[雙語翻譯]眾籌融資外文翻譯--金融創(chuàng)新——眾籌融資是朋友還是敵人？（原文）

1、 Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 ( 2015 ) 353 – 362 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect1877-0428 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article

2、 under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of Istanbul Univeristy. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.334 World Conference on Technology, Innovation

3、and EntrepreneurshipFinancial Innovation - Crowdfunding: Friend or Foe?Semen Son Turan a*aAbstractMEF University, Istanbul, TurkeyA phenomenon with a considerable past, and with new conspicuous investment models and fina

4、ncial products and services proliferated through the Internet; financial innovation seems to be almost ubiquitous these days. While there are numerous advantages, especially nowadays through the exploitation of easily

5、accessible, low cost and convenient e-commerce platforms, innovation in the finance sector does not come without its perils. Banks and traditional financial institutions are losing chunks of market share to virtual int

6、ermediaries and investors are operating in relatively less regulated and, consequently, less secure environments. Furthermore, from the perspective of all stakeholders, there is a Knightian uncertainty component of the

7、long-term ramifications in investing in and through newly developed products and platforms. As such, it is only recently that economic history witnessed the outbreak of the sub-prime mortgage crisis caused by the unrav

8、eling of a chain of events interlinked through the imprudent use of “innovative” derivative transactions involving credit default swaps backed by the insatiable appetite of the “irrationally exuberant” investor and the

9、 easement of regulation paving the leeway for predatory lending. This paper investigates whether and to what extent innovative investment models such as crowdfunding, as the game-changer, forcing the tightly regulated

10、securities markets to adapt to the rules of the WEB 3.0 era and relieved through the provision, Title III, of the JOBS Act, could be a potential peril. To that end, it discusses the evolution of the equity crowdfunding

11、model in the realm of the technology push - demand pull framework and analyzes the current situation of the market.© 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Peer-review under responsibility of Istanbul Univers

12、ity.Keywords: Innovative Investment Models; Crowdfunding; Technology Push Demand Pull; Financial Innovation; JOBS Act* Corresponding author. Tel.: +90-212-395-3600.E-mail address: semen.son@mef.edu.tr© 2015 The Auth

13、ors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of Istanbul Univeristy.355Semen Son Tura

14、n / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 ( 2015 ) 353 – 362 Therewith, EC will most likely pose a threat to traditional investment products offered through mature financial services industry intermediar

15、ies.According to finance theory, the higher the risks attached to a certain cash flow, the higher should the compensation be in the form of higher returns. EC, with its very short track record and huge shares of non-fin

16、alized or unsuccessful projects, inherently, contains huge incalculable risks. It is this Knightian uncertainty component associated with long-run implications of financial innovations and the risk exposure faced by i

17、mmediate EC stakeholders that is being explored in this paper. So then is EC a means towards the “democratization” of finance or the sword of Damocles hanging over the head of all those involved?To the best my knowledg

18、e, little is known about the riskiness associated with CF and no study, as of yet, has addressed the risks from a stakeholders’ perspective during each stage of the lifecycle of a typical EC process. 2. Theoretical Fram

19、ework and the EC MarketResearch on CF is beginning to emerge, though it mostly focuses on donation-based funding (Mollick, 2014). The technology push - demand pull framework offers a viable explanation for the surge in

20、EC platforms: The subprime mortgage crisis, which was triggered by imprudent lending practices of greedy investors and loose regulatory control, in its aftermath, created a more challenging lending environment, or a “f

21、unding gap”, especially for SMEs and new ventures in need for these funds (the “demand pull” factor). Business angels, and, at latter stages, venture capitalists partially served as remedy, however, only to the lucky f

22、ew of entrepreneurs who had the awareness of their existence, the communication skills to access them and make their “pitch” to these organized groups of investors. On the contrary, online investment platforms (the “te

23、chnology push” factor) relieve both investors and entrepreneurs from the burdens of the traditional early stage investment process by providing quick, easy and low cost access to a variety of projects, in a transparent

24、 setting facilitated by a third party.The importance of angel investors has increased in recent years given the difficulties young innovative firms face in securing finance from other channels (Wilson, 2011). Meanwhile,

25、 venture capital firms are paying more attention to later-stage investments, and, coupled with the post-2008 crisis growing demand for cheap and accessible funds, have left a significant funding gap at the seed and ear

26、ly stage. Angel investors, operate in this investment segment and thus help to fill this increasing gap. EC departs from the models of traditional angel investors and venture capital firms since transactions are interm

27、ediated by an online platform. Some platforms are more active in screening and evaluating companies than others. Also, their role during the investment and post-investment stages can vary significantly. EC platforms, i

28、n general, follow the phases described in this paper.3. Stakeholder RisksThere are three direct stakeholders to the EC model: the entrepreneur, the investor, and the EC platform. These players may not be fully aware of

29、the immediate and long-term risks they have to bear prior to, during, and in the aftermath of the EC process. Some entrepreneurs do not fully comprehend the unique challenges that going down the EC route can bring. Inv

30、estors, especially unsophisticated ones, may underestimate the risks associated with high-risk investments or misread signals. EC platforms, on the other hand, carry the burden of acting, both, as an investment bank an

31、d an auditor. From a legal standpoint, the investor buys a stake in the company, where the value of the venture must be estimated in advance, a task extremely difficult for a company with no track record. Many more comp

32、lexities pose problems that are distinct and more fundamental than those of other CF models. And while, there is an increasing amount of papers discussing the benefits of EC, little is known about the risks, most proba