1) Do you make use of it?
2) Would you be willing to fight for it?
Well, I guess I am not sure that I would be on such a committee. As much as I hope to benefit from Act 221 I am not sure it is the best solution for the state. If we do end up receiving tax advantaged money (and we should know by fall), then I would be happy to go on record as saying that "we wouldn't be in Hawaii if we hadn't received Act 221 money". I'm not sure I'm willing to go beyond that. But I'm happy to discuss further.
3 "not sures" in one paragraph!
I have lived through dumb money twice. Once from a VC that was supposedly excellent but unfortunately totally misread our space. Dumb money can force you into very bad strategic directions or impose unrealistic expectations that the management team cannot meet.
Virendra Nath: It is not at all clear that Act 221/215 investments "cost" the State money - even in the short run. Many Act 221 ventures bring in significant $$ from out of state, money that has to be spent in Hawaii, mostly on salaries - which are taxed - and then on consumption - which is also taxed. Plus, in the long term, those ventures result in income taxes and capital gains taxes to the State, as the ventures begin to succeed. A linear view of this Act is probably misleading. IMHO.