Michael D. Moberly, Principal, Founder kpstrat and ‘Business Intangible Asset Blog – Business Intangible Asset Strategies and Risk Mitigator

I respectfully encourage readers to recognize that many, if not each, of the questions delineated – explored in the forthcoming posts, for founders – managements teams of early-stage – R&D-based businesses and prospective investors, i.e.,

what is asked, what is said, how either are conveyed, and what is heard, and how same is interpreted – assessed, materialize – translate as intangibles.

The primary purpose – preferred outcome for differentiating – drawing attention to the above, is to aid parties to…

• better articulate near term, strategic, and operational clarity to the mission of early-stage businesses relative to their investment needs and priorities in an authentically attractive manner.

I suspect most leaders on a startups’ operation + prospective investment side, have themselves, engaged in presentations, discussions, and made decisions, etc., which they wish had come with ‘do-over – re-do’ opportunities, if need be.

Investors – VCs are obliged (similar to leaders of startups) to recognize that the questions they frame and pose, and the responses they receive, constitute forms – methods of investment specific due diligence of key the intangibles in play.

This is why I encourage the questions (posed to founder – management teams) + the responses directed to investors, be ‘circumstance specific’, e.g.,

• be designed – intended to reveal (confirm, corroborate, give credence to) initial impressions – perspectives, and

• surface – differentiate particular – hesitancies which warrant attention and unraveling.

Either-of-the-above may not be intuitive, obvious, self-evident standing alone, or gleanable by merely reviewing relevant financials.

Experientially, I encourage ‘invest – don’t invest questions’ be framed in ‘assessable and circumstance specific continuum’ contexts, i.e., to produce a good-better-best decision process, not merely an ‘intuition-gut check, or a check-the-box’.

Framing important questions in this manner allows parties to seek – elicit information about operating perspectives – culture, mission, and projections held by early-stage business founders and management teams…

Which leads to being positioned to assess – compare – contrast same in (circumstance specific) investment contexts and parameters with perhaps, fewer missteps, and better outcomes.

Framing ‘invest – don’t invest’ questions – propositions as advocatedhere, can ‘surface – direct light on – differentiate’ specific issues – aspects which warrant concentrated discussion, elaboration, and perhaps investigation, ala pre – post due diligence, e.g.,

• which conceivably, some of which may be ‘addressed, and contractually mitigated – negotiated’ in lieu of wholly withdrawing.

ala decisions made in haste, whether they emerge as good ones or poor ones, are similarly long lasting.

Ultimately, I encourage answer-response idiosyncrasies be integrated – applied toa continuum of specificity to generality to an ‘invest – don’t invest’ decision process, e.g., risks, concerns, and ROI, etc.

Too, we all should anticipate the various ways which responses to – assessment of these questions will, at some point, be variously derived via AI.

The ‘Business Intangible Asset Blog’ is experientially-researched, written, and produced by Michael D. Moberly, to provide perspectives, insights, and additional and sometimes alternative perspectives to readers, ala business leaders, management teams, boards, and investors, etc., to aid in identifying, distinguishing, assessing, valuing, safeguarding, and lucratively – competitively utilizing -applying their ‘mission essential’ intangible assets. 

Readers are-encouraged to review and comment on this, and other posts wherein arrays of issues related to business things intangible are authentically and practically conveyed.