Over 18?

When you buy a share, there is the chance you'll increase equity, depending on market values. That's precisely how the average consumer will become more interested. Market value generally only increases if revenue increases, scams and bubbles excepted. If your concept is that people will become interested in swimming because they have money "invested" in them I think you are headed more in the direction of gambling than in investment. An investment increases in value when its ability to generate revenue increases. An investment that relies purely on future investors investing more money is generally called a scam and is usually illegal. In sports money comes either from corporations (generally) that want to improve their brand, and hence their ability to generate revenue, by association with an athlete or team or event, OR it comes from selling entertainment to spectators, or often a mix of the two. If you have a sport that isn't as interesting to watch as the other sports competing for attention you can only hope to capture a relatively small niche market. If all you've got to sell is branded tshirts you've got another pretty limited market. I may be wrong and you may be right but if you can't do a better job of articulating your value proposition you aren't going to get people to invest. During the Olympics they often have campaigns to send a fan message to the athletes, maybe they could have a program to send $1 or $5 to an athlete that just won a medal for your country or otherwise impressed you. It would be interesting to see how many people would do so if you made it extremely easy to do so.

I have a paperclip that I twisted in the shape of a swimmer. Anyone want to trade?

Lindsay, I'm not trying to prove one particular view is right or wrong. I'm trying to show an alternative option moving forward, a viable way of generating more interest in the sport. You look to the past and say, "this is the way it always was, so that's why it will always be that way." Except this is the way it was because the rules at the time were counter-productive to anything different. Things have changed now, which makes this an opportunity for investment. What is $5-10 worth, or even $100-200 for a sports enthusiast? Although right now that enthusiasm is worth-less because there isn't a direct mechanism for them to be connected to the sporting event. Purchasing shares gives the public a vested interest, a direct way of being part of the sport. I may be wrong and you may be right but if you can't do a better job of articulating your value proposition you aren't going to get people to invest.

I'm not trying to prove anything either, I'm trying to determine for myself whether I think you have a viable idea I want to support or not. What has changed and how will you take advantage of that change? Be specific. All I am saying about investment is that if you want people to give you money you had better be able to answer the question of what will they get in return? Should they expect to get their money back with interest if the swimmer succeeds? Are they making a donation purely in the hope that good things will result and no expectation of monetary return? Are they paying for an outlet for their enthusiasm? Right now you are sending all sorts of mixed messages, and investors hate that. Investors want clarity. Is your target investor someone who is enthusiastic about swimming and wants a way to be part of the swimming scene or someone with money that you think will be interested in swimming if they have money on the line? To make it real simple, say we're in an elevator, I've got a nice crisp $100 bill, and you have 60 seconds to make me want to give it to you. What do I get out of it if I give you the $100? Sell me. And be specific. Lindsay, I'm not trying to prove one particular view is right or wrong. I'm trying to show an alternative option moving forward, a viable way of generating more interest in the sport. You look to the past and say, "this is the way it always was, so that's why it will always be that way." Except this is the way it was because the rules at the time were counter-productive to anything different. Things have changed now, which makes this an opportunity for investment. What is $5-10 worth, or even $100-200 for a sports enthusiast? Although right now that enthusiasm is worth-less because there isn't a direct mechanism for them to be connected to the sporting event. Purchasing shares gives the public a vested interest, a direct way of being part of the sport.

I would never try to sell you something in an elevator. Relationship sales are worth way more in the long run. I might ask for your card, and e-mail you a few investment idea's over the next few years. Although let's say we did happen to meet in an elevator. Instead I give you $100 on one condition, you have to tell me who your favorite athlete is. If you answer Dara Torres, I'll let you keep the cash. As far as trying to convince anyone of this idea, whether it is viable or not, that's not my motivation. In fact, if the idea does "fly" that would be enough reward in itself. I'm not trying to prove anything either, I'm trying to determine for myself whether I think you have a viable idea I want to support or not. To make it real simple, say we're in an elevator, I've got a nice crisp $100 bill, and you have 60 seconds to make me want to give it to you. What do I get out of it if I give you the $100? Sell me. And be specific.

I would never try to sell you something in an elevator. Relationship sales are worth way more in the long run. I might ask for your card, and e-mail you a few investment idea's over the next few years. Although let's say we did happen to meet in an elevator. Instead I give you $100 on one condition, you have to tell me who you're favorite athlete is. If you answer Dara Torres, I'll let you keep the cash. As far as trying to convince anyone of this idea, whether it is viable or not, that's not my motivation. In fact, if the idea does "fly" that would be enough reward in itself. I've read all the posts and am really trying to understand your proposal but at this point just don't get it. I love swimming and might invest but invest to me implies there will be a return of some sort. Is the return monetary? if not then what is it? This has nothing to do with how things were done in the past. I just don't get what you are asking people to do.

This is an awesome thread. If it were me, I would not buy shares of Dara Torres, sure, it’s a great pharmaceutical company, but it could suffer from litigation and lawsuits in the very foreseeable future. Instead, I would invest in a much safer blue chip company during theses tough economic times. That’s why I advise all investors to take a look at abc stock (abc is my name on this forum). It has a proven track record, great management team, and currently trades at an earnings multiple of 1 (a great buy)! After reading this thread, we will also accept purchases in dollars and loons (Canadian money)! To make your investment, just PM me and I will gladly cash your check or money order. In return, you can expect to receive a half page newsletter from me quarterly in which I outline my domination in the sport of swimming. Also, I am planning a hostile takeover in Beijing, where I will look to purchase Michael Phelps, dissolve him into several smaller companies, and sell these individual units for a total that is much greater than the current whole. Please note, I respect everybody's opinion on this thread but think it has gotten a little out of control. I just wanted to make sure that I was part of the confusion.

Please remember before investing in any type of share, bond, exchange traded futures, options on futures, foreign exchange, CDO, CDS, mutual fund, or fund of any kind: "Past performance is not indicative of or a guarantee of future results." There, you've been disclaimed!

Please invest in me. I have to pay big bucks to swim in Gresham Oregon. The entry fees, the meals, the hotel room. I need a new car, I also had to pay for the Parties. I will have to set up a corporate site with a paypal button on it. Donations accepted for $100.00 or you can slip it to me on the elevator at the Best Western in Gresham.

One company that handles the exchange between the athletes and the general public. Whatever you want to call it, what is needed is a mechanism for investment and product development, a share that can be purchased by the average consumer. Ok, so now clarify what it is that investors expect to get back from their investment? Are they making a donation in hopes of helping the swimmer or in hopes of getting a financial payback? I think the basic fact you may be missing is that swimming in general is not a profitable activity. For the most part swimming is a mechanism for transferring money from parents and governments to swim wear companies, coaches, and governing bodies. In the process the swimmers receive numerous benefits from participation, but for the most part those benefits are not financial. The most basic issue with swimming is that it is a great participant sport but a not very good spectator sport. The reasons that swimming is not a good spectator sport are pretty fundamental, the most important being that a swim race is very short and very simple, which is a bad recipe for interesting. And adding "personality" to a basically flawed product will only improve things to a very limited extent, there are lots of better venues for showcasing personality. For the most part grafting on nationalism is the only way to get your average Joe to care which of eight swimmers touched the wall 0.04 seconds earlier than the others. Take almost any swim race, slow down the clock a little so the clock says the swimmers are at world record pace and everyone will be excited, speed the clock up so the times are considered slow and everyone will be disappointed. How many people can tell the difference between a world record swim and a mere international level swim without reference to a clock? That said I admit that I enjoy watching swimming.