4 ms·
The problem is, if you're setting up such a system; why should you limit yourself to a 10% cut? In the short term, if you're setting up a company that is buildi
by olefoo 14y ago
The problem is, if you're setting up such a system; why should you limit yourself to a 10% cut? In the short term, if you're setting up a company that is building revenue generating sites, you can probably capture more than that in revenue if you're paying people to do the work. The accounting gets a bit fuzzy because we're talking about two classes of entities here (one in which labor expenses come out of net revenue, and the other in which they come out of gross revenue). Another trade-off is liability, who pays out if one of these projects gets sued; are they individually severable from the parent entity? If not, then setting up the system is unappealing compared to a traditional employment relationship. And if they are that raises the cost-complexity of the setup since you need to manage the transaction costs of setting up new entities as well as the ongoing overhead of managing the accounting for each of the formed entities.
Basically what you're talking about is a setup that would allow web workers to earn residual income for their efforts as opposed to the present system where the route to residuals goes through ownership of the company. Effectively, operations management as a service.
I have thought about this quite a bit. And would like to discuss this further, on the level of sharing models and projections.