I have different groups of friends on each service and use them differently, probably similar to @emily. I find myself thinking "is that more of a Facebook post or a tweet?"

Unlike @emily I have 3 groups of friends: Twitterers (the plugged-in crowd), FBers (people trying to understand this online/social stuff), and law partners (who fortunately will never see this comment). I email memos to them.

Form D is a bit of a half-measure. It created a standard form for use in all 50 states- and the fact that it is electronic now is great- but it is a very LONG form compared to most state filings.

States can also glom on their own requirements in addition to Form D, which reduces a lot of the benefit of having the single form AND firms still need to keep updated information on state blue sky procedures because of these requirements, so time/cost savings are lost there as well.

On top of that, several states have self-executing exemptions, so under non-Reg D procedures there is literally nothing to do in order to claim the exemption.

Last, most offerings involve only a couple of states at a time, so the burden on any individual client is usually not that high.

Firms here in the Bay Area seem to be split on whether to go the Form D route or state law blue sky. I haven't noticed a cost, time or complexity difference either way.

I'd love to see a genuinely uniform securities registration exemption process. Unfortunately Form D is not it.

In the end, though, I think I agree with you insofar as Sen. should not throw the baby out with the bath water. Uniform, electronic, click-to-add-state exemption procedures would be ideal.

This is a good series idea.

One of the hardest points for many people to understand, in my experience, is that the end comes well before the bank account hits $0. People who wait that long end up with no resources to conduct an asset sale, wind down employment tax matters or complete an orderly shutdown. The question I would add is "how much cash do I need to reserve for a wind down?"

Here are two bookend examples of privacy rule flaws:

-> Drivers' details sold by DVLA are used in bizarre roadside adverts for Castrol | Mail Online http://bit.ly/3QIBHf

A billboard in the UK scans license plates, looks up registration numbers and gathers information on car model, age, type,etc.

-> Privacy laws hamper police investigations http://bit.ly/1iQDiX
Ambulance services in Calgary no longer able to access health care records because change of managing organization puts the ambulances under a different privacy law than police & fire departments.

This is an incredibly thorny issue full of negative consequences at both ends of the control-of-data spectrum.

Congrats to all, and hooray for TechStars. Impressive group of folks

My favorite recent quote on the exquisitely attuned point is from a DLA Piper lawyer who moved to a smaller Penn firm, telling the ABA Journal "Somebody from Lansdale didn't necessarily care that I had an office in Kuwait." http://bit.ly/wTi6E Great stuff.

Funny- I started thinking about the same thing this morning. Webvan is my best example of technical debt and premature scalaculation- they massively overinvested in infrastructure before figuring out how many customers really existed and then had no room to maneuver when things got tight.

Technical debt and ramen profitability are both gems. Great post.

I agree with Adam- there has to be a better model than Kid Rock.

One of my favorite lines came from a friend, who said "if you can see the bus, you're not on it". Wait-and-see means you won't be ready to get on when the bus comes your way.

The Keiretsu Forum and other organizations have become so popular they *can* charge companies a lot to present, which doesn't mean they should. It is great to see folks trying to recalibrate.

I have one quibble with OAF's model, which is that the service providers who can afford the $1500 fee need to make that up through time billed to clients. I.e. the companies still pay the presenter fee- they just pay it over a longer period to their lawyers and accountants. No free lunch indeed.

And lest I come off as purely altruistic- I am an attorney who has worked with startup companies for my whole career. I keep expenses low so that I can keep my rates low, and consequently get priced out of events like the Open Angel Forum. That works for me.

I hope the OAF is a smashing success and spawns loads of great companies. You won’t find me there, though. I will be down the street meeting entrepreneurs over coffee.

This form (heh heh) over substance discussion goes all the way down to formation of a company. Prospective clients ask regularly why they should hire me when they can form a corporation for $350 online (or even free- see rocketlawyer.com).

I can work with this for sure- I sit down with people, map out the plans and figure out the right initial structure so they can incorporate online if that makes the most sense, then come back to me for initial equity allocation and other "next steps". Some of them do the online filing and some just have me do it all. Still, I like my forms better and as a fiduciary I would feel more comfortable seeing clients use them.

Maybe it comes down to a variation of the old saw- speed, low cost, diligence: pick two. We try to get enough of all three in every transaction, but there is always some element of compromise.