Hello Steve and Ray,
In view of our mutual and separate discussions on the commercial
arrangements between the three of us, I thought it might be beneficial as
an aid to further discussions, if I put my thoughts down on 'paper'.
These notes are intended to be used to progress our discussions so that we
can settle arrangements which will be mutually acceptable.
These arrangements are based upon the understanding that Steve had the
original idea of a trolley management system. Steve recognised that he
needed engineering expertise to develop the system and he approached Ray
for assistance. The system continued to develop following further
discussions until Ray suggested to Steve that I become involved with
preparing a PowerPoint presentation. Following further discussions
including the development of the RFID concept proposed by Andrew, it was
agreed that Andrew become involved to develop the required hardware and
software under Ray's supervision. These discussions have developed the
system considerably since the original concept of a coin operated locking
mechanism. It is now necessary to document the commercial arrangements
between the parties.
In these notes I will use our names but clearly they could and should be
exchanged for commercial entities such as a Pty Ltd company. In essence I
see the arrangements as follows. The owner(s) of the patent is to sell an
exclusive licence for the use of the patent for a given period of time to
Steve (as TMS). The cost of granting a licence to Steve has yet to be
determined. Steve is primarily responsible for the sale, installation and
maintenance of the complete TMS system. All overheads, including a salary
to Steve, will be met by TMS. All profits of TMS will go 100% to Steve.
Ray is responsible for the manufacture of the trolley locking system
including all aspects of the system including hardware, software and
communications equipment (the "TMS System"). Steve is to enter into an
agreement with Ray for him to be granted an exclusive licence to
manufacture the equipment the subject of the patent for an identical
period of time that Steve has been granted a licence to use the patent.
As part of these arrangements Steve and Ray are to share any profits
arising from Ray on a 50:50 basis. Ray is to sell the TMS System to Steve
on commercial arrangements yet to be agreed. The sale price of the TMS
System is to include the cost of all overheads, including an income to
Ray. As stated earlier, any profits made by Ray after the accounting for
all costs, are to be shared between Steve and Ray on a 50:50 basis.
Steve, Ray and Stuart are to jointly own an entity with Steve and Ray
holding 40% each whilst Stuart holds 20%. Let's call this entity 'SRS'.
Steve is to enter into an agreement with SRS for it to be granted an
exclusive licence to sell and manage the RFID cards, the subject of the
patent, for an identical period of time that Steve has been granted a
licence to use the patent. SRS will be responsible for sourcing,
managing and selling the RFID cards to the customers of Steve. All
overheads, including an income to Stuart, will be met by SRS. All profits
from SRS, after accounting for all overheads, are to be shared as to 40%
to Steve, 40% to Ray and 20% to Stuart.
I foresee, provided we all continue to work well together, that these
arrangements will continue to change, reflecting the growth of the various
entities. To maximise the profit potential in both the operating sense as
well as, perhaps, a sale of the complete system including the patent, it
will become necessary to consolidate some or all of the arrangements we
are presently discussing.
As I stated earlier, these are only my thoughts - nothing is cast in
concrete. However I think we should progress our discussions so that we
all have an agreed basis of working together for our mutual benefit.
Regards,
--
Stuart
My understanding of Commercial Arrangements - For discussion
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Hugh Watkins
Re: My understanding of Commercial Arrangements - For discus
off topic here no genealogy
avoid partnership in business
worse then marriage and more exoensive to get out of
Hugh W
"Stuart Gregory" <stuart@nospampls.scss.com.au.invalid> wrote in message
news:op.swl4efxxojqke0@freenews.iinet.net.au...
avoid partnership in business
worse then marriage and more exoensive to get out of
Hugh W
"Stuart Gregory" <stuart@nospampls.scss.com.au.invalid> wrote in message
news:op.swl4efxxojqke0@freenews.iinet.net.au...
Hello Steve and Ray,
In view of our mutual and separate discussions on the commercial
arrangements between the three of us, I thought it might be beneficial as
an aid to further discussions, if I put my thoughts down on 'paper'.
These notes are intended to be used to progress our discussions so that we
can settle arrangements which will be mutually acceptable.
These arrangements are based upon the understanding that Steve had the
original idea of a trolley management system. Steve recognised that he
needed engineering expertise to develop the system and he approached Ray
for assistance. The system continued to develop following further
discussions until Ray suggested to Steve that I become involved with
preparing a PowerPoint presentation. Following further discussions
including the development of the RFID concept proposed by Andrew, it was
agreed that Andrew become involved to develop the required hardware and
software under Ray's supervision. These discussions have developed the
system considerably since the original concept of a coin operated locking
mechanism. It is now necessary to document the commercial arrangements
between the parties.
In these notes I will use our names but clearly they could and should be
exchanged for commercial entities such as a Pty Ltd company. In essence I
see the arrangements as follows. The owner(s) of the patent is to sell an
exclusive licence for the use of the patent for a given period of time to
Steve (as TMS). The cost of granting a licence to Steve has yet to be
determined. Steve is primarily responsible for the sale, installation and
maintenance of the complete TMS system. All overheads, including a salary
to Steve, will be met by TMS. All profits of TMS will go 100% to Steve.
Ray is responsible for the manufacture of the trolley locking system
including all aspects of the system including hardware, software and
communications equipment (the "TMS System"). Steve is to enter into an
agreement with Ray for him to be granted an exclusive licence to
manufacture the equipment the subject of the patent for an identical
period of time that Steve has been granted a licence to use the patent.
As part of these arrangements Steve and Ray are to share any profits
arising from Ray on a 50:50 basis. Ray is to sell the TMS System to Steve
on commercial arrangements yet to be agreed. The sale price of the TMS
System is to include the cost of all overheads, including an income to
Ray. As stated earlier, any profits made by Ray after the accounting for
all costs, are to be shared between Steve and Ray on a 50:50 basis.
Steve, Ray and Stuart are to jointly own an entity with Steve and Ray
holding 40% each whilst Stuart holds 20%. Let's call this entity 'SRS'.
Steve is to enter into an agreement with SRS for it to be granted an
exclusive licence to sell and manage the RFID cards, the subject of the
patent, for an identical period of time that Steve has been granted a
licence to use the patent. SRS will be responsible for sourcing,
managing and selling the RFID cards to the customers of Steve. All
overheads, including an income to Stuart, will be met by SRS. All profits
from SRS, after accounting for all overheads, are to be shared as to 40%
to Steve, 40% to Ray and 20% to Stuart.
I foresee, provided we all continue to work well together, that these
arrangements will continue to change, reflecting the growth of the various
entities. To maximise the profit potential in both the operating sense as
well as, perhaps, a sale of the complete system including the patent, it
will become necessary to consolidate some or all of the arrangements we
are presently discussing.
As I stated earlier, these are only my thoughts - nothing is cast in
concrete. However I think we should progress our discussions so that we
all have an agreed basis of working together for our mutual benefit.
Regards,
--
Stuart
-
Steve Hayes
Re: My understanding of Commercial Arrangements - For discus
On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 12:36:05 +0800, "Stuart Gregory"
<stuart@nospampls.scss.com.au.invalid> wrote:
How do you envisage this "trolley management system" being used for genealogy?
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
<stuart@nospampls.scss.com.au.invalid> wrote:
Hello Steve and Ray,
In view of our mutual and separate discussions on the commercial
arrangements between the three of us, I thought it might be beneficial as
an aid to further discussions, if I put my thoughts down on 'paper'.
These notes are intended to be used to progress our discussions so that we
can settle arrangements which will be mutually acceptable.
These arrangements are based upon the understanding that Steve had the
original idea of a trolley management system. Steve recognised that he
needed engineering expertise to develop the system and he approached Ray
for assistance. The system continued to develop following further
discussions until Ray suggested to Steve that I become involved with
preparing a PowerPoint presentation. Following further discussions
including the development of the RFID concept proposed by Andrew, it was
agreed that Andrew become involved to develop the required hardware and
software under Ray's supervision. These discussions have developed the
system considerably since the original concept of a coin operated locking
mechanism. It is now necessary to document the commercial arrangements
between the parties.
How do you envisage this "trolley management system" being used for genealogy?
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
-
tim sewell
Re: My understanding of Commercial Arrangements - For discus
"Steve Hayes" <hayesmstw@hotmail.com> wrote
You have not seen the assortment of genealogical jumble in my so-called
office. ANY sort of management system would help
Tim S.
How do you envisage this "trolley management system" being used for
genealogy?
Steve,
You have not seen the assortment of genealogical jumble in my so-called
office. ANY sort of management system would help
Tim S.