Perspective is an interesting thing. Depending on who you are and what you do, you might have a completely different take on someone’s story. For example, an ABC News report I just read about a U.S. cleantech startup and its experience dealing with both the U.S. and China governments was ostensibly a Friedmanish illustration of how the U.S. is falling behind the Chinese.

It was a good article, but I took away more than just the Friedmanite position from the story of Chuck Provini and his company, Natcore Technology. The basic message here was that Provini needed help commercializing his technology; the U.S. government was unhelpful, and the Chinese were more than willing to jump in.

His company, Natcore Technology, based in Red Bank, N.J., holds the license to technology that makes solar panels cheaper, more efficient and less toxic to the environment. He said he tried to commercialize the technology domestically, but while bureaucracy and red tape stalled talks with state and federal officials, conversations with Chinese officials sped ahead.

I’m assuming that “holds the license” actually means that the technology is patented. Would it kill journalists, particularly those who write about technology, to learn just a few intellectual property terms? (Sorry, but it’s annoying.)

The main point here is that the U.S. isn’t doing enough, while the Chinese are not only fired up, but more efficient in getting these projects done.

“The Chinese have a major, aggressive movement to increase the technology in the photovoltaic area,” he said. “They picked up the phone and called us and said, ‘What do you do?’”

At the time of this story’s publication, he’s in Zhuzhou city in China’s Hunan province, on the verge of signing a deal that will commercialize the technology overseas, giving the Chinese economy a boost and Chinese workers more jobs.

Fair enough. Good illustration, and point made. But here’s where perspective makes one think off topic. After reading that last paragraph, I immediately started wondering just how much trouble this guy is getting himself into down in Hunan.

I have no idea how savvy Mr. Provini is, whether he has international/China experience, or even if he has an adequate legal counsel or business consultant helping him. I sincerely hope so, because the whole thing makes me wince. Just consider how he got involved in this deal in the first place:

Provini said, “The Chinese were just so aggressive. We didn’t contact them, they contacted us.”

Officials responsible for developing China’s clean and alternative energy program in the Hunan province learned about Natcore through a mutual contact at the University of Wales and placed a call, he said.

Then they flew Provini to China and helped him find a production partner that will provide capital and manufacturing capabilities. In the next three to six months, he said, they could move into the manufacturing phase, which could create 250-400 jobs.

“They’ve cut through the red tape to be responsive,” he said. “It’s almost embarrassing that whatever you ask for, they deliver it.”

Methinks Mr. Provini better keep one hand on his wallet, and by wallet, I mean his patents. Something tells me that a few companies will be manufacturing this stuff in China free and clear within a couple of years.

Why am I so skeptical? Here are some red flags:

They contacted him. Nothing inherently wrong with that, of course. I’ve been involved with a number of projects over the years where the Chinese partner contacted the foreign guys “out of the blue,” and the deal proceeded from there. But those only succeeded after a lot of due diligence; in a majority of cases, DD separates out the “out of the blue” type of prospective business partners. Something tells me Provini may not have gone through extensive DD (I don’t know for sure either way, of course.)

Local government involvement. I’ll admit it, I generally don’t trust local government folks. They have a tendency to, shall we say, bend the law, going against Beijing policy in the areas of taxes, land use rights, etc. In this case, we have some Hunan provincial authorities that started this whole thing. To an American, it looks as though you are being approached by officials from, say, California, with the full power and authority that entails. Doesn’t work that way here; let’s hope for Mr. Provini’s sake that, once again, he checked them out thoroughly at the beginning.

Front loaded money. Hearing that the government (I assume that the hand-picked partner paid for it) flew Mr. Provini to China for talks and provided everything he needed again makes me suspicious. Chinese companies are certainly not profligate spenders, so this flash of cash at the outset, while not unheard of, is at the very least a sign that someone is trying very hard to impress the foreign tech owner. That can be a good thing (i.e. a sign of good faith) or a red flag. Only due diligence can sort it out.

The hand-picked partner. This is old school stuff that is becoming fashionable once again. It used to be the norm – you deal with the government, they find a partner for you, a JV is set up, and off you go. As soon as foreign investors no longer had to do business this way, they stopped with the arranged marriages, preferring to JV with folks they found themselves. Not to beat a dead horse here, but if the government tells you that you only have one choice, the chances of a rigorous and thorough due diligence process is fairly low.

I think you get the point here. I agree with the ABC News report’s conclusion that the U.S. needs to get off its ass and be more responsive to startups like Natcore. It’s a good story.

On the other hand, the story of Mr. Provini and his Hunan benefactors sounds too good to be true. I have visions of this guy being flown in, given the VIP tour, being told that everything is wonderful and that the government will give them all kinds of advantages, and then asked to sign off on a JV agreement (patents as a capital contribution).

If Mr. Provini has any disputes with either his partner or the local government in the future, he may find the dispute resolution process to be slightly less forgiving that this initial negotiation and startup phase.

I wish him luck.