Helena Case Analysis Business & Marketing Essay Paper (Essay Sample)

Helena Case Analysis
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Analysis of Helena Case
Sole proprietorship gives Helena the advantage of maintaining total control over her business. She could hire the services of an independent contractor to assist her with the marketing task. Unfortunately, that is not possible because the company has poor cash flow and is also restricted from obtaining a loan that could be used to pay for marketing services. This situation makes employment of an independent contractor (s) a risky business venture since she is personally liable for all the debts accrued by the business. It is, therefore, imperative that she opts for a different form of company (business entity) that is appropriate to the the prevailing set of circumstances.
General Partnership vis-a-vis Limited Partnership
Neither a general partnership nor the limited partnership forms of business are good options for Helena. Even though a general partnership is not limited to loans and can raise capital, it would expose her and the general partner (s) to joint and have several liabilities for business debts (Martin, 2016; Selkowitz, 2014). The arrangement would also give other partners, especially the general partners, the right to control the business, something on which Helena is very keen. General partnership, as defined by the revised partnership law, is an association of two or more persons who intend to carry on a business as co-owners with the intention of making a profit.The general partnership would technically and legally make other partners co-owners of the business regardless of their contribution. In essence, all the profits and other benefits realized by the company are shared equally between the partners in case of more than two partners (Caramela, 2018). Hellena is the one who designed the software for making microloans. For this reason, she strives tp establishe a business that will reward her invention. However, she may not reap from her creative idea on a preferential basis. In general partnership, the software would be part and parcel of the business co-owned by other partners. Therefore, the proceeds of the software would be shared equally by the partners; however, it is immaterial that the rest of the partners did not contribute to the development of the software. In light of the preceding, general partnership is inappropriate for Helena.[Revised Uniform Partnership Act (RUPA), Section 202 (a).]