Modi woos startups; offers them 3-year tax break

[vgane]

Share:

Facebook X Bluesky LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Excellent! Start ups will be the new engine of growth for India!

[h=1]Modi woos startups; offers them 3-year tax break[/h]

January 16, 2016 19:33

---

More highlights of Prime Minister's speech at the launch of the Startup India at Vigyan Bhawan in Delhi:


* Start-ups will be exempted from paying income tax for the first 3 years.


* No inspection for 3 years of start-up businesses in respect of labour, environment law compliance post self-certification


* This Startup India movement is not just guided by money or fame.


* The kind of innovative India we are witnessing today is one of a kind. Reasonable vaccines which reaches maximum countries today are developed by Indian scientists.


* We need to bring in a psychological change in mindset of youths from that of a job-seeker to that of a job-creator.


* When we say 'Make in India' we also say 'Make for India.' India is a great market.


* Start up does not mean a billion dollar company where thousands work. It is about employing even 5 people & developing India.


* When I say Startup India, I also mean to say stand up India. India is blessed to be a nation of youngsters.


* We are moving forward to give opportunities to new ideas in India but quality shouldn't be compromised.


http://news.rediff.com/commentary/2...ar-tax-break/397332b57b24208af4044abe33d87600

 

[Brahmanyan]

We had a wonderful system of self sufficiancy in villages with small artisans and business people taking care of the requirements of village, who slowly expanded into big business.These were systamatically destroyed by the interference of Government's policies. Now the Government has initiated the old concept with a new name "start-up", with a lot of publicity. Let us hope it succeeds. However "the proof of the pudding is in the eating".There is no dearth of self motivated youngsters who want to creat their own business ventures in our Country. All they need is corruption free support by the Government agencies.
Let us hope for the best,

Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

 

[krish44]

We have never had bankrupt youngsters. With start up we shall have with govt support.lol

 

[asadu]

It was never the government which pulled down such startups by our youngsters all these years. It was our society which always looks up at these entrepreneurs as aliens. Particularly TBs never supported and will never support self employment as our blood is soaked fully in slavery. May the good sense prevail upon the present generation to be liberal and general and support those who toil themselves and come out successful in their endevour. Thathastu.

 

[krish44]

It was never the government which pulled down such startups by our youngsters all these years. It was our society which always looks up at these entrepreneurs as aliens. Particularly TBs never supported and will never support self employment as our blood is soaked fully in slavery. May the good sense prevail upon the present generation to be liberal and general and support those who toil themselves and come out successful in their endevour. Thathastu.

We TBs value job security and monthly pay packets with less risk.

We invest in education of kids only with the hope that they will be academically proficient and collect lakhs in monthly emoluments.

Risk taking is not in our blood.

It requires a different mindset .

It will take years to change the basic premise of brahmin thinking.

Other can mke big money by risk taking and we will work with a monthly salary for them. Thathasthu

 

[vgane]

If we have fear of the unknown unknown we cannot survive in business...We have to take risks! May be TB's can be given a crash course in risk taking! Without community support similar to Marwaris this cannot succeed

 

[prasad1]

We had a wonderful system of self sufficiancy in villages with small artisans and business people taking care of the requirements of village, who slowly expanded into big business.These were systamatically destroyed by the interference of Government's policies. Now the Government has initiated the old concept with a new name "start-up", with a lot of publicity. Let us hope it succeeds. However "the proof of the pudding is in the eating".There is no dearth of self motivated youngsters who want to creat their own business ventures in our Country. All they need is corruption free support by the Government agencies.
Let us hope for the best,

Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

Sir,
I generally do not question your post.
But this post is wrong on so many fronts. I have to challenge you, show us the proof that government destroyed the local artisan. Artisan were well supported by successive governments. They were exploited by the ruling class, and money lenders. The artisan were not business savvy, and were easily tempted by "alcohol", and their own ignorance. Most of the "motivated youngsters" are purely ignorant fools from Rich family. Indian parents and business houses were not strict with their kids like Warren Buffet of this world. The poor kids did not have the "angles" investors to promote and groom them.
Very few people become rich by chance (except lottery winners), it takes a lot of intelligence to become rich and it takes even more intelligence to retain that wealth.
No country is corruption free and that is an Utopian dream. One has to work within the framework of your environment and be successful.
In my opinion TB are not groomed for business.
I fully support Asaduji's post#4 (I hate to agree with a person branded as Asadu :decision.

 

[prasad1]

Everyone knows that starting companies — and investing in startups — is a risky way to earn a living. But few people appreciate just how risky it is.
Thanks to a recent tweet from Paul Graham, the founder of "startup school" Y Combinator, we now have a better idea.
Graham says that 37 of the 511 companies that have gone through the Y Combinator program over the past 5 years have either sold for, or are now worth, more than $40 million.
Most entrepreneurs would probably view creating a company worth more than $40 million as a success (unless the company raised more capital than that). And, on its face, the "37 companies" number seems relatively impressive.
In fact, however, the number tells a scary and depressing story.
This number suggests that a startling 93% of the companies that get accepted by Y Combinator eventually fail.
(Not all companies that sell for less than $40 million are "failures," obviously. Assuming a company hasn't raised much capital, a sale between $5 million and $40 million could be considered a success. But a high percentage of Y Combinator companies likely end up being worth zero. And for companies that are hand-picked by very smart investors, the 93%-below-$40 million rate is still surprisingly low).
A company accepted by Y Combinator, therefore, has less than a 1-in-10 chance of being a big success.
More alarmingly, the companies accepted by Y Combinator are only a tiny fraction of the companies that apply.
Some have estimated that Y Combinator's acceptance rate is 3-5%.
If we use the 5% rate, we can estimate that Y Combinator has received about 10,000 applications for the ~500 companies it has chosen over the years.
Assuming Y Combinator has even a modest ability to pick winners, therefore, the odds that a company applying to Y Combinator will be a success are significantly lower than the odds of success of the companies accepted into the program.
If only 37 of the companies that have applied to Y Combinator over the years have succeeded, this is a staggeringly low 0.4% success rate.
Put differently, only one in every 200 companies that applies to Y Combinator will succeed.
The reality is that Y Combinator probably misses a few winners, so the actual odds are probably slightly higher.
But in case any entrepreneur or angel investor is deluding themselves into thinking that startups are an easy way to cash in, they might want to think again.

http://www.businessinsider.com/startup-odds-of-success-2013-5
Y Combinator
is one of the most prestigious startup accelerators in Silicon Valley.
It has an acceptance rate similar to that of an Ivy League school, and a track a record for producing billion-dollar-valuation startups, like Dropbox and Airbnb.
Over the weekend, YC founder Paul Graham tweeted that 37 companies out of the program's 511 startups are either worth at least $40 million, or have sold for that amount.
We first saw the news over on TechCrunch.
The most surprising success story for Graham: Rap Genius, the startup that annotates rap lyrics, literature, and poetry.
But what is it actually like once you get accepted into Silicon Valley's most prestigious accelerator?
Last year, we compiled thoughts from several Y Combinator founders about the incubator.


The case may be different for Indian conditions.

 

[prasad1]

Startup Business Failure

Year 1	25 %
Year 2	36 %
Year 3	44 %
Year 4	50 %
Year 5	55 %
Year 6	60 %
Year 7	63 %
Year 8	66 %
Year 9	69 %
Year 10	71 %

[TD="bgcolor: #2CDA8C"]

Year
[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #2CDA8C"] Percent Failed
[/TD]

http://www.statisticbrain.com/startup-failure-by-industry/

 

[prasad1]

[h=1]Silicon Valley's culture of failure … and 'the walking dead' it leaves behind[/h] Though tech startups rely on origin myths and mantras like 'Fail fast, fail often,' the psychic toll of unrelenting failure simmers just beneath the exuberance





Companies typically die around 20 months after their last financing round and after having raised $1.3m, according to a study by the analytics firms CB Insights titled The RIP Report – startup death trends.

Failure is difficult to quantify because it does not necessarily mean liquidation. Many startups limp on for years, ignored by the market but sustained by founders' savings or investors.

“We call them the walking dead,” said one manager at a tech behemoth, who requested anonymity. “They don't necessarily die. They putter along.”

Software engineers employed by such zombies face a choice. Stay in hope the company will take off, turning stock options into gold. Or quit and take one of the plentiful jobs at other startups or giants like Apple and Google.

Founders face a more agonising dilemma. Continue working 100-hour weeks and telling employees and investors their dream is alive, that the metrics are improving, and hope it's true, or pull the plug.

The loss aversion principle – the human tendency to strongly prefer avoiding losses to acquiring gains – tilts many towards the former, said Bruno Bowden, a former engineering manager at Google who is now a venture investor and entrepreneur.
"People will do a lot of irrational things to avoid losing even if it's to their detriment. You push and push and exhaust yourself."
Silicon Valley wannabes tell origin fables of startup founders who maxed out credit cards before dazzling Wall Street, the same way Hollywood's struggling actors find solace in the fact Brad Pitt dressed as a chicken for El Pollo Loco before his breakthrough.
“It's painful to be one of the walking dead. You lie to yourself and mask what's not working. You amplify little wins,” said Chin, who eventually abandoned startups which offered micro, specialised versions of Amazon and Yelp.
That startup founders were Silicon Valley's “cool kids”, glamorous buccaneers compared to engineers and corporate drones, could make failure tricky to recognise, let alone accept, he said. “People are very encouraging. Everything is amazing, cool, awesome. But then they go home and don't use your product.”
Chin is bullish about his new company, Bannerman, an Uber-type service for event security and bodyguards, and has no regrets about rolling the tech dice. “I love what I do. I couldn't do anything else.”

http://www.theguardian.com/technolo...n-valley-startup-failure-culture-success-myth

 

[prasad1]

Is it wise to spend public money in this risky venture?

The Congress on Sunday picked holes into Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Start-Up India programme and said it had many misses, cautioning the government against its decision to earmarking of Rs 10,000 crore of public money to the risky generic venture capital funds.

The party urged the government to direct such taxpayer funds preferably into social impact innovation in sectors like agriculture technologies, education and affordable healthcare, “where private venture capital is not easily available.”

“When the overall economy is in shambles with falling exports, weak domestic demand and a collapsing rupee, it is prudent to optimise government funds in important social sectors and not in risky generic venture capital funds,” senior Congress leader and former Union minister Jairam Ramesh said in a statement.

The generic venture capital funds, towards which the government announced on Saturday directing Rs 10,000 crore fund, anyways attract funds from various sources, including “foreign billionaires,” he added.

The party though welcomed the unveiling of policy initiatives taken for the “new class of emerging, innovative companies called Start Ups”, it sought to downplay the efforts made by the Narendra Modi government, taking a pot shot.

“The Congress welcomes yet another re-discovery by the prime minister of something that it had always recognised,” Jairam said, “The Congress Party is proud that India rose to becoming the third largest start-up ecosystem in the world during its regime.”

Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi held meetings with start-ups across the country and the most important policy requirement expressed by the entrepreneurs was to maintain neutrality of the Internet between big business and start-ups, he said.

“It is unfortunate that in the mega show for start-ups that the government held yesterday (Saturday), the prime minister failed to commit to net neutrality. His silence on this vital issue is deafening,” Jairam added.
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/523645/congress-blasts-start-up-programme.html

I do not think RG is capable of understanding such complicated subject, but others may.

 

[krish44]

I have came across several fellows in this start up fever.

Some with established careers with sound finances gave up their monthly paying jobs and tried for couple of years and hung up a failed enterpreneur after burning a few

lakhs. They returned to their monthly paying jobs.

There are others who were minor successes and could set up ventures employing four or five and unable to scale further. They continued that way.

The third types , after being burnt out became drop outs and became unemployable and took to drinking and drugs.

Just one out of dozens is a hit and becomes successful.