A Dotcom in a Basement?

garyebickford asks: "I recently learned that a company I co-founded a long time ago has degenerated to the point where the present principals have sold off most of the equipment and have moved 'operations' into their houses. Though the founding concept is almost two decades old, they still believe that they'll be able to pull something out of a hat. I'm pretty sure the two remaining true believers haven't been paid for several years, and have been working outside to support themselves. The company hasn't sold anything for years as far as I know, but they have kept it running through an amazing series of trials and tribulations including some of the most amazing legal shenanigans I've ever heard of. The stock was delisted a long time ago and is now valued at about $0.001. Of course, who knows? Maybe it will recover. It's happened before. I'm sure we all know of many others, like snakebit projects that have migrated from company to company, and 'entrepreneurs' who could raise money over and over but never quite get a company going, and of course, really cool technology that just never seemed to come out of development, or was almost done when the money ran out?So Slashdot, fess up - do you have a 'company in a box' downstairs? What kind of earth-shaking, irrelevant or worthless technology is sitting under your stairs? More interestingly, why are you, or they, still committed to the business?"

Comments

Re:Slashdot usage tip

[RedWolves2]

Or if you preview first then hit submit when you hit the 20 second rule you can hit back and your content is still in the textbox.

OT: reply to my .sig

[JCMay]

I suppose you're referring to this one, where he writes about the House passing a bill to allow the re-importation of drugs from overseas (Canada). What has current profitability to do with what he projects would happen if the House bill is signed into law?

Nothing.

What Williams is saying is quite simple: remove the ability to profit from production of drugs, which includes not only manufacture and R&D but navigating the FDA approval process, then the drugs will not be produced. I quote:

If Congress enacts laws preventing price discrimination, both foreigners and Americans will lose because it will reduce the profitability of drug manufacture and hence drug development incentives. I ask you which is preferable: a life-saving drug at a high cost or no life saving drug at all? Americans would be much better served by trying to do something about FDA's costly approval process.

Whether they are not produced because there's no money to be made, or they're not produced because the companies have gone under, the result is that the drugs we will need won't be there.