darren Marble, and Alon Goren. The conference was developed with the vision that every American – whether accredited or not – can now become equity investors. Visit us online at www.crowdinvestsummit.com.

Dara Albright Media Announces New FinTech Video Channel and Broadcast of its Upcoming FinTech Revolution Symposium

Crowdfund Beat NewsWire,

FinTechREVOLUTION.tv will feature the leadership, ingenuity and technologies that are shaping the future of personal finance

ATLANTA, GA (PRWEBOCTOBER 11, 2016

Dara Albright Media, known for its trendsetting FinTech articles and acclaimed industry conferences that helped birth the crowdfinance movement, is pleased to unveil FinTechREVOLUTION.tv, a new FinTech video channel supported by BrightTALK technology. BrightTALK is a leading provider of financial webinars and videos and the producer of the highly praised Digital Banking Summit which continues to garner widespread views from financial industry professionals across the globe.

FinTechREVOLUTION.tv will stream both live as well as on-demand video programming aimed at helping investors of all sizes, businesses in all stages of growth, and financial services providers of all echelons stay on the forefront of the FinTech revolution.

“Especially as FinTech democratizes the financial landscape and gives rise to a new generation of alternative investment products for micro-investors, it is imperative that we create video content that is not only informative and useful, but programming that is as appreciated by investing novices as it is by financial experts. Our mission is to produce innovative and entertaining financial content that makes personal finance and retirement planning not only easy to comprehend, but alluring to the average consumer. Only by truly engaging the populous can we even begin to narrow the national wealth gap and thwart a looming retirement crisis,” stated Dara Albright, Founder of Dara Albright Media.

FinTechREVOLUTION.tv will officially launch on November 15, 2016 in conjunction with Dara Albright Media’s next FinTech Revolution cocktail event being held in New York City.

The November 15th program will include cutting-edge discussions such as: how non-exchange traded alternatives are becoming the mutual funds of yesteryear; what is driving retail’s demand for non-exchange traded alternatives; using micro-investing technology to diversify across and within online marketplaces; how legislation is being used to engineer a new breed of alternative products; how innovations in self-directed IRAs will create new retail distribution channels for the entire alternative product universe; how technology will ensure the scalability of online platforms and enable traditional financial services providers to increase AUM; how millennials will fuel the growth of FinTech and redefine financial services; how FinTech will replace the 401k and transform the way Americans save for retirement; and how modernizing the Self-directed IRA is the trillion dollar FinTech opportunity. Featured retail alternative products will include consumer debt, small business debt and a groundbreaking new equities Reg CF offering.

“I’m thrilled to expand our partnership with BrightTALK which began nearly 4 years ago when we broke new ground in the finance industry with the launch of the world’s first crowdfinance webinar channel. Through this new initiative, BrightTALK enables us to significantly augment the interactive experience of our online viewers. Now virtual participants across the globe will be afforded the same unprecedented opportunities as our physical event attendees to not only see some of the latest financial tools, technologies, investment products and apps that are coming down the pike, but to interact with FinTech experts through live Q&A during our conferences, seminars, roadshows and other “physical world” events,” concluded Albright.

Those interested in participating virtually can register at https://www.brighttalk.com/webcast/9407/228383.

Those joining us in person will, of course, get the added benefit of rubbing elbows with FinTech leaders in an informal setting over cocktails and hors d’oeuvres. Those wishing to join us in person in New York City on November 15th can register athttp://fintechrevolutionnyc.eventbrite.com using the special complimentary code obtained by joining the guest list athttp://www.daraalbright.com/events/ or by emailing guestlist@daraalbright.com. Although there is no attendance fee, admittance is available only on a first-come first-serve basis. The networking event will begin at 4pm EST.

Credentialed members of the media are also welcome to join us for a pre-event press conference that will give journalists a sneak peek into some of the latest micro-investing technologies, non-exchange traded retail alternative investment products and retail investing tools that will transform personal finance and retirement planning. For details on the press conference, please email press@daraalbright.com.

About Dara Albright Media 
Since 2011, Dara Albright has been helping set the direction of the financial services industry through trendsetting articles, white papers, acclaimed conferences, roadshows and influential webinars that introduce new digital financing techniques and modern alternative asset classes such as equity crowdfunding and p2p notes to the financial ecosystem. Over the years, Dara Albright Events have connected thousands of investors, issuers and financial services providers – while helping them capitalize on the incredible transformation in financial services resulting from regulatory overhaul and the progression of FinTech. Additional information can be found at http://www.daraalbrightmedia.com.

Attorney Sanctioned by SEC for Unregistered Broker-Dealer Activity

By  Bret Daniel , Wealthforge.com, CrowdfundBeat Guest Post,

The SEC crackdown on unregistered entities continues to grab headlines. Recently, we wrote about the importance of complying with the broker-dealer registration requirement under Section 15(a) by highlighting the latest violations by portfolio managers, online platforms, and individuals.

We suggested that anyone that helps to facilitate a securities offering, even in the broadest sense, should consult a lawyer about the necessity of registering as a broker. The most recent SEC enforcement action, however, demonstrates that even lawyers can get tangled up in the wide net cast over unregistered broker-dealers.

images-10

EB-5: Visa or Security?

Mark Ivener was a partner at the California-based law firm Ivener & Fullmer, LLP (both “Respondents”).1 Ivener specialized in immigration law and regularly counseled clients on how to qualify for EB-5 visas under the Immigrant Investor Program. The program allows foreign investors to obtain an EB-5 visa—and permanent resident status for themselves, their spouses, and their children—by investing $1 million2 in a commercial enterprise in the United States that creates or preserves at least ten full-time jobs for American workers.  A prevalent vehicle for making such an investment is through a Regional Center. Regional Centers are allocated a certain number of EB-5 visas for qualifying investments that typically take the form of limited partnership interests, a security under federal securities law. When Ivener counseled clients on how to qualify for EB-5 visas, he referred them to at least one Regional Center. The relationship between Ivener, his firm, and that Regional Center was formalized in a “Referral Services Agreement” that provided for referral commissions. In effect, Ivener was advising his clients to invest in EB-5 securities, and further, receiving transaction-based compensation from those investments. From January 2009 to December 2011, Ivener earned commissions totaling $450,000.

The SEC determined the Respondents’ actions were in violation of Section 15(a)(1) of the Exchange Act. Commonly known as the “registration requirement,” Section 15(a)(1) makes it unlawful for an unregistered entity “to effect any transaction in, or to induce or attempt to induce the purchase or sale of, any security.” Per the terms of a settlement offer, the SEC ordered Respondents to pay $450,000 in disgorgement and $87,855 in interest. Based on the plain language of the statute and broad application by the SEC, it is unsurprising for those versed in securities law that Ivener’s conduct rose to the level of “effecting” or “inducing” the purchase of securities. For Ivener, however, by all accounts an immigration expert, the pitfalls and minefields of securities law may have been completely foreign.

Transaction-Based Compensation

This not the first time we have seen EB-5 matching, a prevalent practice, result in SEC enforcement action.  We provided analysis about one such case relating to a Florida company, Ireeco LLC, and a related foreign entity.

In the Ivener Order, the SEC notes that the Regional Center, the investment vehicles, and the managers “paid commission to anyone who successfully facilitated the sale of limited partnership interests to new investors.” The SEC explicitly classified the commission as transaction-based, but did not provide details on the commission structure.

In the Ireeco case, the sanctions totaled nearly $3.2 million dollars in disgorgement plus prejudgment interest.3 There, the respondent’s illicit commissions were a set percentage of a related flat-fee, but the commissions were contingent upon the investor receiving a condition green card. Therefore, although the Ireeco respondents’ commission was independent of the size of the investment, it was contingent upon a successful closing.

Regardless of what technically qualifies as transaction-based compensation, the range of activities garnering enforcement activity highlights some very important points: (a) a broad range of commission structures may draw ire from the SEC and (b) transaction-based compensation may not be dispositive of whether one is in violation of Section 15(a).

Other Factors to Consider

Generally, “[a] person effects transactions if he or she participates in securities transactions ‘at key points in the chain of distribution.’4 Transaction-based compensation is a clear indicator of participation in key points of the securities distribution chain. However, it is only one of several factors. Other activities to consider include:

  • Selecting the market to which a securities transaction will be sent
  • Assisting an issuer to structure prospective securities transactions
  • Helping an issuer to identify potential purchasers of securities
  • Helping purchasers to identify potential security offerings
  • Soliciting securities transactions (including advertising)
  • Participating in the order taking or routing process
  • Operation or control of electronic or other platforms to trade securities

Such broad framing affords the SEC flexibility, and enforcement action like that taken against Mr. Ivener and his firm illustrates the Commission’s commitment to rooting out and shutting down unregistered brokers in every field.

Bret Daniel

Bret is part of the legal team at WealthForge where he manages client contract flow, internal policy development, and contributes thought leadership on issues ranging from tax to employment law. Bret brings a small business background to WealthForge and is currently a law student at the University of Richmond

Understanding Reg CF: Discussing financial results

By Sara Hanks , CrowdFundBeat  Sr.contributing Guest Editor  CEO/Founder, CrowdCheck, Inc.

As we have previously discussed, the Regulation CF disclosure requirement for thefinancial condition of the issuer has the potential to get inexperienced companies in trouble. It is in this section of the disclosure that optimistic entrepreneurs may provide misleading information by not providing the full details of performance measurements, or by not including information on the assumptions underlying any financial projections. Such statements may be misleading in their own right, or may omit information necessary to make the provided information not misleading – also known as securities fraud(link is external) (see paragraph (c)).

As we have also previously discussed, financial information presented to investors must be prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”). This applies even to financial statements that are merely certified by the management of the company.

The SEC recently articulated in a series of Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations(link is external) just why financial information should be presented according to GAAP. While the SEC’s interpretations are specifically applicable to public companies, the analysis applies equally to companies raising funds under Regulation CF. The short and sweet of it is that financial performance measures that are non-GAAP can be misleading unless steps are taken to ensure the information presented is done consistently and with a full explanation of the measurement.

For instance, the SEC cites the example of presenting a performance measure that excludes normal, recurring, cash operating expenses. Such a measure could be misleading to investors and result in liability to the company (and the intermediary).

Other examples of commonly used non-GAAP practices that could be misleading are when charges or gains are adjusted in one accounting period when that adjustment was not made in other accounting periods, as well as adjustments for non-recurring charges when there were no adjustments for non-recurring gains. These practices, identified by the SEC, are commonplace among early stage companies looking to publicize month-over-month growth figures, or other eye catching figures that are not fully supported by GAAP measurements.

For any company, when it comes time to discuss financial results in your Regulation CF disclosure, is the gain of disclosing non-GAAP measurements without complete disclosure worth the risk of securities fraud liability? Similarly, for any platform, is the risk of allowing these measurements worth it?

sarahanks

Sara Hanks, co-founder and CEO of CrowdCheck, is an attorney with over 30 years of experience in the corporate and securities field. Crowd Check provides due diligence and compliance services for online alternative securities offerings. Its services help entrepreneurs and project sponsors through the disclosure and due diligence process, give investors the information they need to make an informed investment decision and avoid fraud and help intermediaries avoid liability. Sara’s prior position was General Counsel of the bipartisan Congressional Oversight Panel, the overseer of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). Prior to that, Sara spent many years as a partner of Clifford Chance, one of the world’s largest law firms. While at Clifford Chance, she advised on capital markets transactions and corporate matters for companies throughout the world.Sara began her career with the London law firm Norton Rose. She later joined the Securities and Exchange Commission and as Chief of the Office of International Corporate Finance led the team drafting regulations that put into place a new generation of rules governing the capital-raising process. Sara received her law degree from Oxford University and is a member of the New York and DC bars and a Solicitor of the Supreme Court of England and Wales. She serves on the SEC’s Advisory Council on Small and Emerging Companies. She holds a Series 65 securities license as a registered investment advisor. Sara is an aunt, Army wife, skier, cyclist, gardener and animal lover.

Crowdfunding: REG A+ Due Diligence!


Watch More on CrowdFunding Video–Library |Conference|Interview|Webinar|Campaign Showcase|Research|

Crowdfunding with Self Directed IRA?

REPORT: Is Marketplace lending A temporary phenomenon?

Crowdfund Beat Data Center:

Deloitte Report

MPLs are online platforms that enable investors to lend to retail and commercial borrowers. Unlike banks, MPLs do not take deposits or lend themselves; as such they do not take any risk onto their balance sheets. They make money from fees and commissions received from borrowers and lenders.

The rise of Marketplace lending has urged many commentators to highlight the potential disruption that such new business models may bring to traditional banking. Our research presents a different opinion and instead concludes that MPLs do not currently have the competitive advantage needed to threaten this traditional banking model. However, while they may not fully disrupt the model, we do expect them to be a continued presence within the ever evolving banking landscape.

Deloitte Uk Fs Marketplace Lending by CrowdFunding Beat

 

 

We believe there is significant consumer benefit to be had by supporting the development of an innovative MPL sector. Banks should therefore view MPLs as complementary to the core model, rather than as core competitors, and explore opportunities to enhance their overall customer propositions through collaboration.

As explored in Deloitte’s Banking disrupted and Payments disrupted reports, and Deloitte’s The Future of Financial Services report, produced in collaboration with the World Economic Forum, a combination of new technology and regulation is eroding many of the core competitive advantages that banks have over new market entrants. These structural threats have arrived at a time when interest rates are at historic lows, and seem likely to remain ‘lower for longer’. Combined with an increase in regulatory capital requirements, these changes are making the goal of generating returns above the cost of (more) capital a continuing challenge.

Source:
http://www2.deloitte.com/uk/en/pages/financial-services/articles/marketplace-lending.html

Lending Club, Well that was unexpected.

By Bo Brustkern, CEO NSR Invest, Crowdfund Beat Gust Post,

I certainly didn’t think I would be reading about Renaud Laplanche’s resignation as CEO of Lending Club while drinking my morning coffee last Monday. Since then, the news hasn’t gotten any better and emotions are… shall we say, running high? Here at NSR Invest we have fielded a large number of calls from anxious investors over the past several days, so in lieu of our traditional monthly newsletter I figure let’s just talk about Lending Club.

But before I weigh in, I need you to keep a couple things in mind. First, this short missive can only scratch the surface of the issues at hand. It is a summary of events as they have been reported, together with a few of my thoughts as of this moment. Second, this is a dynamic situation and facts and perceptions are surely going to change rapidly and continuously for many weeks to come. What I say today may not apply to tomorrow’s situation, to tomorrow’s facts, to tomorrow’s revelations. What’s more, there are always at least two sides to any story, and at this point it feels like we have only one: the alarmist. Or half of one: the alarmist who is still coming up to speed on the story.

To recap, here’s a brief overview of what we understand happened at Lending Club that led to the ousting of Renaud. Note that essentially all of this has already been reported in the media, and we have made no effort to independently verify any of the below “facts,” nor have we received the benefit of hearing the other side(s) of the story.

What we think we know

  1. Renaud Laplanche, CEO of Lending Club, apparently made an investment in a fund that purchases loans from Lending Club. Doing this creates a conflict of interest, as Lending Club is supposed to remain neutral when it comes to serving its client-investors. If Renaud is invested in one of his clients, can he remain truly neutral?
  2. Renaud apparently requested that the Board of Directors (BoD) approve an investment by Lending Club in the same fund. This only exacerbates the conflict of interest. What’s more, Renaud apparently did not notify the board that he had already invested in the fund. From the company’s recently filed 10Q we learn that “The Board did not have the information required to review and approve or disapprove investments made by its former CEO… in accordance with Company policies, including the Code of Conduct and Ethics.”
  3. After years of saying no to securitization, the company began working with a prominent investment bank, Jefferies, to put together loan portfolios that could be securitized and sold, which supported Lending Club’s growth plans. As part of this effort, Jefferies required Lending Club to enhance its disclosures to borrowers, making more prominent a Power of Attorney (PoA) clause. This Lending Club faithfully did. Later, however, a staff engineer was allegedly ordered by a Senior VP to change the origination dates on $3 million worth of loans that were allocated to the Jefferies securitization portfolio, possibly to obfuscate the fact that the loans were not originated in accordance with the new PoA clause; upon investigation, it was discovered that in total $22 million in notes allocated to Jefferies did not meet Jefferies’ requirements. Lending Club later reversed the transactions and allocated the loans to other investors, but the breach of contract — and confidence — was recognized.
  4. According to the Wall Street Journal, LC’s BoD “was presented with evidence that Mr. Laplanche knew many of the details of the $22 million loan sale and wasn’t upfront with directors about what he knew.” Naturally, this would have caused great discomfort at the board level.
  5. On Friday, May 6, Renaud was asked by the BoD to resign, and at least three of his lieutenants were summarily dismissed. Scott Sanborn, who had been President of Lending Club, became also Acting CEO while Hans Morris of Nyca Capital assumed the role of Chairman of the Board.

So that’s what we “know” about the situation at Lending Club. To sum it up, it sounds like Renaud made some bad decisions related to conflicts of interest and compliance, and he and/or his lieutenants got caught manipulating data in the loan book. If all of this is true, then my deepest concern is that some members of the LC team chose (and were able) to tamper with the data provided to investors. This is of grave concern to me because our loan selection system at NSR Invest is only as reliable as the data we receive. In other words, if Lending Club were to send us inaccurate data, then our system could very likely make an imprudent judgment about which loans to buy for our clients.

We’ll dig deeper there in a sec, but for the moment let me underscore a very important point: in my opinion, none of these apparent transgressions contradict the basic tenets of the Lending Club model, which is to provide responsibly structured, lower-cost loans to borrowers while providing uncorrelated, higher-yielding investment opportunities to lenders. Nothing here undermines the clear market need for p2p lending. In the words of the inimitable Dara Albright, people are “not going to suddenly start liking banks more than root canals.” While these are sad days indeed for our friends at Lending Club, I perceive no Achilles Heel in the p2p lending industry.

So if the model works, and the credits are good, and the data is reliable, then what we have here is a headline-grabbing corporate governance scandal and conflicts-management problem. With this perspective, we can continue purchasing Lending Club loans with confidence, and we are doing that very thing for ourselves and for our clients.

Confidence

Every day after the scandal broke we engaged in countless conversations with investors, partners, and key players in the space about the scandal, and what it means for Lending Club, for investors and borrowers, and for our industry. And while everyone was shocked and dismayed, there was also a certain feeling of confidence shining forth… an “our industry is going to come out stronger as a result” kind of sentiment.

“The FinTech train has long left the station and there is no turning back. The earth doesn’t spin in reverse. What we are experiencing now is the natural evolution of an industry. In order to evolve, we must err. Stumbling is how we learn and grow. This is nothing new. Mankind has been advancing in this manner for centuries.”
— Dara Albright, co-Founder of the LendIt Conference, One scandal does NOT mean that marketplace lending is over, CNBC
And then on May 16, Acting CEO Scott Sanborn, a well-respected executive with a long tenure at LC, issued a letter to investors through Lending Club’s investor relations department, asserting that a Big Four accounting firm had been retained to conduct “forensic data change analysis” on 673,000 loans sold to investors over the past 8 quarters, and “99.99%… display either no changes or changes explained by the normal course of business.” While the results of the audit are not yet complete, they are indeed encouraging. In fact, the audit simply re-confirms the due diligence performed by presumably scores of institutional investors like Banco Santander, Morgan Stanley, BlackRock, and others, prior to collectively pouring billions of investment dollars into loans originated by Lending Club.

The sentiment of confidence was echoed In a recent post on the Lend Academy blog, where Peter Renton wrote, “Lending Club’s business model is about providing a lower rate of interest to American borrowers using a more responsible structure than credit card-style revolving debt, and at the same time providing a high return by passing through 99% of the cash flows (that’s 100% minus a 1% servicing fee) to investors. Lending Club’s underwriting model – the way in which it selects loans to list on its marketplace – has absolutely nothing to do with the recent events that ended in the resignation of its CEO and founder.”

What the data tells us 

In addition to all the grief Lending Club is going through, the media has also been bashing the purportedly surprising increase in credit defaults at both LC and Prosper. Makes for a nice headline, but where this conclusion comes from I don’t rightly know. It’s not what the data tells us.

We used NSR Platform to conduct a study of the loss rates for quarterly cohorts from 2009 to present. Our analysis examined the six-month loss figures across all loans originated by Lending Club and Prosper for each quarterly cohort. By comparing losses at a fixed age, we can quickly assess whether there is a material difference in performance during the early stages of portfolio maturation, when losses can lead to material detrimental effects to returns.

Note that the “Loss Rate” in this analysis is the NSR-estimated projected loss based on a loan status analysis 6 months after origination. These aren’t the final loss numbers for the cohorts, but a snapshot at a given point in time.
Note also that the “Average Rate” for Lending Club and Prosper are heavily influenced by the blend of loan grades originated for each platform for each cohort.

This test does not perfectly isolate underwriting, and can be impacted by many variables, including macro-economic impacts such as employment rates. However, it’s a reasonable way to quickly establish whether the results of Lending Club’s or Prosper’s underwriting has materially changed from one quarter to the next. And we conclude: it hasn’t. You can easily see that, contrary to media opinion, recent vintages are showing strong performance.

Press Contributions

For a detailed review of the reported events that led up to the sacking of Renaud, readInside the Final Days of Lending Club CEO Renaud Laplanche in the Wall Street Journal by Peter Rudegeair and Annamaria Andriotis with contributions from Michael Rapoport.

To read Lending Club’s official response, which can be found on their Investor Relations website, check out this two-page investor letter from President and Acting CEO Scott Sanborn, which explains the rigorous internal controls testing the company has conducted, along with its quick response to the crisis. In it Scott pledges, “The problems identified this quarter run counter to our values and will never be tolerated. We’re working hard to make things right and prove to you that we continue to deserve your trust.”

Nav Athwal of Forbes offers this opinion in the article Lending Club and What it Means for FinTech: “This is an unfortunate development, but it doesn’t erase the solid foundation and talented teams that most fintech companies, including Lending Club, have built over the last decade. Fintech will not only survive, but thrive, largely because the business model these pioneers developed is still sound.”

Kadhim Shubber of the Financial Times has this more sobering report on What happens if Lending Club goes out of business?, in which he extensively covers the difference between owning a loan and owning a borrower-payment dependent note, as is typical for individual investors who invest through Lending Club.

Mr Shubber also wrote in the FT Who knew what at Lending Club?, in which he unpacks some of the more salient footnotes that appear in LC’s 10Q filing, which posted on Monday, May 16, for the period ending March 31, 2016.

Stone Fox Capital wrote Lending Club: Death Watch Value and posted it on Seeking Alpha, arguing that LC “now trades at a death watch valuation despite no fundamental change to the performance of the loans on the platform.”

My partner Peter Renton wrote a piece called Why I am Keeping My Money in Lending Club for Lend Academy, in which he explains why the governance issues at Lending Club are not affecting his allocations to p2p investments on the LC marketplace. In it he states, “I am very confident that Lending Club loans will continue to perform well despite the governance issues that cropped up and came to light over the past two weeks… nothing in this narrative shakes my confidence in the underlying business model of Lending Club.”

Finally, Dara Albright throws a cold, wet towel on the alarmists with her article One scandal does NOT mean that marketplace lending is over, which appeared on CNBC.

There, that should get you a fair way into — and out of — the sea of information swirling about the industry.

Conclusion

Surely, the foundation of our industry is built on transparency and straight-arrow ethics, and our faith in those pillars has been shaken by recent events. But the peer-to-peer model has not been challenged here. There has been no discovery of a fundamental flaw in the business of originating healthy consumer installment loans. In fact, the apparent transgressions at LC seem to cry out for a return to the fundamentals of the industry: transparency, freedom from conflict, and service to borrowers and lenders.

If we find good in the events of the past several weeks, it will be because Lending Club specifically, and our industry generally, respond to this crisis in a reasonable, considered fashion. It will be because we used this opportunity to recommit ourselves to the heroic ideals that comprise our foundation. It will be because we march onward, putting forth new leaders who will carry the flag and find higher ground.

 

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do notnecessarily reflect the official policy or position of CrowdFund Beat Media Group.

 

 

 

Marketing for Crowdfunding

By Ashleigh Everston  CrowdfundBeat Guest Contributor,

Influencer Marketing for Crowdfunding: An Equation for Success!

Crowdfunding is the first step towards successful entrepreneurship. Without having the right financiers in your pocket, you cannot make your dream startup a reality. You may say that the financers are your primary target audience to position your startup venture.

To promote a potential business idea, you needa support system of people who can promote your brand to the right audience, and who can do this better than influencers.

Influencers are industry experts who give their insights into best practices and trending topicsof a particular area of field. These are the people who form general opinions of the people about a product in a particular industry.

So, if you intend to launch a breakthrough product but you need help offinanciers, you should engage withthese guys andtake leverage from their marketinfluence.

internet-marketing
internet-marketing

Why You Need Influencer Marketing?

Influencers have a strong influence over their target audience. With their social commentary,they lend credibility to an idea and validate its authenticity. As they are regarded as trusted individuals, they can reinforce the viability of your projectin potential financiers.

Too often, social entrepreneurs make the mistake of connecting with common people while they should be pitching to the influencers who can instantlymarket their business idea in a matter of few days. By partnering with influencers,entrepreneurs can raise awareness about their brand and channel their products to the intended audience.

Don’t know how to do it?Let us guide you with the following steps:

  1. Identify Your Influencers

First things first.

The road to a successful influencer marketing begins by identifying the influential people in your industry. As the influencers will be promoting your cause to a specific audience, it is important to pick the people who closely match with your finely-grained audience.Consider the following questions to help yourself identify targeted influencers:

  • Who are the opinion leaders in your industry?
  • What people from your industry are making impact on social media?
  • What bloggers and social media marketers do your competitorsfollow?

Answering these questions will help you easilyreach the influencers in your industry that you can contact to pitch your brand to the right funders.

  1. Reach the Influencers

Once you have identified your influencer, the next step involvesfinding where they exist socially. Luckily for you, this is far easier today than it would have been in the past.

Social media is easily the one place you can find the targeted influencers in your industry.

Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and Google Plus are all popular social space used byinfluencersuse to voice their opinions to their audience.So, if you are already not visible on these platforms, you should do it today toconnect with influencers in your industry.

  1. Build a Rapport

Once you are able to convince an influencer, it is time to share with him the features of your products and how it would be a help for your targeted customers. A well-crafted proposal will serve the purpose in this regards and it will help the influencer understand the objectives you will accomplish with your business.

However, if you lack time to write a proposal, you can even present the MBA dissertation you once wrote on the subject.

  1. Single Out the Extraordinary from the Ordinary

Now that you have the influencers in your reach, you need to segregate them in terms of their magnitude of influence on your target audience. What you need to do here is measure the influence of individual influencers. The higher the influence, the more credibility the person will lend to your brand.

Kloutis an app that helps you evaluatethe power of an influencer. It shows Klout score of an individual based on his interaction with his audience on a particular social media platform.

  1. Nurture Your Influencer

After you have a list of handful influencers, it is time to pitch your idea to them. But, you need to take a gradual approach and first build a rapport with them. This is very much like nurturing a customer where you first educate them about a product before throwing your offer.

Similarly, you first need to educate your selected influencers about benefits of your product and how it will solve problems of a group of people. Get engaged with them on social platforms, such as Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn. If possible, you should arrange a personal meeting to share the blueprint of your product and any other facts that demand aone-on-one meeting.

Influencer marketing is a powerful technique to market your business idea to potential funders. If implemented effective, it can generate the right hype of your startup venture and help you raise fund to make it a reality.

Author Bio: Ashleigh Everston offers free consultation who seeks career guidance. She works as a part-time QA at online startup. When not working, she enjoys writing blogs, writing short-stories and fiction.