1. Little or No Appreciation as Market Bottoms

In parts of the country hardest hit by 2007 - 2008 foreclosures such as California, Michigan and Florida, prices will continue to soften. In scattered markets, the bottom will already have been reached by April but media won't report it until late summer, after a trend has been established.

There will be no more dramatic price drops such as those 30% to 50% declines we saw between 2006 and 2008. But the market will not stabilize in 2009. Furthermore, consumer confidence will continue to fall, and more people will find themselves out of work.

On the bright side, employed home buyers with good credit will find 2009 is an excellent time to buy.

2. Housing Inventory Will Fall

Sellers will withhold listings from the market or cancel listings that don't sell within 90 days. Although persistent demand will come from first-time home buyers and investors, inventory will fall. Falling inventory will not drive up the prices.

The number of homes for sale in states such as California will decrease by 45% or more from the same months in 2007. New home starts will fall by the wayside, and the construction industry will see at least another 10% in layoffs.

Although fewer homes will be available for sale, those sellers will be motivated to sell.

3. Bank Will Rent Out REOs

In an effort to drive up housing prices, banks will slowly release their REO inventory to the market and price those homes at 5% to 20% under comparable sales. Banks will be under great pressure to cut losses and increase revenue. Although state charters prohibit banks from renting out bank-owned homes, banks will find a way to work around this prohibition.

By transferring title from bank-owned homes into holding companies, banks may find a loophole that will allow them to rent out homes instead of putting them on the market. This maneuver will let banks receive income while waiting for the market to turnaround.

To rent the homes, banks will be forced to fix them up.

4. Buyers Will Compete in Multiple-Offer Situations

Due to limited inventory, coupled with pseudo pricing on short sales and foreclosures, more buyers will find themselves competing over the attractive listings. It will not be unusual for sellers to receive 20 or more offers on these listings.

Multiple offers may drive up the prices to market value but buyers will refuse to pay over market value. The stiff competition will cause frustration and confusion among buyers who will find themselves going head-to-head with investors. Cash buyers will win every time over buyers who need financing.

This means it will be more important than ever for home buyers to hire an excellent negotiator.

5. Real Estate Competition Will Shrink

One can count only so many sheets of copy machine paper before it makes no further sense to try to cut costs. Although real-estate related companies such as banks, escrow and title have already reduced staff and cut expenses, many will find themselves unable to continue operating without folding their doors or merging with a larger corporation. Real estate brokerages are not exempt and will struggle as well.

As a result, competition will shrink toward monopoly and a few corporations will control various aspects of the real estate industry. This will limit consumer choices as the little guys continue to get stomped on. The public will turn the other way as the government steps in to control the banking industry, because consumers will be pushed to the brink of desperation and apathy.

Since more real estate agents will be leaving the business, the industry will weed itself of lackluster and inexperienced real estate agents.

6. Sellers Will Shun Loan Modification Programs in Favor of Short Sales

Upside-down home sellers may try to modify their existing loans but those efforts will be met with roadblocks as lenders exhaust other options. The loan modification process will be cumbersome and riddled with conflicting demands within the same banks.

Home sellers will ask themselves if they are better off selling their homes on a short sale, absorbing the hit to their credit reports and becoming renters for a few years. Many sellers will turn to a short sale or walk away than try to directly deal with mortgage lenders.

Real estate agents who specialize in short sales will see an uptick of business.

7. Banks Will Pursue Foreclosure Options Over Loan Modifications

Banks will find it is easier and less expensive to foreclose than to attempt loan modifications. It is probable that banks will decide it is more profitable for them to foreclose than to rewrite a loan. In that event, banks will prefer to make loans to new borrowers who meet rigid standards.

As a result, the number of foreclosures will continue to rise. Many 5/1 ARMs will begin to adjust during 2009 and 2010, causing more foreclosures. But consumers won't see many of those foreclosed homes show up in MLS, which will artificially reduce inventory.

Some banks will change their guidelines to allow foreclosed upon sellers to buy another home after six months.

8. Mortgage Interest Rates Will Spike

Because mortgage rates are influenced by mortgage bonds and mortgage-backed securities, not fed rate cuts, I predict interest rates could rise to 7% in 2009. Maybe more if investors continue to worry about inflation and the government adds a new supply of U.S. Treasuries to the market to offset the looming deficit.

On November 7, 2008, as I write this, the federal funds rate is 1%. It's not likely to go much lower and, in fact, will probably go up. Mortgage rates are not tied directly to the federal funds rate but that does influence its movement. Historically, mortgage rates exceeded 8% from 1970 to 1992.

So while the bad news is rates will rise, they won't surpass 8%.

9. Rental Rates Will Increase as Demand Increases

Surging numbers of home owners will lose their homes in 2009, which will turn former home owners into tenants. Some home owners will walk away from their residences, deciding that home ownership is not worth the aggravation, and return to living in rentals.

Because new construction will be at a standstill, existing inventory will serve as shelter. There will be fewer rental homes available than the demand will dictate, which will put upward pressure on rental rates. Sellers who are unwilling to take a hit on their sales prices will put their homes on the market as rentals, but that won't provide enough inventory to fulfill demand.

It's a good time to be landlord.

10. Tax Breaks for Home Selling Will be Revised

Baby boomers who hope to downsize in 2009 may get hit with an unexpected change in the I.R.S. Tax Code Section 121, if Congress revisits this tax break. The law has been exempting $500,000 for married couples and $250,000 for single people from capital gains only since 1997.

I predict that the government will try to change the home sale tax exclusion in 2009, disallowing the free money that up to now sellers have been able to pull out of their homes upon resale. Congress needs cash to refill the treasury depleted by bailouts and continuing military action.

Sellers should consult a CPA to determine the best way to avoid taxes upon resale.

 

To read more visit http://homebuying.about.com/od/marketfactstrends/ss/110708_2009-RE.htm

 

ALSO, for more information on HOME PRICE TRENDS, visit http://www.lisachapman.com/blogs/lisa_chapman/archive/2008/12/26/update-2008-home-price-trends-harvard-university-report.aspx .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like the overall housing market, the U.S. home improvement industry is mired in a severe downturn. With home prices falling, owners are shifting from high-end discretionary improvements to those that maintain the structural integrity and efficient functioning of their homes, as well as generate cost savings. Similarly, contracting businesses serving the remodeling industry are likely to undergo fundamental changes, as even in the best of times, remodeling contractors experience very high failure rates. While leading indicators suggest the remodeling market has yet to reach bottom, the correction is still expected to be much less severe than in home building. New sources of future growth are already emerging, including the need to upgrade the nation’s aging rental stock, the rapidly expanding market of foreign-born homeowners, and an increasing demand for green remodeling solutions.

 

Emerging Industry Structure

The remodeling industry remains extremely fragmented with few signs of consolidation. The recent trend toward specialization is likely to reverse itself during the current downturn as intensifying competition pushes contractors to pursue a broader range of projects. Due to the fragmented nature of the industry, contractor failure rates are relatively high even during a strong market, and smaller firms and start-ups are particularly vulnerable to failure. While smaller remodelers bear the brunt of the spending slowdown, larger firms are by no means immune.

•General remodeling firms with estimated revenues under $100,000 in 2003 had a one-year failure rate of 22 percent in the midst of a remodeling boom—almost twice as high as all remodelers, while fully 20 percent of start-ups failed.
•Larger remodelers typically have more resources to ride out downturns, yet this spending slowdown has considerably weakened growth in recent years. By 2007, median annual revenue growth of remodelers had fallen to less than 3 percent from a peak of 12.5 percent in 2004, with 40 percent of large firms experiencing declining revenues that year.
•Consistent with higher average project costs, large design/build and kitchen and bath firms experienced significantly more year-to-year revenue volatility between 2000 and 2007, where sharp swings tend to create major challenges for contracting businesses, while exterior replacement firms reported the most stable annual revenues over the period.

 Changing Geography of Improvement Spending

The areas of the country hardest hit by the housing market slowdown—where house prices and home sales have collapsed and where mortgage defaults and foreclosures are mounting—are likely to see the greatest declines in home improvement activity this cycle.

•Owners extracted an average of $450 billion a year in home equity between 1999 and 2008 and reinvested more than 25 percent of extracted equity into home improvements. Since 2005 home equity has fallen 32 percent, drastically reducing this source of improvement spending, especially in places such as California and Nevada where house prices have plummeted over the past year.
•Recent movers spend about 23 percent more on improvements, but with housing sales down substantially from their peak, there will be fewer new occupants upgrading and modifying their homes. Areas such as Florida, which have seen the largest decline in sales, will face even sharper declines in spending.
•Markets with rapidly appreciating home values earlier in the decade saw the highest cost recovery from home improvement projects, but are now experiencing the sharpest declines. Most of the top 10 metropolitan areas in terms of house price declines report much lower cost recovery now, with the average share down 28 percentage points between 2005 and 2008.

Growth Markets for Remodeling
Of the sources of demand that are most likely to boost improvement spending as the remodeling industry emerges from the downturn, three stand out: the increasing need to upgrade the rental housing stock, continued growth in improvements spending by foreign-born homeowners, and mounting interest in sustainable remodeling projects.
•Average expenditures for rental homes fell by almost 40 percent between 1990 and 2007, while expenditures on owner-occupied units increased nearly 30 percent. Almost 10 percent of rental housing—more than 3.6 million units—was considered structurally inadequate in 2007 and in need of remodeling.
•In 2007, foreign-born homeowners spent over $23 billion on home improvements, and their spending levels have grown almost 13 percent per year since 2000—well in excess of the 7 percent growth by native-born households. Immigrant households will provide a growing source of remodeling demand as their numbers continue to rise.
•Occupants of a typical 1960s home used 25 percent less energy per square foot in 2005 than in 1980 largely due to improvements to the housing stock. Higher energy prices and greater environmental awareness will increase the demand for green remodeling projects.

 

To read more visit http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/publications/remodeling/remodeling2009/r09-1_fact_sheet.pdf

 

It used to be that people who wanted to solve a social problem — like lack of access to clean water or inadequate housing for the poor — created a charity. Today, many start a company instead.

 

D.light, a company cofounded by Sam Goldman, who spent four years in the Peace Corps in Benin before earning a master’s degree in business from Stanford University, is an example. Mr. Goldman started D.light with the mission of replacing millions of kerosene lamps now used in poor, rural parts of the world with solar-powered lamps.

Having used kerosene lamps himself while living in Benin, Mr. Goldman learned firsthand of kerosene’s problems — it is expensive, it provides poor light and it is extremely dangerous. When the son of his West African neighbor nearly died after suffering severe burns from spilled kerosene, Mr. Goldman said he realized he wanted to create a venture to solve both the social and economic problems caused by these lamps. His time in Benin also convinced him, he said, that only as a business could a project become large enough to reach the great number of people who use these lamps as their primary source of light.

“We could have done it as a nonprofit over a hundred years, but if we wanted to do it in five or 10 years, then we believed it needed to be fueled by profit,” he said. “That’s the way to grow.”

Since the company incorporated in May 2007, it has raised $6.5 million from a combination of investors who, Mr. Goldman said, are able to push the company on both its social mission and its profitability.

What to call these innovative businesspeople is the subject of some debate. The terms “social entrepreneur” and “social businesses” are generally used to characterize people and businesses that bring entrepreneurship to ventures that have a social mission. Yet there are those who would limit the social entrepreneur label only to those without any profit motive. A separate, but related, category are companies referred to as “socially responsible.” These are generally companies whose core business does not necessarily have a social mission, but who display socially responsible characteristics, like environmental sensitivity.

Because of the difficulty of defining these social ventures, it is hard to gauge the exact number of them, but there are indications that there is increasing interest in the idea of using business to tackle the world’s big problems. Last year, 630 people attended a new conference, Social Capital Markets, on social venture investing. According to Kevin Jones, the creator of the conference and a principal in Good Capital, an investment firm focusing on social business, two-thirds of the participants signed up after the collapse of Lehman Brothers, which he called a sign that people are flocking to what he calls a “new asset class.”

Experts concede that not all social problems respond well to the for-profit model. One example could be early childhood education. “If you set it up as a business, you might be able to raise money more quickly and grow more quickly,” said David Bornstein, the author of “How to Change the World” (Oxford University Press, 2004), an often-cited book on social entrepreneurship. “But if you want to be profitable, you might find that you have to make choices that diminish the quality of your program and then children won’t learn to read as quickly. While Stanley Kaplan can make a fortune selling education to well-heeled people, providing the same services to low-income kids would probably not provide a very good income.”

Mr. Bornstein said it came down to one crucial question: “As you grow, will the economics of your business work in favor of your mission or will they work against it? In the case of providing access to solar energy for people in villages, the bigger you get, the cheaper your product will be, so the economies of scale make sense.”

Conchy Bretos, right, advises housing agencies on how to care for older people in their homes. Her daughter Pilar works with her.

 

Conchy Bretos, too, chose a for-profit model for her venture. While working as Florida’s secretary for aging and adult services, Ms. Bretos learned of the difficulties that force older people to leave their homes and move into nursing homes for lack of proper care.

With a partner, Ms. Bretos started the MIA Consulting Group, a business that advises governments as well as private housing developers on how to bring assisted living services cost-effectively to low-income housing communities so that older people can be cared for in their own homes.

Ms. Bretos said that a business was the natural model for their venture. “We came from a strong business background and we developed a business plan,” Ms. Bretos said. “By doing that, we discovered that we were offering something that no one else was offering. We got our first client even before we incorporated and within a few hours we had to form a company to be able to put together a contract. It was just easy to form an S corporation.”

Ms. Bretos said she also had to make a living. “In this nation, we equate success with profit,” she said. “We wanted to be profitable while also doing something that was right and giving back to the community.”

 

Visit http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/05/business/smallbusiness/05sbiz.html?_r=1 to view full article.

 

 

Quality of life and local incentives can lend a competitive advantage to entrepreneurs when they need it most

 

 

Bigger isn't always better when it comes to selecting a place to start a company. ZoomProspector.com's heat map shows startups per capita.

 

 

Philip Eggers has started six medical device companies in his Dublin, Ohio, hometown. His last five followed a pattern: Eggers would develop the product in his Ohio lab, fly frequently to the Bay Area or Boston to raise money, then relocate the company to one of the coasts when ready to commercialize the product. But Eggers has a different plan in mind for his latest startup, Cardiox, founded in 2006 to develop a noninvasive way to detect heart shunts: He wants to find funding locally and keep his five-employee business in Dublin.

As the economy reels, Eggers is one of many entrepreneurs quick to tout the ease of doing business in small or midsize cities. Plenty of factors make the city of 38,000 outside Columbus attractive for starting up: Abundant, inexpensive office and lab space; a major university, Ohio State, nearby; a growing population; and good local schools to attract workers with families. "It draws the highly skilled and educated people you need to bring in, especially to a high-tech startup company," Eggers says.

In high-growth and more conventional businesses, many entrepreneurs find that bigger isn't always better when it comes to selecting a place to start a company. "People are being drawn by lower cost of living and better quality of life," says Jack Schultz, founder and CEO of industrial developer Agracel of Effingham, Ill., and author of Boomtown USA: The 7½ Keys to Big Success in Small Towns. He also says states and cities are beginning to recognize entrepreneurs as a "third leg" of economic development, as important as retaining existing jobs and attracting large corporations. While startup meccas like the Bay Area offer concentrations of talent and investors, new companies there face plenty of competition for those resources, and the cost of doing business is high. In smaller cities, new businesses enjoy lower costs and a higher profile to attract workers, and may be able to get government to create jobs. 

 

Fifty Cities

GIS Planning used this criteria to identify the best small cities (with populations between 20,000 and 200,000) for startups in each state. With that data in hand, BusinessWeek asked entrepreneurs in each city what people should know about starting a business there. Many said factors such as affordability, availability of talent, existence of a thriving business community, and quality of life helped them choose where to open shop. What emerged is a picture of 50 dynamic cities, each with its own draw for new businesses.

In many small or midsize cities, universities provided the resources of talent and infrastructure that helped them compete with metropolitan centers. Besides providing a steady stream of potential hires, big schools are often connected to startup incubators or programs to commercialize technology developed in academic research. 

Entrepreneurs said incentives from local governments eager to attract growth industries helped make their cities attractive. In Edmond, Okla., Charles Seeney has tapped half a million in economic development grants for his five-employee nanomedicine company, BioNanoMimetics. "When you start a small business, economy is key to everything you do—getting the most bang for your dollar," he says. The incentives, combined with the low cost of doing business there, made the city of 83,000 attractive.

Startups also found skilled workers—especially younger ones—drawn to the perception of a higher quality of life. "A lot of people say, in rural areas, sometimes people are concerned they can't find employees, but my experience is that the quality of life and amenities actually draw people to the area, and they tend to be underemployed," says Bill Moseley, president of GL Suite, a Bend, Ore., 40-employee firm that makes software for regulatory agencies. "You have a really strong talent pool that's not nearly as expensive as in a big city."

All these factors can add up to significant competitive advantages for entrepreneurs launching new companies in small or midsize cities that are sometimes overlooked, says Anatalio Ubalde, co-founder and co-CEO of GIS Planning. "Location in many ways is a gift, because it's not something that a CEO has to work so hard at," he says. "You don't have to start from neutral. You can start from an advantage."

 

 

For a look at the top small city in your state, visit http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/mar2009/sb20090327_385972.htm?chan=smallbiz_smallbiz+index+page_getting+started.

 

As entrepreneurs are frantically trying to decrease and downsize, we thought we'd offer some tips for second thoughts...

Avoid these management traps, and maybe your company can emerge from the recession in stronger shape.

1. They kid themselves. No one likes to lay people off or close facilities. Faced with such nasty tasks, leaders tend initially to kid themselves in underestimating the scope of a downturn—and as a result, they find themselves chasing a falling revenue curve and risking death by 1,000 cuts.

Don't fall into this trap. Instead, get your core team together and take a brutally honest look at how bad things are likely to get for your business. Then size your business to make a profit at the level of revenue you think is most likely. Don't bet that the sales department is going to pull a rabbit out of its hat, or that some new product you are about to launch is going to solve all of your problems.

2. They make across-the-board cuts. A common approach in a downturn is to declare reactive, across-the-board reductions—which usually just make things worse. Tough times require leaders to think deeply about their business models and focus cuts in such a way that they can protect or even extend the core.

It should become clear that many projects, initiatives, and even departments hatched during good times are not at the core of your business. Indeed, it is vital that a company know exactly how much money it makes by customer group and by product. Roll up your sleeves and make a clear-eyed analysis of your company's position. Identify the 20% of the activities that produce 80% of the results—and protect them at all costs.

3. They fail to demonstrate generosity and concern. One reason some leaders perform poorly in a downsizing is that the process is painful for them. Many feel the situation may be their fault, and they attempt to minimize bad feelings by avoiding contact with those losing their jobs. Doing so makes them appear miserly with their time or their pocketbooks.

Show courage and commitment—meet with people you have to lay off, help them transition, commit to show a generosity of spirit. Survivors in the organization will be watching you closely, and they will judge your character based on the empathy you show to those who are losing their jobs. If they see even a hint of dispassion, they are likely to lose faith in you and begin to look for another job.

4. They clam up. For good reasons, communication with the troops about impending expense cuts is usually carefully and tightly controlled. But people get antsy when they know their job or department might be on the chopping block, and it's important that leaders send a clear signals on how serious the financial challenges are likely to be and exactly how the company will respond.

As soon as you determine a course of action, communicate fully and often to the troops. Send the signal that you fully grasp the seriousness of the situation, but that you also have a plan for helping the company survive and even flourish.

If you avoid the traps described above, you may even find that your business will emerge from the recession stronger than ever.

To read full article, visit http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/oct2008/sb20081024_833389.htm. 

What many entrepreneurs and small business innovators don't know is:

It doesn't matter if you have a vision if you're not capable of articulating it.

 A great majority of entrepreneurs and small business owners have backgrounds of business studies and degrees, but lack the knowledge of ways to communicate the value of their companies' brands to their employees, investors, and customers. The key to getting people excited is an ability to articulate an inspiring vision.

When a leader fails to articulate such a vision, people notice. Whether you’re running a Fortune 500 company or a small boutique on Main Street, an effective vision must incorporate the following four elements.

Brevity. Google (GOOG) guys Sergey Brin and Larry Page once walked into a venture-capital firm and were able to express their company’s vision in one sentence: "Google provides access to the world’s information in one click." One investor told me that if an entrepreneur cannot articulate his or her vision in 10 words or less, he wouldn’t give that entrepreneur a dime. If your listeners cannot remember your vision, it won’t inspire anyone.

Specificity. Inspiring visions rally people to a greater purpose, even if they seem daunting at first. On May 25, 1961, President John F. Kennedy outlined a specific vision to conquer space. Not only would America land a man on the moon and "return him safely to earth," he told a joint session of Congress, but America would do so by the last day of the decade. That is a specific goal and a specific timeline. Skeptics ridiculed Kennedy’s plan as nothing but a pipe dream, but the bold, specific vision rallied the nation’s best scientists to make it happen.

Consistency. A vision means nothing if your staff doesn’t hear it consistently. When I met Cranium co-founder Richard Tait, he said he left Microsoft (MSFT) and created a board game with a sketch he drew on the back of an airplane napkin. It was a vision to create a board game that gave every player a "chance to shine," as he put it. Tait reminded employees of the vision on a daily basis and used media interviews as opportunities to explain the concept. Though Hasbro (HAS) bought Cranium in January, this vision ("Everyone Shines") remains consistent on Cranium’s packaging, Web site, press releases, presentations, and marketing material.

Emotional connection. In order to create an emotional connection with your listener, your vision must be about your listener. In other words, if your vision is all about yourself, it can be specific, concise, and consistent, but fail to touch your customer on an emotional level. Tell me how your product improves my life and you’ll hit a home run.

Remember, most business leaders either do not have a vision or fail to articulate it in a way that makes people excited. That means your company will stand out when you manage to do so. Good luck.

 

For more in-depth reading, visit http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/nov2008/sb20081125_348248.htm.

 

 

                                                 

This is part seven of seven. I'm sure you will enjoy each one.

 

As a lifelong and successful entrepreneur, I've experienced both the ups and downs. It's often tough to start a successful new business, write a good business plan, raise money, find a business funding or a loan for a small business (often from angel investors), and grow your company. I'm fascinated by stories about successful entrepreneurs who have persevered and achieved their business dreams.

 

 

Walt Disney

 

As a young man, Walt Disney was fired from the Kansas City Star Newspaper because his boss thought he lacked creativity. He went on to form an animation company called Laugh-O-Gram Films in 1921. Using his natural salesmanship abilities, Disney was able to raise $15,000 for the company ($181,000 in 2008 dollars). However, he made a deal with a New York distributor, and when the distributor went out of business, Disney was forced to shut Laugh-O-Gram down. He could barely pay his rent and even resorted to eating dog food.

 

Broke but not defeated, Disney spent his last few dollars on a train ticket to Hollywood. Unfortunately his troubles were not over. In 1926, Disney created a cartoon character named Oswald the Rabbit. When he attempted to negotiate a better deal with Universal Studios -- the cartoon’s distributor -- Disney discovered that Universal had secretly patented the Oswald character. Universal then hired Disney’s artists away from him, and continued the cartoon without Disney’s input (and without paying him).

 

As if that wasn’t enough, Disney also struggled to release some of his now-classic films. He was told Mickey Mouse would fail because the mouse would “terrify women.” Distributors rejected The Three Little Pigs, saying it needed more characters. Pinocchio was shut down during production and Disney had to rewrite the entire storyline. Other films, like Bambi, Pollyanna and Fantasia, were misunderstood by audiences at the time of their release, only to become favorites later on.

 

Disney’s greatest example of perseverance occurred when he tried to make the book Mary Poppins into a film. In 1944, at the suggestion of his daughter, Disney decided to adapt the Pamela Travers novel into a screenplay. However, Travers had absolutely no interest in selling Mary Poppins to Hollywood. To win her over, Disney visited Travers at her England home repeatedly for the next 16 years. After more than a decade-and-a-half of persuasion, Travers was overcome by Disney’s charm and vision for the film, and finally gave him permission to bring Mary Poppins to the big screen. The result is a timeless classic.

 

In a fitting twist of fate, The Disney Company went on to purchase ABC in 1996. At the time, ABC was owner of the Kansas City Star, meaning the newspaper that once fired Disney had become part of the empire he created. And all thanks to his creativity (and a lot of perseverance). (Written by Tom Zeleznock)

 

About me:

Lisa Chapman serves her clients as a Business Coach, Business Planning Consultant, and by performing Due Diligence Services for Investors. Ms. Chapman helps a wide variety of start-up, small, and medium-sized businesses all over the US enhance their growth, strengths and profits. During her 25+ years as an entrepreneur & CEO, her professional achievements include Nashville Business Journal’s “Executive of the Year” and “Small Business of the Year” finalist awards, as well as inclusion in Nashville Business and Lifestyle magazine’s list of “40 Under 40 – Nashville’s Emerging Leadership”.

Ms. Chapman’s published books include The Savvy Woman’s Guide to Cars (Bantam) and The Buck Starts Here, The Beginner’s Guide to Smart Financial Choices (Simon & Schuster/Kaplan).  She has appeared on NBC Today with Katie Couric, and a wide variety of national and local television and radio shows. She has also been featured or quoted in leading national publications such as Good Housekeeping, Cosmopolitan and Readers Digest, as well as dozens of magazines and newspapers.

Visit Lisa’s website: www.LisaChapman.com. You may contact her via email: Lisa @ LisaChapman.com or call 615-477-8412

 

 

                                                       

This is part five of seven. I'm sure you will enjoy each one.

 

As a lifelong and successful entrepreneur, I've experienced both the ups and downs. It's often tough to start a successful new business, write a good business plan, raise money, find a business funding or a loan for a small business (often from angel investors), and grow your company. I'm fascinated by stories about successful entrepreneurs who have persevered and achieved their business dreams.

 

 

George Steinbrenner

 

Before “The Boss” assumed ownership of the New York Yankees, he owned a basketball franchise called the Cleveland Pipers. The Pipers were part of the American Basketball League, and in 1960, under Steinbrenner’s helm, the franchise went bankrupt.

 

When he eventually took over the Yankees, Steinbrenner’s struggles didn’t end. Most baseball fans will remember the team’s drought in the 1980s and early 1990s. As the team suffered, Steinbrenner was often criticized for his executive decisions, which included questionable trades and frequent changes to the Manager position. Though his methods were controversial, Steinbrenner stuck to his guns, and it paid off. The Yankees made an impressive six World Series appearances from 1996-2003, and remain Major League Baseball’s most profitable team year after year.

 

Steinbrenner is known for his shrewd business tactics, but he’s also not afraid to put his money where his mouth is. The Yankees have the highest payroll in baseball, and they’ve been in contention every year since the mid-90s. Even when the Cleveland Pipers went bankrupt, Steinbrenner offered to pay back the team’s investors, a promise he eventually made good on.

 

Steinbrenner has been quoted as saying, "I never wanted anybody to say ‘I went down a path with George Steinbrenner and lost money.’" (Written by Tom Zeleznock)

 

About me:

Lisa Chapman serves her clients as a Business Coach, Business Planning Consultant, and by performing Due Diligence Services for Investors. Ms. Chapman helps a wide variety of start-up, small, and medium-sized businesses all over the US enhance their growth, strengths and profits. During her 25+ years as an entrepreneur & CEO, her professional achievements include Nashville Business Journal’s “Executive of the Year” and “Small Business of the Year” finalist awards, as well as inclusion in Nashville Business and Lifestyle magazine’s list of “40 Under 40 – Nashville’s Emerging Leadership”.

Ms. Chapman’s published books include The Savvy Woman’s Guide to Cars (Bantam) and The Buck Starts Here, The Beginner’s Guide to Smart Financial Choices (Simon & Schuster/Kaplan).  She has appeared on NBC Today with Katie Couric, and a wide variety of national and local television and radio shows. She has also been featured or quoted in leading national publications such as Good Housekeeping, Cosmopolitan and Readers Digest, as well as dozens of magazines and newspapers.

Visit Lisa’s website: www.LisaChapman.com. You may contact her via email: Lisa @ LisaChapman.com or call 615-477-8412