To me the right solution is to have an 'umbrella company' - that startups can live under. By law, they'd be divisions (so bankruptcy law would never get involved). But, internal to the umbrella company, there would be a culture of experimentation & iteration.
Like rejection therapy, the 'umbrella' employees could be encouraged to fail often : Not enough failure implies not enough risk-taking / innovation.
If you're having to rely on the ability to walk away from a commitment (to a supplier, say), then that needs to be built into the contract initially.
In California (say), where the culture is 'built for failure', the contracts already embed that optionality - meaning that the pricing already has the possibility of default built in. Negotiating the same flexibility elsewhere should just increase the pricing. Just as offering gold-plated guarantees in California should reduce the pricing.
Comments
To me the right solution is to have an 'umbrella company' - that startups can live under. By law, they'd be divisions (so bankruptcy law would never get involved). But, internal to the umbrella company, there would be a culture of experimentation & iteration.
Like rejection therapy, the 'umbrella' employees could be encouraged to fail often : Not enough failure implies not enough risk-taking / innovation.
How does that solve the problem of not being able to unilaterally write off a debt obligation?
If you're having to rely on the ability to walk away from a commitment (to a supplier, say), then that needs to be built into the contract initially.
In California (say), where the culture is 'built for failure', the contracts already embed that optionality - meaning that the pricing already has the possibility of default built in. Negotiating the same flexibility elsewhere should just increase the pricing. Just as offering gold-plated guarantees in California should reduce the pricing.