Re: My understanding of Commercial Arrangements - For discussion
- From: "Hugh Watkins" <hugh.watkins@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2005 10:48:30 -0000
off topic here no genealogy
avoid partnership in business
worse then marriage and more exoensive to get out of
Hugh W
"Stuart Gregory" <stuart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:op.swl4efxxojqke0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 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
.
- References:
- My understanding of Commercial Arrangements - For discussion
- From: Stuart Gregory
- My understanding of Commercial Arrangements - For discussion
- Prev by Date: My understanding of Commercial Arrangements - For discussion
- Next by Date: Viewing pictures FTM
- Previous by thread: My understanding of Commercial Arrangements - For discussion
- Next by thread: Re: My understanding of Commercial Arrangements - For discussion
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
