WO2001020523A1

WO2001020523A1 - Method and system for matching purchasers and suppliers

Info

Publication number: WO2001020523A1
Application number: PCT/US2000/025284
Authority: WO
Inventors: Benjamin A. Vitale; Jordan E. Frederick; David Starr; Len Batterson
Original assignee: Venture Capital Online, Llc
Priority date: 1999-09-15
Filing date: 2000-09-15
Publication date: 2001-03-22

Abstract

The present method and system is a vertical portal for enterpreneurs and business owners, and for their investors, and for professional service providers who sell to entrepreneurs, business owners, and investors. At the core of the present method and system is a membership-based exchange of leading capital providers that offer financing to an online community of entrepreneurs and business owners.

Description

METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MATCHING PURCHASERS AND SUPPLIERS

Cross-Reference to Related Application

This application relates to and claims priority benefits from U.S. Provisional Patent Application Serial No. 60/154,104 filed September 15, 1999, entitled "Method And System For Matching Purchasers And Suppliers", which is incorporated by reference herein m its entirety.

Field of the Invention

The present invention is directed to a method and system for facilitating the financing of business ventures between two or more parties through the use of electronic networks .

Background of the Invention

The present system and method offer a new way for business financial transactions to be conducted.

Although there are large amounts of private capital available, and large numbers of promising companies seeking funding, the traditional process of matching investor preferences with appropriate opportunities is highly inefficient One reputable research company estimates that there is currently a $17 billion capital gap (available capital that -s not matched with available opportunities) due to inefficiencies m the current capital raising process. These inefficiencies are the result of numerous problems with the current manual private equity raising process. One such problem is the lack of any ability to match the characteristics of capital seekers with the investment preferences of capital providers. This results m a waste of time to both entrepreneurs and investors, as entrepreneurs frequently end up making unneeded presentations of their ideas to investors whose interests lie elsewhere.

Another deficiency m the existing process is the lack of any ability for individual entrepreneurs to reach multiple potential investors with a single presentation.

Venture capital is, instead, fragmented, resulting m entrepreneurs having to make repeated presentations to reach any appreciable percentage of the venture capital market.

An additional problem with the existing capital raising process is that capital seekers receive little education and feedback as they proceed through the process. This results m an information disparity m favor of capital providers that gives them an eαge m negotiating deals. Further lacking m the existing process is an automated way for a capital seeker or capital provider to find additional providers interested m syndicating a deal. The existing manual process requires the seeker or provider to maintain a list of contacts and to telephone each contact individually to determine who may be interested m the deal .

Existing processes also lack tracking and security capabilities that can protect the capital seeker. In many of the listing services currently available, the seeker αoes not know who is reviewing his proposal and has little ability to prevent specific providers from reviewing the deal .

Capital seekers and providers also lack an automated way to find additional providers interested m syndicating a deal Current listing services simply post a deal and cannot enable syndication of a deal between interested parties. Current methods also do not provide capital seekers with information and feedback on the status of their financing. Listing services frequently do not issue turndown memos or improvement suggestions.

Thus, a need exists to better bridge the gaps between those seeking capital and those with capital to provide .

Summary of the Invention

The present system and method are designed to address the inefficiencies of traditional private capital markets . With a large membership base of member capital providers, the present system and method can bring a significant portion of the global private-capital "bank" to the market as a single point of entry. Consequently, entrepreneurs can now address interested exchange members all at once, and m a manner that is tightly targeted to the preferences of those members, instead of presenting their business opportunities to capital providers one at a time m the traditional manner The process is equally well-suited to matching interested parties (and/or the brokers representing them) m the areas of leveraged buy- outs and mergers and acquisitions. - A -

The front-end of the capital raising process includes the marketing of the capital provider organizations, the completion of a comprehensive business plan, the development of a capital raising strategy, and the proper targeting of professional service providers to assist the business, and access to a number of appropriate investors .

Previously, there had been no industry-accepted standard process to efficiently complete the front-end stages of this investment process. To meet this need, procedures, processes, and online documents have been developed, based on a combination of the most effective and efficient industry-accepted practices. To ensure industry-wide acceptance, the processes and supporting documents are designed to be standard but flexible to apply to various types of businesses and situations.

It typically takes between twenty weeks and fifty- two weeks to complete the front-end stages of the investment process. The present system and method m combination with an exclusive network of investors and large amounts of investment data reduce this critical time substantially. The key efficiencies are the result of a unique use of the Internet, comprehensive information, and the explicit requirements for the database-driven automation of the present system and method, all of which can be combined for use with an exchange of investors, business owners and professional service providers

To further aid m building the global capital provider network, the present system and method include enhanced features and benefits, including consistent, high-quality deal flow, streamlined front-end process and administration, and other tiered services. One such tiered service, a private-label service, provides features that use the present system and method, coupled with another web site, to process and track deal flow sent directly to members electronically and via traditional mechanisms.

Notable features of the present system and method include (1) database-driven interactive interfaces for the matching of capital-seeking companies with capital and professional service providers; (2) database-driven, interactive interfaces for the creation, submission, and qualification of business plan summaries that can be referred to capital and professional service providers online; (3) a password protected area for capital and professional service providers to access and review the referred investment opportunities; and (4) a standardized but flexible mechanism for capital and professional service providers to act upon, manage and communicate with potential investment candidates .

The initial stage of the exchange process is enabled by an intelligent database that automatically screens investment opportunities and matches them with capital providers based upon their investment preferences and prior successful investments. Interactive interfaces and templates are then used to support the dynamic creation and submission of concise and uniform summaries of the investment opportunities Alternatively, this step can be carried out manually, utilizing the expertise of the entity controlling the matching process.

A real-time, interactive text and graphical based interface is also tightly integrated into the present system and method to help insure that investment summaries are properly completed. Submitted summaries may be manually or automatically reviewed for matching with capital provider specific criteria, and complete and consistent summaries can be digitally referred.

As can be seen, the present method is superior to existing methods of matching capital seekers and providers (to the extent such current methods can be said to even exist) . The present method matches the characteristics of the capital seeker with the investment preferences of the capital provider. This reduces the time the entrepreneur searches for appropriate providers, and reduces the effort required by capital providers, who now must only review deals that match their preferences. By assembling a large percentage of the entire venture capital market m a single place, an entrepreneur can save time by presenting his plan to many potential capital providers simultaneously. This also reduces the number of unpalatable deals referred to providers for review and provides a tracked and secure method that protects the capital seeker. The present method provides a significant amount of content and services to educate the capital seekers and feedback that has not previously been available. The capital seeker will now have knowledge of who is reviewing his proposal and will have the ability to prevent certain providers from reviewing the deal. A level of automation is provided for allowing a capital seeker or capital provider to find additional providers interested m syndicating a deal. By the method of the present invention, capital seekers can receive information and feedback on the status of their financing not previously available.

Brief Description of the Drawings

FIG. 1 is a flow-chart of the matching system according to the invention. FIGS. 2a-2c are flow-charts of the Provider's

Interface for the matching system of FIG. 1.

FIGS. 3a-3g are flow-charts of the Entrepreneur's Interface for the matching system of FIG. 1.

Detailed Description of the Invention

The present method and system utilises a computer system to facilitate the matching of capital seeking companies and individuals with capital and service providers . Although the present system and method can be used m connection with other applications, for the purposes of illustration, the capital seeker/provider example is used throughout the specification.

FIG. 1 shows a broad overview of the entire process of the preferred embodiment, as explained below. FIGS. 2a-2c illustrate a preferred embodiment of the present invention from the investor's perspective. Referring to FIG. 2a, an interested provider (IP) enters the system m one of two ways . The IP may enter the system online by filling out a "Join the Network" form, m step 200, which may include basic information such as contact name, address, telephone number, type of deal interested m (that is, Venture Capital, Mergers and Acquisitions, Buyouts), and investor type (that is, Angel Group, Corporate Venture Groups, Family Venture Groups, Female-Focused Venture Capital Firms, Financial Buyer, Financial Institution, Financial Institution Venture Groups, Government Supported Venture Group, Hedge Fund, Incubator, Individual Angel, Minority-Focused Venture Capital Firms, Private Management Firms, Public Management Firms, Small Business Investment Companies,

Strategic Buyer, VC Firm, Venture Leasing Firms) , amount of active capital, capital under management, source of capital, and fee structure. An IP may also enter the system as shown m step 202 by being added by an Administrator.

As shown in step 204, IPs are then sorted based upon the type of exchange the IP is interested m and routed to a Provider Associate who concentrates m that type of exchange. In one embodiment, the IP is routed to either a VC Provider Associate (as m step 206), a Professional Service Provider (PSP) Associate (as m step 208), or a Mergers & Acquisitions (M&A) Provider Associate (as m step 210) .

The relevant Associate then researches the IP and contacts the IP as shown m step 212. In step 214 the Associate completes a Provider Recommendation form and includes an acceptance decision In step 216, the IP is judged against automatic acceptance requirements set by the Administrator. If the IP meets the automatic acceptance requirements, the IP is flagged as accepted by the system as shown m step 218.

If at step 216 the IP does not meet the automatic acceptance requirements, the Provider Recommendation form is submitted to an Exchange Manager for review as m step 220. If the Exchange Manager does not agree with the Associate's recommendation, the recommendation is declined as m step 222 and the Associate is notified with feedback as m step 224. If the Exchange Manager agrees with the Associate's recommendation, the recommendation if accepted as m step 226. The IP may then either be accepted, m which case the IP is flagged as accepted by the system as shown m step 218, or rejected, m which case the firm is coded as "rejected" by the Exchange Manager as shown m step 228. As further shown m step 228, feedback is compiled and given to the rejected IP.

An IP that has been accepted (as shown m step 218) is notified of acceptance as shown m step 230. As also shown m step 230, the Exchange Manager is notified of an accepted IP. The process then continues as shown m FIG. 2b.

Referring to FIG. 2b, an accepted IP next completes a showcase as shown m step 232. In a preferred embodiment, the showcase is a multimedia presentation (for example, Microsoft PowerPoint, Evoke

(www evoke.com) , Bramshark (www.bramshark . com) ) "showcasing" the IP and capable of being viewed remotely by the Administrator or an entrepreneur. If after a certain amount of time has passed and the IP has failed to submit a showcase, an Associate follows up with the IP and offers assistance, as shown m step 234. As further shown in step 234, the Associate may help complete the showcase for the IP.

Once a showcase has been submitted, it is reviewed for appropriateness by an Associate as shown in step 236. If the showcase is found unacceptable, the Associate provides the IP with feedback as shown in step 238. Otherwise, the Associate approves the showcase and activates the IP's account as shown in step 240. In step 242, both the Exchange Manager and the IP are notified of the account activation.

An Associate then completes an orientation with the IP as shown in step 244. The IP then unsuspends its account and becomes eligible to receive deals from the deal flow, as illustrated in FIG. 2c.

Referring to FIG. 2c, a deal is referred to the accepted IP as shown in step 246. The IP then preferences the deal as shown in step 248. Options for the IP could include requesting a meeting with the entrepreneur (step 250), syndicating or participating in syndication with other firms (step 252), reviewing or requesting a due diligence investigation (step 254), reviewing the entrepreneur's showcase or business plan (step 256) , or turning down the deal (step 258) . When an option is selected, the activity is recorded by the system as shown in step 260.

If the IP preferences the deal as in step 250, 252, or 254, however, the deal is examined to see whether it has achieved "featured" status in step 262. (See FIG. 3g and the accompanying discussion, infra, for a more complete description of the "featured deal" process.) If the deal is not a featured deal, the Associate assigned to that IP is notified of the deal request as shown m step 264. The Provider Associate may then call the IP m five days for a follow-up as m step 266.

If at step 262 the deal is one that is currently a featured deal, the applicable Industry Analyst is notified of the request as m step 268. The Industry Analyst may then call the IP m five days for a follow-up as m step 270.

FIGS 3a-3g illustrate a preferred embodiment of the present invention from the entrepreneur's perspective. Referring to FIG. 3a, an entrepreneur enrolls m the venture capital exchange as shown m step 300. In step 302, the entrepreneur is assigned Deal Team Members (for example, an Associate and an Analyst) based on the Industry to which the entrepreneur's deal pertains. The entrepreneur then proceeds based upon whether he has prepared a business plan, as shown m step 304. If not, the assigned Analyst calls the customer for an initial orientation as shown m step 306. If the entrepreneur does have a business plan, he proceeds to step 310.

By way of example, entrepreneurs could enter the system with a variety of business profiles. One profile would consist of hyper-growth companies focusing on new technologies, innovative ideas, or emerging industries. Such companies might be m the midst of accelerating sales from $0 to more than $75 million within a few years. Companies m this category generally have an innovative product or service that will revolutionize an industry or create a new market . Preferred industries include information technology, healthcare, and e- commerce. Target markets should be sufficiently large to create a $50-$100 million business within 3-5 years. These businesses are generally seeking venture capital since excess cash flow does not exist to service debt and operating expenses.

A second profile of steadily evolving companies that are fully matured and established, with a proven product or service and national focus. Companies in this category generally have a proven product or service and an established customer base. These mature companies are typically profitable with stable operating margins. They may also have significant market share in their particular niche. These businesses may be seeking equity or debt financing to fund internal growth or complete acquisitions. Owners may also be interested in selling all or a portion of the business for liquidity reasons, or in using the business as a platform to execute a consolidation strategy.

Another type of business that might seek the matching services of the present invention might be small businesses that are locally focused and have a maximum market potential of about $10 million. Examples include a small family-owned manufacturing company or local restaurant chain. Companies in this category are generally operated by a sole proprietor with few employees. These businesses may also include individual franchisees. Such companies are generally seeking debt financing to fund startup or internal growth. Owners may also be interested m selling all or a portion of the business for liquidity reason.

A fourth type of business might consist of companies that have a viable product or service but have become financially troubled. This type of company has found itself m a position with operational or financial difficulties. These companies require capital to execute a revised business plan or are m need of assistance from experts m the area of turnaround assistance. Returning now to FIG. 3a, if at step 304 the entrepreneur had no prepared business plan and no business plan is received from the entrepreneur following the orientation telephone call m step 306, the entrepreneur is alerted every three weeks of the deficiency until a business plan is received or a

Vcapital Summary is submitted as shown m step 308. A Vcapital Summary (sometimes used interchangeably with the term iDeal Summary) is a concise synopsis of the entrepreneur's proposed venture and contains only the most pertinent information from his complete business plan. The iDeal Summary highlights key information m a standardized format, allowing investors to quickly get to the heart of the investment opportunity From step 308, the process proceeds as illustrated m FIG. 3b. If a business plan is received, the Analyst reviews the deal information and completes a Recommendation Form as shown m step 310 In step 314, the Analyst submits the Recommendation Form to the Associate for review. If the Associate does not agree with the recommendation, the Associate sends comments and questions on the deal back to the Analyst as shown m step 314 If necessary, the Analyst (by email) or the Associate (by telephone) obtains more information from the entrepreneur as shown in step 316. The process then starts again at step 310.

When the Associate agrees with the recommendation, the recommendation is accepted as shown m step 318. The deal is then examined m step 320 to determine whether it is referable to investors. If not, the deal is coded as "not referable" by the Analyst, and feedback and assistance are compiled and provided to the entrepreneur as shown m step 322. An evaluation is then made as to whether the customer should be refunded. If a refund is approved, the Associate or Analyst completes the refund process as shown m step 324. If no refund is approved, the entrepreneur remains "paid but not referable" and must take further action to become active again m the process, as shown m step 326.

If a deal is found to be referable m step 320, it is coded as "referable" by the Analyst and directions on completing a Vcapital Summary are provided to the entrepreneur as shown m step 328. The entrepreneur then has access to PSP information, multimedia presentation information (for example, Microsoft PowerPoint, Evoke (www evoke.com) , Bramshark (www bramshark com) ) , and additional showcase items as shown m step 330. The process then continues as shown m FIG. 3b.

Referring to FIG. 3b, an entrepreneur completes a Vcapital Summary as shown m step 332. If after five days a Vcapital Summary has not been submitted, the Analyst is notified and contacts the entrepreneur to offer assistance as shown m step 334.

Once a Vcapital Summary has been submitted, the deal is examined to see if a "referable" determination has previously been made, as shown m step 336. If a

"referable" analysis has not previously been initiated, the process continues according to steps 310-330 of FIG. 3a. If the deal emerges from these steps as referable, the entrepreneur continues at step 338. If at step 336 it is determined that a "referable" analysis was previously conducted and the deal was found to be referable, the entrepreneur continues to step 338.

As shown m step 338, the Analyst or Associate reviews the iDeal Summary for completeness. The process then continues as illustrated m FIG. 3c.

Referring to FIG. 3c, if the entrepreneur's iDeal Summary is not complete, the degree of the required changes are evaluated as shown m step 340. If the changes are minor, the Analyst marks the iDeal Summary as incomplete and provides the entrepreneur with suggested changes, as shown m step 342. If the changes are not minor, the Associate marks the summary as incomplete and sends suggested revisions to the entrepreneur, as shown m step 344. Step 344 may additionally entail a telephone call to the entrepreneur. After completing either step 342 or 344, the entrepreneur revises his iDeal summary and re-submits it as shown m step 346. If the entrepreneur does not re-submit his iDeal Summary, the Analyst follows up with him weekly until there is a submission, as shown m step 348. Once the revised iDeal summary has been submitted, the Analyst or Associate reviews it, focusing on the areas highlighted m the last review, as shown m step 350. If the summary remains incomplete, the process is reinitiated at step 340. Otherwise, the Associate marks the iDeal Summary as complete as shown m step 352. (An entrepreneur also reaches this point if after step 338 m FIG. 3b his summary is found to be complete.) The entrepreneur then completes his showcase as shown m step 354. If after that time the entrepreneur fails to submit his showcase, the Analyst follows up with him weekly until there is a submission, as shown m step 356. Once the showcase is submitted, the process continues as illustrated m FIG. 3d. Referring to FIG. 3d, the entrepreneur's interest m multimedia aspects of his showcase is evaluated m step 358. If the entrepreneur has expressed such interest, the process proceeds as shown m FIG. 3e. If no interest is expressed, the Analyst reviews the showcase items for appropriateness or reasonableness for referral, as shown m step 360.

If the showcase is found to be not acceptable, the Analyst provides the entrepreneur with feedback on his showcase, as shown m step 362. The deal is then returned to "iDeal Summary Complete" status as shown m step 364. The entrepreneur updates his showcase and re- submits it for review as shown in step 366. The process then reinitiates at step 360

If at step 360 the showcase is found acceptable, the Analyst marks the showcase as referable as shown m step 368. The Analyst then verifies the applicable match criteria and updates these criteria if necessary as shown in step 370. The Associate performs a final review of the deal for referable status, including a verification of the match criteria, as shown in step 372.

If the deal is not found to be acceptable for referral, the Associate contacts the entrepreneur as shown in step 374 and discusses the reasons why the deal is not referable. The entrepreneur then makes the necessary changes to the showcase or iDeal Summary as shown in step 376. In step 378, the deal is reevaluated and if again not found referable, the process restarts at step 374.

If the deal is ultimately found referable, the Associate refers the deal to the relevant IPs as shown in step 380. At this stage, custom matching is available to the Associate so that he can deselect firms whose preferences do not match this deal.

FIG. 3e illustrates two options that might be pursued by an entrepreneur who has expressed interest in multimedia at step 358 in FIG. 3d. As shown in step 301, once an entrepreneur's deal has been coded as referable, the entrepreneur may sign up for a self-published multimedia presentation service such as Brainshark as in step 303. (Evoke Communications provides a similar webcasting service.) The Analyst then creates a Brainshark account for the entrepreneur as shown in step 305. The Analyst records a conference identification or personal identification number (PIN) in the database as shown in step 307. Once such a presentation has been completed, if the entrepreneur fails to upload the completed presentation, the Analyst follows up to obtain the presentation as shown in step 309. Once a presentation has been uploaded, the Associate or Analyst reviews the presentation and provides feedback as shown in step 311.

The Associate or Analyst then reviews a practice presentation with the entrepreneur as shown in step 313. If the entrepreneur has not submitted a showcase, the Associate or Analyst waits for one to submitted, as shown in step 315. When a showcase has been submitted, the entrepreneur can schedule a time for a live Brainshark presentation, as shown in step 317. The Analyst then confirms the time for the live presentation as shown in step 319. The Analyst inputs the confirmed time into a database as in step 321. At the scheduled time, the Analyst oversees the live Brainshark presentation, as shown in step 323. Following the live presentation, the Analyst saves the recorded the Brainshark presentation with the entrepreneur's showcase, as shown in step 325. FIG. 3e also shows a similar option whereby only video is utilized.

FIG. 3f shows the relationship between the processes illustrated in FIG. 3d and FIG. 2c. FIG. 3g illustrates the "featured deal" process. In step 351, a compiled list of deals is forwarded to deal team members for completion. A decision is then made as to whether each deal will be discussed in a weekly meeting. If it is decided that a deal will not be discussed, the Associate marks the deal as "not discuss" and includes reasons for the decision, as shown m step 353. The deal is then included m the weekly report as "not discuss" and is included m the group of deals to be considered the next week, as shown m step 355. If a deal is selected for discussion, the

Recommendation Form is then evaluated as shown m step 357. If the Recommendation Form has not been completed, the Associate or Analyst completes the commentary on the deal as shown m step 359. Alternatively, if the Recommendation Form is found to be completed, the commentary is pulled from the Recommendation Form as shown m step 361.

The deal is then examined to determine its status as a "featured deal" (i.e., an "A" deal) as shown m step 363. If the deal is not featured, the deal is included m the weekly report as shown m step 365. Otherwise, the Associate completes a two-page write-up on the deal as shown m step 367. The deal and the write-up are then included m the weekly report with a featured rating as shown m step 369.

The deals m the weekly report are reviewed at a weekly meeting as shown m step 371. Whether a deal should be a "featured deal" is then determined as shown m step 373. If the deal is determined not to be a featured deal, the deal is monitored for "under review," "hot," or "due diligence" status after referral, as shown m step 375. If the entrepreneur has three or more investors interested m the deal, the deal is flagged as "featured" as shown m step 377 If not, the Associate follows up with the entrepreneur as shown m FIG. 3f. If the deal has flagged as featured, the Industry Analyst compiles a shortlist of providers to contact regarding the deal, as shown in step 379. The Industry Analyst then contacts providers, and indications of interest are recorded as "hot" prospects, as shown in step 381.

While particular elements, embodiments and applications of the present invention have been shown and described, it is understood that the invention is not limited thereto since modifications may be made by those skilled in the art, particularly in light of the foregoing teaching. It is therefore contemplated by the appended claims to cover such modifications and incorporate those features which come within the spirit and scope of the invention.

Claims

What is claimed is:

1. A method for using an electronic network to facilitate the matching of seekers and providers of capital comprising the steps of: receiving seeker-specifIC criteria from a plurality of seekers; storing said seeker-specific criteria as seeker records m a database; receiving provider-specific criteria from a plurality of providers; storing said provider-specific criteria as provider records m said database; matching said seekers with said providers by comparing said seeker-specific criteria m said seeker records with said provider-specific criteria m said provider records .

2. The method of claim 1 wherein said method further comprises using a plurality of computers to carry out one or more of the steps of claim 1.

3. The method of claim 2 wherein at least one of the steps of claim 2 are carried out over a worldwide global computer network.

4. The method of claim 2 wherein said seekers and said providers are business entities seeking a merger.

5. The method of claim 2 wherein said seekers and said providers are entities seeking to enter a leveraged buy-out .

6. The method of claim 2 wherein said provider is a professional service provider.

7. The method of claim 2 wherein said provider- specific criteria in said provider records are not accessible by said seekers.

8. The method of claim 2 wherein said seekers can prevent one or more of said providers from accessing said seeker records .

9. The method of claim 2 wherein said method further includes the step of selectively providing a subset of said seeker records to said providers, said subset consisting of said seeker records that match the provider-specific criteria of the respective provider.

10. The method of claim 2 wherein said seeker records include multimedia information descriptive of said seekers .

11. The method of claim 10 wherein said provider records include multimedia information descriptive of said providers .

12. The method of claim 10 wherein said method further includes the step of selectively providing a subset of said multimedia-containing seeker records to said providers, said subset consisting of said multimedia-containing seeker records that match the provider-specific criteria of the respective provider.

13. The method of claim 10 wherein said method further includes the step of presenting one of said multimedia-containing seeker records to a subset of said providers simultaneously, said subset consisting of said providers who desire to view said presentation of the respective seeker.

14. The method of claim 1 wherein said method further includes seeker- feedback means for providing said seekers with feedback regarding said seeker-specific criteria .

15. The method of claim 1 wherein said method further includes provider-feedback means for providing said providers with feedback regarding said provider- specific criteria.

16. The method of claim 10 wherein said method further includes seeker-multimedia-feedback means for providing said seekers with feeαback regarding said multimedia-containing seeker records.

17. The method of claim 11 wherein said method further includes provider-multimedia- feedback means for providing said providers with feedback regarding said multimedia-containing provider records.