>>39748 China, maybe, Russia, probably not. Doesn't the west have full sanctions on Russia? And China is basically in a second Cold War

>>39747 Certainly, my friend. :) Now, to address your post. >I'm inclined to agree I'm glad to hear that - it'd certainly be a temporary thing, until we get to the aforementioned MVP - as soon as that's done, we can shift into manufacturing / company models. I would strongly advise against becoming a public corporation. That's how you get forced to manufacture at least 40% of your dolls as disabled models with vitiligo and an inability to speak, because the investors are too preocuppied with ESG scores, and a talking, walking robowaifu is just unacceptable according to the West. No company that I've ever dealt with, which went with an investor-controlled model, ended up actually bringing a product to market. Excellent for stealing investor money, though - and then routing it through offshore companies to your private company, which actually manufactures the dolls. But, given that this is North America we're talking about, the last thing I'd want to do is incur the wrath of the FTC. >MVP Yes, Minimum Viable Product. A prototype that can be sold. >Ribose's Plans Those are fantastic plans, and I'm in full agreement - I'd say getting some sort of brick and mortar location, a robowaifu Boston Dynamics, would be a most excellent option. >Fair enough, ATM. Apologies - I really should've elaborated. I'd only meant for the time until we can get an MVP put together - once every anon's got their robowaifu, and the product's ready for the market, we can start treating it as a product. For the time being though, I think it shouldn't be treated as such, since that's when you end up cutting everything up - as is the case in most startups. >>39748 >>39750 GreerTech is onto the right idea - in practice, none of those (with the exception of offshore, which I'll get into in a moment.) First of all, it really oughtn't be a geopolitical hotspot - while there are some fantastic, 1% tax havens in the Caucasus, the proximity to the Middle East, and Eastern Europe, as well as the tendency of these countries to occasionally implode, means that's out of the question. Second of all - a government that doesn't really care about what its companies do; this automatically disqualifies the US / China / Russia / most of the EU / Japan (authoritarian governments that regulate at the first opportunity to do so). Now, there are a few pretty lucrative options in the EU - Cyprus, Greece, much of Southern Europe - however, as most anons are in North America (correct me if I'm wrong) - a Caribbean tax haven would be the best option. The Bahamas have gotten too much push from the United States recently, as have the Cayman Islands. Let's just say they'll be inclined to sell you out, if Uncle Sam deems it necessary. Nevis, Barbados, and the British Virgin Islands are fantastic options. Usually, the smaller, more obscure, and lower in taxation the country (and the fewer extradition treaties it has), the better.

>>39747 And, a separate post to address >that would be a wonderful situation It really would. I'd have done so a long time ago, if I could - I hadn't really thought about it, as this was prior to the jumps in tech we've had over the past few years, but, in hindsight, I would've prepared for this eventuality much earlier. We'll just have to see about the situation with raising funds, or developing something, once we get the projects closer to completion. As for raising funds in the meantime - honestly, I've got a few ideas, but am hesitant to share them, until I've checked if they're actually viable. To elaborate a bit further on corporate havens - manufacturing, can, of course, be done in North America - while I'd opt to do it elsewhere (personally, I'd have chosen South America as a manufacturing site - Uruguay has always been a decent choice, but I've avoided it due to the instability of the region. Now, given the instability of the Western powers - I'm inclined to reconsider.) Remember - any sort of country where there exist mass-movements which may say: >robowaifus are objectifying (US / EU) >robowaifus are offensive (US / EU) >robowaifus are a (social) problem (US / EU / Russia / China) and the government would be inclined to listen, would make a rather poor choice for registering in. Alternatively, anywhere that the government might say, >robowaifus are degenerate (Russia / China) >the company is too profitable, and we will simply nationalize it (Russia / China) would be just as terrible to operate in. Manufacturing, though, can, of course, be done anywhere - as per Ribose's plans, getting a manufacturing facility set up - hell, an old foreclosed garage would suffice - would be an excellent option. Remember - sanction-busting isn't that difficult. It doesn't particularly matter whether the company is placed under tariffs, or sanctions. There are always solutions to such problems. The real issue is if they can come, seize research or documents, and dissolve the company / make it ineligible for export. So, a place with lax export laws, in case manufacturing is set up outside of the country, is also worth considering.

>>39752 Apologies, I'd referred to the robowaifus as dolls - recalled to working with a doll business, haha. As a matter of fact, the industries are rather similar, when the economics, viability, and PR are considered. Would be a fantastic option to look at the way those companies operate - now, they are in China, but that comes with caveats - all of those guys have excellent connections to their state. Now, it might be possible to leverage certain connections, to find a partner, and get manufacturing set up in China - but, due to the situation with the current economic hardships the country is facing - and an expanding middle class - there might be issues with setting up robowaifu manufacturing there.

>>39752 >No company that I've ever dealt with, which went with an investor-controlled model, ended up actually bringing a product to market. This is my concerned instinct in this matter, and I certainly don't want to find ourselves here beholden to a bunch of kikes! (Which seems to be the common, inevitable course of such a choice AFAICT.) The sole reason I've been seriously considering VC Investor funding, is that's the only gamble (in my admittedly very-modest experience with such matters) I could see to reasonably-quickly obtain the resources for our office/R&D labs/manufacturing/housing spaces needed (cf. >>39708 ). If this can all be achieved in a reasonable way without going the public corpo route (or some other, similar, crippling form of indentured-servitude) I would love to do that instead!! :D <---> Also, please pardon me; I'm probably going to make a few different, shorter posts to address various topics ITT, rather than making longer ones. My time & focus is a bit stretched-thin ATM (and this one specific topic is so fundamental to our direction and guidance going forward that I consider it more than enough for my own particular focus ATM). I hope that makes sense, Anon. :^)

NOTICE: I'd advise any'non intending to reply to any of my posts ITT, to manually (F5) refresh the page before doing so. Our IB software Lynxchan used here doesn't auto-refresh properly when I make edits (and I make them often). These 'in-process' edits may differ markedly from my initial posting -- which is all you'll initially see if you had the tab already open in your browser and didn't refresh first before replying. And given the importance of these topics, I'm likely to be prone to making many post-hoc edits ITT. <---> My apologies in advance for this inconvenience, Anons. :/

[redacted] > (related : >>39761 )

>>39759 >and if you search on the actuators thread for Grommet I've blathored on infinitely on this. That's no excuse for derailing a thread (especially intentionally-so as you appear to be doing right now!) I'm moving this post to our R&D thread. <---> Please keep your posts ITT Business, Finance, Logistics, Organizations & Legal -focused, Anon!

>>39755 No apologies necessary, Anon. We all understood your point, and all of us OG Anons here also understand the clear corollaries to the sexdoll industries (though of course all of us waifu purists strongly diverge in our views on this perspective, haha! :D As to your national base of operations/manufacturing selections, I'll trust your & other'nons instincts here more than my own. Right now I'm much more concerned about the fundamental issue of organization+financing, as mentioned here ( >>39756, et al). Business & logistics + legalities -- while clearly-related -- can be addressed in due time, I deem.

>>39767 Again, please keep your posts ITT Business, Finance, Logistics, Organizations & Legal -focused, Anon!

For seed funding without chains to (((investors))): I see one option, Crowdfunding, similar to other out-there technology. However, for that, we will need two things -Promotion Campaign -Prototype, or at least proof of concept. As Carl Sagan once said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", and "Affordable humanoid robot wife" is an extraordinary claim. Similar to promoting /robowaifu/, we need to prove to others that we know what we're doing, we have a goal, and we're not just weebs fantasizing about an anime robot wife (we are, but we have the skills to back it up) A good example is this; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFgXunR8b6A&ab_channel=gizmochina The order of contents is: Background/familiarization with the concept --- Problem to be solved --- Background of Tech --- Prototype Solution to be funded All this should apply to traditional investors if you so desire.

>>39756 >is that's the only way (in my admittedly very-inexperienced with such matters) can see to obtain the resources needed for the offices/R&D lab/manufacturing spaces needed I don't think this is necessary at all. Yes maybe some sort of building to work in but a large a majority of this can be done in an apartment with few things done outdoors. We have this great opportunity to leverage resin printers. I say resin because the accuracy is really high on these things. 19uM or 0.019 mm. It's really good. Of course you may not get "exactly" that good but it's likely to be not more than three times that and with a little sanding or work you could get really accurate parts for "molds". Molds is the key. There's also the possibility to get super high accurate resin and glass printers. Much more costly but not extraordinarily so if you are talking about a start up. Bigger parts can be made from smaller ones stuck together. But if you are talking about paying for intellectual property, programming, etc. yes you could spend as much as you like if you hire people to do all the work.

>>39760 >derailing a thread (especially intentionally Not intentional. My apologies

He said he wanted to help. My intention was to highlight WHERE help was needed. It was not to derail anything.

>>39777 Would it be possible to use crypto instead of stocks to entice regular people into investing? Each coin = x% of the company.

>>39756 Of course, anon - take all the time you need - there's no inconvenience whatsoever. :) I will be permanently lurking here - ready to provide counsel. Hopefully, I can venture out into the other threads from time to time, but at the moment - I can always be found here. Now, regarding your thoughts on the matter - I am very glad to hear that we are at an agreement here. I've had the night to think on this, and have recalled a solution that previously worked for a few enterprises. If the issue is raising funds - but the secondary issue is the fallout from giving up equity on the robowaifu business, perhaps there is a solution to be found here - what if we could raise funds *without* giving up equity? I propose a little gambit I've pulled in a startup previously - by splitting the startup into two, and raising funding on one of them, a publicly owned one, that can be easily bankrupted if need be, in order to then redirect the *profit* from startup one into funding for startup two. Example: >I want to start a company manufacturing armored vehicles, but I won't give up equity, as investors will pressure me to sell to the government, which I don't want to do (for example) >I have no money to open a manufacturing plant, as-is >What if I split off a piece of my company, for example, the manufacture of the armor plate which I'll need anyways, raise investor funding on that, then use profit from said company to finance the construction of a second, private company, that actually manufactures armored vehicles? Given that this is the robotics field, I'm sure there are plenty of options to raise funds. To borrow from Grommet's most excellent point - >>39781 - resin printing is a great tool for prototyping and manufacturing. While that field *may* be slightly saturated at the moment, I'm sure the brilliant anons on this board could certainly find a niche that would work. In short - start making profit or raising funds with a disposable company - and funnel any profit or revenue into a robowaifu conglomerate. >>39783 Grommet, my friend - I'd read your post, and I'll certainly be replying to that next - you've raised some excellent points - I do want to clarify one thing. You are completely right - when it comes to mass-manufacture, the problem isn't financial - the problem is that we haven't yet put together a fully-functional prototype, that is to the satisfaction of the anons here. So, it *is* a matter of technology, just like you said. Unfortunately though, technology *is* a matter of finance. Those actuators - pneumatic muscles, lightweight frames, the machinery to put the girls together - it'll be much easier to do with deep pockets. I'm not suggesting raising finances for the purpose of manufacture - that'd be, like you said, putting the cart before the horse. Rather, I'm inclined to suggest addressing financial issues as a way to expedite the R&D process. Even think tanks need funding. Or at least, enough cash to buy equipment and tooling. >>39788 A very good point - if we consider crowdfunding as an avenue to explore, certainly, the crypto market is more interested in investing. Unfortunately, giving away equity in a sensitive enterprise like this, can be worrisome - as per the earlier concerns regarding giving up shares. However - and this is merely my opinion - I think every option should be explored if utilizing a "dummy" company - you anons would clearly be capable of building a profitable business in a field other than robowaifus. So, perhaps a portion of the process can be splintered off, repurposed for extracting capital, and then, flipped back around and re-integrated into the larger robowaifu enterprise.

>>39789 >I propose a little gambit I've pulled in a startup previously - by splitting the startup into two, and raising funding on one of them, a publicly owned one, that can be easily bankrupted if need be, in order to then redirect the *profit* from startup one into funding for startup two. It's odd to me, but I was thinking exactly this during my recent outing. If (((US Corpo Law))) is willing to treat these entities as """persons""" (to ensure lining their own pockets while draining your own), then I'm more than willing to play this exact same game back at them. As an inspiring example: the great Henry Ford's first two adventures were financial failures. BUT he used the experience and connections to begin FoMoCo + the Model A. The rest, as they say, is history. Perhaps we here can take a similar tack, financially & organizationally. After all it's a common outcome that your first attempts are often failures. Persistence is the key to success for us here! :^)

@Anons: Thanks very-kindly for your understanding and cooperation with my on-topic demands ITT. I feel it's very important r/n to keep this thread focused like a laser on the OP's subject (which I've expanded slightly, BTW). Keeping distractions out will help us all to move forward more quickly, I deem. Cheers Anons. :^) <---> I'm going to patch the OP soon-ish with some examples of what I consider to be on-topic vs. off-topic posting ITT, just to help clear the air for every'non. update: Done.

>>39777 >and "Affordable humanoid robot wife" is an extraordinary claim. It is indeed, fren GreerTech! I personally would boldly argue that the 'sci-fi version' of this robowaifu reality is arguably the single most-complex research, design, & engineering undertaking in all of human history!! >tl;dr This will take decades to fully-realize...plenty of business opportunities abound for every'non during this protracted interim! Forward. >>39782 >>39783 Thank you, fren Grommet.

>>39789 I would be very interested in your ideas about setting up company structures. Though I''m not remotely an expert or even very informed, I believe several States in the US will allow you to set up limited liability companies with very, very little restrictions. I read, somewhere, that criminals love this US set up. Not that I'm criminal but limited liability, and some anonymity would be a good thing. This is of course another instance of the US gov. pot calling the kettle black when they rant on about other countries financial structures.

>>39806 Ehh respectfully, it seems to me that its the exact opposite, fren Grommet. At least at the federal level, the Globohomo Big-Gov kikes (you know them: they're the ones who literally own the money printers) controlling the US(urped) Government of today absolutely will do everything within their $$$power$$$ to destroy any viable, opensource, non-(((cloud)))-based, 'little guys' -run robowaifu industry anywhere within their so-called '14-Eyes' domains. And I doubt many US states (or other national supplicants, for that matter) will be willing to buck """Uncle""" Sam very hard on this either; many of these same jews control the state governments as well (and by the same $$$means$$$). >tl;dr Feminism is fundamental to these demonic kike's plots to destroy the entire West. Robowaifus (once fully-realized) represent an existential threat to feminism. You do the math. This entire issue is a B*FD to them... as they're only just now beginning to realize (and in more ways than one too -- after all US$Trillions yearly is potentially at stake here). Yet we've all known about that for almost two decades now (which demonstrates we still have numerous edges on our side in this little "tête-à-tête". :^) <---> And I'm inclined to think Толкач has at least somewhat-similar views regarding our specific situation, based on his posts ITT: >Needless to say, the company really *shouldn't* be registered within North America - at least, on the mainland. >That'd be setting ourselves up for getting regulated out of existence. ( >>39746 ) >...this automatically disqualifies the US / China / Russia / most of the EU / Japan (authoritarian governments that regulate at the first opportunity to do so). >Let's just say they'll be inclined to sell you out, if Uncle Sam deems it necessary. ( >>39752 ) >robowaifus are objectifying (US / EU) >robowaifus are offensive (US / EU) >robowaifus are a (social) problem (US / EU / Russia / China) ( >>39753 )

>>39806 I hear you loud and clear, buddy. The unfortunate thing is that, in the U.S., limited liability is what it sounds like - your liability may be limited, but if they'd like to persecute you, they will certainly find a way to do so. Now, a funny quirk of modern economies is this - if you want to sell something in a country, your best bet is to register your company in a different country. The aforementioned modern economies tend to regulate domestic enterprises into oblivion; given the recent developments with Trump's tariffs, I must say, the situation does seem to be changing somewhat. Still, we don't know two things: >1. Once Trump is out of office, will his tariffs and focus on domestic industry continue with the next president? >2. Will the next president be neutral, pro, or anti-robowaifu? These are very relevant questions, as it could go one of two ways - if the economy maintains the same relative status quo as it has for the past fifty or so years, you can rest assured that a domestic enterprise will be regulated out of existence - you'll have to pay quadruple taxes on everything, you'll need to get permits, licenses, registrations - as ironic as it may be, foreign enterprises (outside of car manufacturers, who lobbied billions of dollars for government support) have an easier time bringing products to the domestic market, than domestic ones. Given that this is a bit of a controversial industry for the masses, I would be inclined to register out-of-country (plus, I'd much rather pay 1% in taxes than the 20-30% I'd be paying in the U.S.) - and, in case the government goes against the idea, we can always pivot to a foreign market - the Chinese have a growing middle class, and while I'm inclined to think the CCP would be against robowaifus, economic zones like Hong Kong would be viable markets - many immigrants being mainlanders. Taiwan, Japan, South Korea - all of those would likely be much more supportive of robowaifus than the U.S. Now, I would strongly recommend against opening a public corporation. As I've mentioned before, and as Chobitsu so clearly put it >>39792 (speaking of, completely and utterly agreed, mate!); influence from investors will mean you'll be making and developing what *they* want for you to make and develop. It means forced compliance with There is a gambit that can be done, of course - as I'd mentioned - opening a "sacrificial" company to raise funds, manufacturing something semi-related to robowaifus, then bailing (legally), bankrupting the public enterprise (or continuing to generate profit, if it is profitable), and opening a private company to manufacture the robowaifus themselves. There's also the option of starting an organization of robowaifu developers, and an unrelated enterprise to make profit - and only once the robowaifu prototypes are ready for the market, opening a second company, to sell them. The way I see it, there are three distinct options: >operate as a think-tank to complete development of robowaifus, then overseas registration as a private company, and bring them to the market without funding >open a company (public) to raise investor funding in an unrelated industry, then funnel all profit to a private robowaifu company (a partnership or a private corporation) >anons open their own private enterprises (sole proprietorships or independent contracting businesses) and establish a conglomerate out of their own respective companies - every anon will run his own business, and profit will be split as per conglomerate agreements >>39806 As unfortunate as it is, I'm inclined to agree completely. Every single anon on this board will be despised by the larger public, myself included, if this takes off. For the next twenty or thirty years, one could say that the robowaifu sector will be "Public Enemy #1". Once a new status quo is established, the masses will calm down. Until then, you will be treated (and so will I, as I plan to continue in this sector) as Big Tobacco, Hitler, and mass-shooters rolled into one. You can expect for the entire industry to be completely misunderstood. At the moment, I'm providing counsel of the same sort that I'd provide an arms manufacturer. Actually, scratch that. I'd say an arms manufacturer would actually have an easier time, because Uncle Sam loves his Military Industrial Complex. Nobody loves robowaifus aside from, well, the fine men of forums like /robowaifu/. Sure, there are millions of men like that - but, there are billions who want to see the industry destroyed before it even comes to fruition. This is a new paradigm, and so, the appropriate preparations must be made.

Finally. >TLDR If you were to ask me - my opinion - on how *I'd* go about this, I'd say this: I would open a company manufacturing robotic arms, or actuators, or artificial muscles, or whatever else; plant pots with presidents' faces on them - whatever on Earth works. I'd make it quite pretty - it'd be all polished, completely sterilized and cleaned for investor viewing. It'd somehow help the environment, minorities, progressivism, AND the domestic industry all at once, AND it'd be All-American (tm). I'd spend a few months networking, finding investors, and attending conferences; I'd secure seed funding, perhaps even a government grant - "secure housing for Canadians" is offering $5MM as we speak. Plenty of grants in the U.S. too. I'd raise a few million, and open a business; best-case scenario, it'd be in a field that will be easily retooled for manufacturing robowaifus - "of course, we needed to spend $1MM of our investor funding on 3D printers - think of how much more comfortable it'd make the American Consumer, if he knew his plant pot was 3D printed with only the most [insert current popular political agenda]-friendly PLA filament? Best-case scenario, this would also be an industry that can actually be profitable. Then, funnel profit, or finances, into a second, privately held company - Robowaifu Enterprises. Hire anons, on paper. Establish contracts, split equity and control shares. Alternatively, establish a think-tank, or laboratory, using funds. If finances can't be funneled through profit - declare bankruptcy, and liquidate to another anon that isn't officially registered with the public operation. Now, with equipment, funds, and income - hire anons full-time. Best-case scenario are two companies - a public-friendly, pro-PR public corporation, with excellent profitability and a high stock value. One that can hire all the figureheads it needs. Hell, make the CEO gay if that secures another $10MM in investments. And the second company. An anon-held private enterprise, building robowaifus. One that will be defended by the public corporation. One funded by the public corporation. Or, just sell the bloody thing, and open the robowaifu company without baggage (though, holding a public-facing company would be excellent for deflecting any heat onto.)

>>39809 POTD >Until then, [we] will be treated [] as Big Tobacco, Hitler, and mass-shooters rolled into one. TOPLEL. :DD >...if this takes off. For the next twenty or thirty years, one could say that the robowaifu sector will be "Public Enemy #1". Once a new status quo is established, the masses will calm down. I hate to say this, but this is pretty much exactly the scenario I saw coming a few years ago. Not exactly news you want to share with fellow Anons you're trying to encourage to move forward!! But since someone as worldly-wise as you suggests the exact.same.outcome. a few years later, I may as well come out and say it openly. BUT, I think every single regular here already knows what we're all in for. I deem they've already steeled themselves for the adventures ahead! :^) Forward.

>>39812 Aw, Chobitsu - thank you very much for the kind words. I'm just glad I can provide the odd tid-bit of helpful information every once in a while. :) I'm sure the fine anons of this forum are more than capable of handling what's ahead - a given, considering how far the board's come. In fact, I'm sure my words discouraged no one - as I can clearly see you anons already know all of this - likely, to a greater extent than even I do. To any that do feel discouraged by this - I will happily bankrupt my company to see this to fruition.

>>39815 You're welcome, Anon. And I'm not alone: we all here are quite pleased with your inputs, I'm sure. >I'm sure the fine anons of this forum are more than capable of handling what's ahead - a given, considering how far the board's come. Completely concur. >To any that do feel discouraged by this - I will happily bankrupt my company to see this to fruition. That won't be necessary, Anon!! This industry is absolutely inevitable now. To wit: The simple idea of robot wives is already well-entrenched in the so-called 'noosphere' at this point. All it will take is the blessings of the Lord + a slight modicum of good management + flexible & diligent creativity on all our parts and success will surely follow. Cheers, Толкач. :^)

>>39810 So let's say we do invest >=US$1M investor funds into '3D printers to manufacture ALL AMERICAN Planting Pots(tm)(C)(R)(do not steal)' and eventually need to bankrupt that American Consumer's Greatest Good enterprise to pull resources out. In addition to liquidating cash money to an unaffiliated Anon, what about the physical assets (such as these said 1mil in printers) -- can they also be """forwarded""" intact into the actual robowaifu production enterprise as well? What about the physical buildings (assuming clear real property ownership by the bankrupting company), and other 'intangible' assets? Please pardon my ignorance in such matters as yet...I've had much other focus 'on my plate' thus far. :^)

>>39810 I'm not even remotely business-savvy, so apologies if this question doesn't make any sense: Following your idea, would it be a good idea to manage those different businesses under an umbrella company, or is there some important legal reason to avoid that? From what I've seen, some parent companies have done a good job of avoiding major public scrutiny by merit of not being seen all that much. I would also imagine that it'd make it easier to move resources between owned companies. >>39815 >In fact, I'm sure my words discouraged no one - as I can clearly see you anons already know all of this If only you knew how true that is. We've all been around far longer than this site. Anyone who was discouraged or unable to follow was lost years ago.

>>39816 Very glad to hear that; I'll be lurking, just in case. >That won't be necessary A pleasure to know - though, I'm planning to restructure my own company - of course, if funds permit - for entry into electromechanics. >This industry... - ... will surely follow -- all things being equal. Completely agreed; I'm looking into clearing my schedule to free up some time for working with you anons. Cheers, Chobitsu. :)

>>39818 Yes. :) They would be sold for pennies - depending on who owns the control packets, of course, but there are ways about it. The fastest way out, would be to just hold majority stake, overvalue the company, and sell stock off. The most convenient - establish a profitable enterprise, funded by VC capital, and place a figurehead to take care of it. Ah, real estate is a bit more complex - it'd be possible, albeit incredibly difficult to acquire property through this sort of scheme, and then *keep* it. If the ACGG/AAPP (oh, I do adore the name) is kept operational, we can actually subcontract the robowaifu company, and basically pour all the capital we want into it. Though, that may leave it liable to lawsuits by the investors. All in all, there are quite a few ways to funnel money from the former, into the latter.' Honestly, so many, that I'd be open to sitting down, and hosting a conference call with you gentlemen, to quickly run through them, and knock out the ones that don't work for us. >please pardon my ignorance in such matters Please, no need to apologize, my friend - business is all I know, and I hardly know it that well; you anons have much more pressing things to attend to. I mean, it's why I'm here - to help pick up any slack in these sorts of affairs. >>39822 Hey, mate! >I'm not even remotely business savvy It's no worries at all, anon. :) Like I'd mentioned to Chobitsu - I'm here to help you guys out with precisely this sort of thing - heck, at least working in consulting wasn't a *total* waste of time, hah. The businesses would certainly have to be separate - now, if there are privately held enterprises, there's no issue with umbrella-ing them. Whether it be a concern or a conglomerate (the latter being more of a trade agreement between several businesses, perhaps held by different anons, and the former, closer to a "mother company" holding several smaller businesses), they can be combined. In the case of a holding company with a publicly traded corporation under it, well, it's a bit more complicated. First of all, all of this really does vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction; however, typically, if your parent company is holding a publicly traded corporation (which isn't even possible in many places) - if the holding company wrecks the corporation, its other properties (AKA robowaifu company) may be held as collateral for compensating investors. Indeed, I would certainly try to separate the two as much as possible, just due to liability reasons. Plus, moving funds and resources wouldn't be too difficult with subcontracting - which is exactly how larger, public-facing companies tend to hide their wetwork, by employing subcontractors that are little-known to the masses. And unfortunately, for those same liability reasons - our robowaifu company should best avoid holding the "All American Planting Pots" - a disgruntled helicopter-of-color might just sue in case of unlawful termination, and they'd be suing not just AAPP, but they'd be suing Robowaifu Conglomerate. Or, if it was HOLDING COMPANY, keeping Robowaifu Company and AAPP under its properties - if HOLDING COMPANY or AAPP didn't have the assets to, they could go after Robowaifu Company. (Note the difference between Robowaifu Conglomerate and Robowaifu Company - the former would've taken the place of the HOLDING COMPANY.) >if only you knew how true that is Oh, I'm certainly getting an idea of it, anon. :) I was shocked to see just what a history you anons have - I've been lurking for a few days - remarkable, really.

>>39816 Chobitsu be careful. Now I think that the reason that you were a little short with me, not that I was right, nor that I didn't deserve it, but just the same, was you are entranced by this gift from heaven of all this cash. Set up companies, No problem. Super investor and "pusher". Supposedly. But look what Толкач says >dad was a Soviet-era apparatchik And what sort of fellow might that be...ring any bells. Promise the world and yet... >I learned how to be a complete and utter sleazeball more of the same. >master bullshit-spewer, rivaling TED-Talk speech-givers, and I can negotiate anything with anyone, coming from a long line of party-grifters, sanction-busters, and hagglers Hmmm let's see what sort of people. or race, are REALLY good at this??? Well I just can't think of any, can you??? >First and foremost, regarding government red tape - for the first while, I can guarantee that the government will pay no attention to the project - at the very least, not to a degree where red tape is a concern. So he says,"no problem" all will be taken care of, don't worry. Really... >Excellent for stealing investor money, though - and then routing it through offshore companies to your private company, which actually manufactures the dolls. So right off the bat he's talking about ripping people off. Why do you think "somehow" you are not a mark, or any one of us? What makes you special? A real question to Толкач. Are you Jewish? And yes this question is very, very, very business related. >=== -patch 'unquote'

>>39810 >>39818 >>39830 I hinted at this with a meme on the Meta thread, but my concern is still there, using money earmarked for flower pots for robowaifus could be considered by some as "misleading investors". Plus, once we have to promote our robowaifus, the charade is permanently over. And it's going to look really weird when "American Pottery" comes out with a robot wife for some reason. Also Grommet has a good point. Our new friend speaks like a Call of Duty character, which I don't mind because sometimes I present GreerTech as a tech company, but some explanations would be nice. He mentioned legal counsel, is he a Saul Goodman-esque lawyer? Did he study modern business law, either officially or unofficially? After all, modern America is different from the Soviet Union, the corruption is less about bribery and more ideological (there still is bribery and nepotism, just not as much). The American version of giving a Soviet cop a few pocket dollars to avoid getting a ticket, is pulling out your phone and threatening to make it into a racial situation on tiktok. Honestly, if you want a robowaifu to buy, the best way to do it is to design a robowaifu using off-the-shelf parts with 3d printed components, distributing the plans online, then sell partially assembled kits from verified sellers

>>39834 Honestly all these schemes seem like they're easily stopped by (((investors))) >1. Robotics front company with gay CEO, comes out with robowaifu Then the social pressure is on the company still, and the investors can just tell them to stop selling robowaifus >2. Shell company with secondary robowaifu company to funnel money towards Highly shady, all finances in a company are typically recorded anyway.

>>39830 Ah. Allow me to open with the fact that I'm not Jewish, anon. I believe I *have* been slightly misunderstood. None of this is illegal. If I were giving you illegal advice, I'd be telling you to simply rugpull the investors; grab the money, and run. Or, sell out to a foreign nation. I'd tell you to artificially pump your stock price, then bankrupt the company immediately. From the very beginning, I'd mentioned the FTC. Would I be mentioning the FTC if I was trying to pull a scam? Why would I've mentioned building an actual profitable enterprise, to make the investors happy? These schemes are no different than the ones operated by almost every major corporation in North America. I ask of you to keep in mind that there is a big difference between a "scheme" and a "scam". The former is fully, completely, and perfectly legal - sure, it uses loopholes. The latter would be illegal. Which I don't condone in the slightest. I'd simply noticed that you anons have spoken extensively of VC funding, and getting investors. So, I figured, considering the public really despises robowaifus, and they are not whatsoever compliant with a publicly funded corporation, moreover, one that'd be run by American investors, who are more preoccupied with diversity quotas than your actual robowaifus - your robowaifu company plans may go slightly south. And finally. >stealing investor money I'm sure BlackRock and Google will really miss the $4MM it invests in our enterprise. Grommet, with all due respect - you act like I'm making you do all of this. You're acting like I'm telling you - "sign the contract, you son of a bitch." As I'd said - I'm here to give advice. That is all. I'm not making you agree to anything - heck, heh, I'm hardly asking what you're going to do. I receive questions, and I provide answers. Sleazeball, yes. Liar, no.

Now, as for GreerTech. >>39834 You have misunderstood, my friend. Through the great American Corporate Law System(tm) - you're not "misleading investors." The funds aren't being directly used for robowaifus. That, certainly, would be illegal. But, if we consider the same tricks every major company in the U.S. uses - from Amazon to Apple to Google to *any* of Musk's companies, to Goldman-Sachs, to JPMorgan-Chase, we'd see that they do the exact same thing. I'm not asking you to take money from investors, and buy 3D printers for printing robowaifus. No. You'd be getting money, from investors, for manufacturing 3D printed plant pots. But, you don't have any 3D printers. So, you need a subcontractor to provide the equipment. You set up a leasing company, Robowaifu Leasing Inc., which provides 3D printers on a contractual basis. You give the contract to Robowaifu Leasing Inc., such that it may acquire and set up 3D printers in your factory, but the printers remain Robowaifu Leasing Inc.'s property. You fund the company with additional contracts for maintenance. Next thing you know, Robowaifu Leasing Inc. is a profitable company with an excellent assortment of purchased equipment. There's no reason why Robowaifu Leasing Inc. couldn't offer you *new* 3D printers 6 months later, and "retire" its old ones - all for a new contract. That's not a scam. That's just how every U.S. Senator ends up rich by the time they're out of office. Have you ever considered this - if they're banned from owning or running companies that may present a Conflict of Interest with their position, how come all of their wives, children, cousins, brothers, and sisters own construction companies? Or, why they award government contracts to people who are lifelong friends? >america is different from the soviet union Not a single piece of advice I've presented would've worked in the Soviet Union - all of this is based on American, European, and Canadian trade law. Surely you do not think that the Soviet Union had enterprise law, when there wasn't even a legal definition for a "corporation" there? This is all U.S. law, my friend. "Making a CEO gay" would've gotten you shot in the Soviet Union (there certainly were no CEOs, but if you made a Factory Director gay, you'd probably end up in prison.) Call me what you like, my friend. But, don't misunderstand me. >some explanations would be nice Worry not, anon - any points you want clarified, just mention them - I'd be happy to elaborate. >it'd look weird when American Pottery comes out with robowaifus Ah, again, you have misunderstood me, Grommet. From the very beginning, I'd mentioned making two separate companies. Elon Musk's holding companies have manufactured flamethrowers General Electric produces everything from pharmaceuticals to the M134 Minigun, through its various daughter companies. >off-the-shelf parts That's fine too. Whatever you anons see as the best way to go about it - after all, the first questions towards me asked how to build an enterprise. If you anons would prefer to build a small sole proprietorship, or private company, specializing in kits - that's perfectly alright. I'd be happy to discuss how to go about that too.

>>39837 The robotics front company with the gay CEO wouldn't be the one rolling out robowaifus. It'd be a publicly owned corporations, with a publicly-picked Board of Directors, governed by the laws and regulations of Securities and Exchange Commission. Robowaifus would be manufactured by a completely different, privately held company. Registered offshore. Unrelated to the public corporation - bound only by occasional contracts, and the like. >funnel money from the public one to the private one Anon, they are supposed to be recorded. This is a completely transparent operation, because there's nothing illegal about it. What I'm saying has been misunderstood as "illegal counsel." What I'm saying is such basic corporate law strategy, that I'd feel comfortable going up in court, and describing all of this. If I thought any of this illegal, I wouldn't have been a fool enough to post so on a public forum; with traceable IPs; on the Internet; for a company which I presume might one day end up manufacturing robowaifus. Again. Sleazeball, yes. Liar / Criminal, no.

Gentlemen, I believe we've come to a slight impasse - a stalemate, of sorts. You have taken my confession to being a sleazeball, and misunderstood it as an admission to being a criminal, a liar, or a scammer (or, all three - I can't quite tell.) Or, at the very least, have become convinced of the criminality / potential liability of my counsel. With no interest in proving anything - I'd have become a scientist or a humanities major if I wanted to spend my days debating - short of the occasional clarification as in, >>39842 >>39841 >>39840 I wouldn't feel it to be a decent use of time - neither mine, nor yours, anons. Similarly, while I'm flattered by the implication that my words somehow render you obliged to follow my advice, I'm uninterested in clarifying each time that this is just "tips and tricks of American Corporate Law", and not "you *have* to open a company just like I said you should." If my consulting is seen as a used car salesman using superglue to hold up a broken bumper, I would much rather prefer to know so - so that we can all save ourselves some time.

Sorry I'm really busy today & most of tomorrow. I'll wade in on this stuff probably in ~30hrs or so. Cheers. >>39830 I appreciate your concern, Grommet. But I think you're being a bit silly. A) What's a stake on my part here? Nothing. B) This are all legal machinations -- invented by the kikes themselves, and primarily (or so they intend) for their sole benefit. As I mentioned, I'm willing to put that right back at them. ( >>39792 ) I'll discuss this with you (all) more soonish. Cheers, Anon. :^)

>>39841 Apologies - >>39834 I meant to say Greer, not Grommet.

>>39840 >Grommet, with all due respect - you act like I'm making you do all of this. You're acting like I'm telling you - "sign the contract, you son of a bitch." As I'd said - I'm here to give advice. That is all. I'm not making you agree to anything - heck, heh, I'm hardly asking what you're going to do. No one said you're doing this >>39841 Granted, I don't know the ins and outs of corporate law. Thank you for elaborating >Soviet Union Your "resume" mentioned secondhand experience from the Soviet Union, and your lineage of presumably other Soviet officials, as your credentials >Elon Musk's flamethrowers That was a promotional/fundraising stunt for his construction company (The Boring Company). It may seem ridiculous now, but Elon Musk used to be very popular and supported by all >General Electric That has the benefit of being under the good graces of the powers that be. >>39843 Frankly, what did you expect? You present yourself as a shadowy "sleazeball" figure that can "get us anything", who has "contacts", who, by your own admission, >"From him, I learned how to be a complete and utter sleazeball - I CAN Ramon my way into positions I should never be trusted with. This includes obtaining any sort of permit, getting any sort of logistics chain in place, and so on - a толкач through and through.", and >"I am a master bullshit-spewer, rivaling TED-Talk speech-givers, and I can negotiate anything with anyone, coming from a long line of party-grifters, sanction-busters, and hagglers." I assume English is not your first language, but a "Sleazeball" is by definition, someone that should not be trusted. >Similarly, while I'm flattered by the implication that my words somehow render you obliged to follow my advice, I'm uninterested in clarifying each time that this is just "tips and tricks of American Corporate Law", and not "you *have* to open a company just like I said you should." No one is saying that, and it's equally as suspicious that you keep framing it that way. All me and Grommet are saying is "hey, is this self-proclaimed untrustworthy sleazeball bullshitter really trustworthy?"

>>39846 Mate, I know what a sleazeball is. I won't flatter myself too much, but I'd say my English is adequate. Here's the line all of this is referring to. >Why do you think "somehow" you are not a mark, or any one of us? What makes you special? Plus, as per your own words, >"hey, is this self-proclaimed untrustworthy sleazeball bullshitter really trustworthy?" My response - >"Grommet, with all due respect - you act like I'm making you do all of this. You're acting like I'm telling you - "sign the contract, you son of a bitch." As I'd said - I'm here to give advice. That is all. I'm not making you agree to anything - heck, heh, I'm hardly asking what you're going to do." Even now, you're worried I'm somehow trying to screw you guys. >"It's equally as suspicious." My response, above, is saying just that - even *I* couldn't come up with a way to screw you, having quite literally, put all of my cards on the table. I'm not asking you to sign any contracts - I'm not asking you to do anything - I'm not even asking you to agree with me. That either makes me the worst scammer in the world, or, it means I wasn't trying to screw you in the first place. If a scam succeeds after its supposed orchestrator has admitted to be an untrustworthy sleazeball, one of two things is true - either the man is the most brilliant manipulator in history (which I am not) - or the men he's scamming are complete idiots (which you don't seem to be.) One note - this is my last response as to this entire debacle; I can help you anons, or I can slink back to where I came from. Honestly, no hard feelings one way or another.

>>39816 >Grommet, with all due respect - you act like I'm making you do all of this. You're acting like I'm telling you - "sign the contract, you son of a bitch." You made that up. For me, attributed negative things that I say or attributing notions I have not presented, that I didn't say, is a bit of a warning sign for me. >As I'd said - I'm here to give advice. That is all. I'm not making you agree to anything - heck, heh, I'm hardly asking what you're going to do. Fair enough but your manner of presentation reminds me, a lot, of a certain bunches tactics. If you are here to help then you will certainly not be opposed to making sure that the wrong sort are not involved and there is due diligence.

>>39843 >You have taken my confession to being a sleazeball, and misunderstood it as an admission to being a criminal I do not accuse you of being a criminal but there is some possibility of us doing the work and, perfectly legally, you end up with all the profits and we end up with either nothing, very little or even worse a big pile of debt. It's not like this has not happened before. Frequently. >america is different from the soviet union I think the US has become very much like the former Soviet Union. Some of the control vectors are different but it's same old Oligarchical control.

I'll leave it alone. I was just making observations.

Hey guys, I'm the guy who suggested the Robowaifu Legal Defense Fund and a hodgepodge of other ideas regarding robowaifu development. I'm starting to consider taking a name, but I did have another idea. What if we had other organizations like charitable foundations or NGOs? I'm not actually sure how we'd go about doing that, but it'd be fun to see a robowaifu charity literally just handing out robowaifus for free to sexually underprivileged men, if for no other reason than the unheard-of amount of roastie seethe it would cause.

>>39810 Create LLC A aka "politically correct robots LLC", do all the legit whatever. Create LLC B aka "robowaifu limited, LLC". LLC B rents machines from LLC A. LLC A can then not consider their machines as an asset but a liability and non-taxable (and subject to depreciation). LLC A says they make money renting out their robot equipment to other companies, LLC B makes robowaifu parts. Rich people do similar to protect their assets from divorce or taxes: "I don't own my lamborghini/house/whatever I rent it from this LLC" which is run by their frens whom he in turn is part of an LLC to protect their assets.

>>39854 That would be a good operation. It would require only a little bit of overhead costs, and also help transform the incel movement from seethe and cope to genuine actions and solutions. I can also see it for loneliness in general. We could even gather support from pro-AI people; it would be harder to anti-AI people to criticize AI when it's your friend's wife and mother's friend. >>39855 Exactly. You put it succinctly

>>39844 AUUUGHH! :D I'm going to need still more time. I went without sleep for waay too long, and now I'm pretty zonked. Hopefully in the next day or so. Cheers. :^)

>>39849 Note for reader Replace >>39816 with >>39840

I'm still in the midst of things IRL, but I'll just drop this here as a quick note. I'll plan to try and address specific points ITT more-fully this coming weekend sometime once I've rested and collected my thoughts. <---> "The Fixer" -Anon (@Толкач) is perfectly welcome to continue posting everywhere on /robowaifu/ . His business savvy is something I value, and I recommend every'non here study it, at least if you are interesting in selling robowaifus to Anons & Joe Sixpacks at some point. And the fact he's suggesting approaches that are within the specific guidelines (((created))) by the (((legal system))) is basically shrewd wisdom, IMO. [1] The old saying is >It takes money to make money. While I personally am not in this for money, I'm smart enough to recognize the need for it. I also trust the Lord to guide us all here into wisdom in our robowaifu-doings. We're most certainly going to need it!! Cheers. :^) --- 1. "The master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly. For the sons of this age are more shrewd in dealing with their own kind than are the sons of light." https://biblehub.com/luke/16-8.htm (BSB)