Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Senator Dodd Reform Bill Could Ruin Angel Investing

online.wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 55 posts

Re: Senator Dodd Reform Bill Could Ruin Angel Investing

#3

Post by jbooth »

If someone's going to make this case, could they please do so from somewhere without a paywall and if at all possible, from a source who's logic is more honest than "are republicans or democrats in office right now"?

IF the claims are correct though, then that needs to be fixed in the bill, particularly the part about filing with the SEC.

Re: Senator Dodd Reform Bill Could Ruin Angel Investing

#4

Post by jessriedel »

jbooth wrote: post #3

If someone's going to make this case, could they please do so from somewhere without a paywall and if at all possible, from a source who's logic is more honest than "are republicans or democrats in office right now"? IF the claims are correct though, then that needs to be fixed in the bill, particularly the part about filing with the SEC.

Agreed that a second source is sorely needed. FYI: you can always access WSJ (and most other news articles) by doing a google search of " site:wsj.com". News sites aren't allowed to show article text to the Google crawler without allowing the user to access the article.

Re: Senator Dodd Reform Bill Could Ruin Angel Investing

#6

Post by hga »

jbooth wrote: post #3

If someone's going to make this case, could they please do so from somewhere without a paywall and if at all possible, from a source who's logic is more honest than "are republicans or democrats in office right now"? IF the claims are correct though, then that needs to be fixed in the bill, particularly the part about filing with the SEC.

Second source???

These provisions of Dodd's bill have been discussed extensively on Hacker News: http://www.google.com/search?q=dodd+site%3Anews.ycombinator....

And I think you underestimate the significance of the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal taking a strong position on this issue in a house editorial.

Re: Senator Dodd Reform Bill Could Ruin Angel Investing

#7

Post by rmaccloy »

Some past posts on this issue:

http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2010/03/startups-get-hit-by-shrapnel...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-e-litan/proposed-protec...

I'm surprised this hasn't been brought up more on HN. I'm not against bank reform, but these provisions seem clearly detrimental to prospective founders without providing any actual protections to people who need them. Correct me if I'm wrong...

Re: Senator Dodd Reform Bill Could Ruin Angel Investing

#8

Post by jimdeterman »

This article leaves out that along with moving the net worth from 1 to 2.3 million for accredited investors, they are also not allowing primary residence to be counted anymore, which for many people is a large part of net worth.

The SEC filing for startups is insane. The last thing we need is further roadblocks and delays for early stage startups.

PG, would this affect y-combinator? YC is the first investment for companies in your portfolio. Would they have a 120 day delay? Four months is a long time in startup land. This would certainly give a head start to bootstrapped companies.

Re: Senator Dodd Reform Bill Could Ruin Angel Investing

#10

Post by hga »

jimdeterman wrote: post #8

This article leaves out that along with moving the net worth from 1 to 2.3 million for accredited investors, they are also not allowing primary residence to be counted anymore, which for many people is a large part of net worth. The SEC filing for startups is insane. The last thing we need is further roadblocks and delays for early stage startups. PG, would this affect y-combinator? YC is the first investment for com…

As indicated in my first comment, the article is focusing on the regulatory problems first; as you note, filing with the SEC with a 120 day delay is awful. Letting the regulators of all the states into the game might be worse, in that I'm sure angel investments would be de facto or de jure outlawed in many states (the state residence of the firm and/or of the angel).

Massachusetts didn't let its residents invest in the Apple IPO: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1303133

But thanks for pointing out that often overlooked detail WRT to primary residence, as that will knock a whole lot more angels out of the game.

Post reply on HN