my product.

have2flushtwice

Ive posted before about a product i have developed. Its almmst ready for sale, which is exciting. I want to ask 20 euro incl p&p. There is 10 profit in each one. iv been told to ask 30.
I saw an alternative for 58 off the shelf. I can see flaws that mine hasnt. Which is good!
So. my product is simple, easy to manufacture. Not a diy job, it needs industrial help to produce
Is it worth getting a patent? How do i make that decision?

Peterdalkey

If the idea is already out there, it is unlikely to be patentable. However you need the advice of a patent agent, most offer a first consultation free see these http://www.patentsoffice.ie/en/patents_agents.aspx

Gloomtastic!

I think the OP is mainly looking for pricing advice......

Competitor is €58.00, you sell 50% less at €30.00. Don't be ashamed to take a good profit if the market will bear it. As you grow your costs will increase, you'll need to be able to cover them.

Good luck to you OP!

Peterdalkey

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

I think the OP is mainly looking for pricing advice......

Competitor is €58.00, you sell 50% less at €30.00. Don't be ashamed to take a good profit if the market will bear it. As you grow your costs will increase, you'll need to be able to cover them.

Good luck to you OP!

not how I read it!!

jimmii

have2flushtwice wrote: »

Ive posted before about a product i have developed. Its almmst ready for sale, which is exciting. I want to ask 20 euro incl p&p. There is 10 profit in each one. iv been told to ask 30.
I saw an alternative for 58 off the shelf. I can see flaws that mine hasnt. Which is good!
So. my product is simple, easy to manufacture. Not a diy job, it needs industrial help to produce
Is it worth getting a patent? How do i make that decision?

By the sounds of it what you are doing isn't likely to be different enough to be able to patent it. Just how similar is the other product? The other product probably costs about the same as yours to product but is getting to the retailer via a 3rd part which adds significantly to the cost. I would sell it atleast €29.95 and if there really is only one rival and its €58 then would probably go €34.95 as that gives you enough room to be able to wholesale it in the future as well.

With the patent thing unless you are going to tell us what it is I don't think you are going to get a proper answer as its impossible to know what to do without knowing how unique and original what you are offering is. Patenting is an expensive process and you would probably want to go to a lawyer who knows more about it before deciding to proceed.

Gloomtastic!

Peterdalkey wrote: »

not how I read it!!

Ah yes, the last line! Sorry.

Still think the OP should sell for €30!

DubTony

If the competition is selling well at that price, my retail price would be closer to €50. €30 is too cheap.

I'll put it this way. It's your duty to your business/company and yourself to get as much for your product as the market will bear.

Coming in at half the price of a competitor doesn't leave enough scope for discounting later on. If you need to go to a distributor at some point in time, he'll want a chunk, and ditto for retailers. At that point you'll see your product increasing in price in the marketplace. If it's a consumable that's purchased again and again, you'll lose customers hand over fist. If it's a one off purchase, potential customers who've been "watching" your product won't appreciate the jump in price.

Take as much as the market will bear, and discount later if need be. If you get into a price war with your competitor, you need to start from a high point so there's still some profit left when prices are forced down.

This strategy also offers huge scope to offer decent discounts and special offers e.g. 3 for the price of 2 etc.

Buttercake

whats the product?

Voltex

DubTony wrote: »

If the competition is selling well at that price, my retail price would be closer to €50. €30 is too cheap.

I'll put it this way. It's your duty to your business/company and yourself to get as much for your product as the market will bear.

Coming in at half the price of a competitor doesn't leave enough scope for discounting later on. If you need to go to a distributor at some point in time, he'll want a chunk, and ditto for retailers. At that point you'll see your product increasing in price in the marketplace. If it's a consumable that's purchased again and again, you'll lose customers hand over fist. If it's a one off purchase, potential customers who've been "watching" your product won't appreciate the jump in price.

Take as much as the market will bear, and discount later if need be. If you get into a price war with your competitor, you need to start from a high point so there's still some profit left when prices are forced down.

This strategy also offers huge scope to offer decent discounts and special offers e.g. 3 for the price of 2 etc.

Id agree...but really depends on the OPs current situation. Going cheap will capture market share...but you really have to be a slick operator. Once business builds, overheads become a more significant part of the TC as mentioned. But if OP's product is better, objectively, then price skimming is the way to go....but as always it depends on what the product is!

have2flushtwice

A lot of good advice there, thanks
My queston revolves around the value the patent wil bring. If it applies

Lets assume its patentable. And joe decides to copy it. So i take a case against joe.

I have first hand of the crap legal system in ireland, and have a case to bring to the high court. its in the 20k region at the moment, and wil reach the 100k mark when it reaches that stage.
The case is ongoing a number of years, and i have little intrest in that route again.

So to jump back a step, if joe hasnt any sizeable assets, whats the point of pursuing the dexpensive legal route if d patent is in place?

The idea? A lock for bikes, going to manuf the first batch tomorrow! Bought the pakaging today! Its going to happen. I will soon be an entrepreneur!

pedroeibar1

have2flushtwice wrote: »

A lot of good advice there, thanks
My queston revolves around the value the patent wil bring. If it applies

Lets assume its patentable. And joe decides to copy it. So i take a case against joe.

I have first hand of the crap legal system in ireland, and have a case to bring to the high court. its in the 20k region at the moment, and wil reach the 100k mark when it reaches that stage.
The case is ongoing a number of years, and i have little intrest in that route again.

So to jump back a step, if joe hasnt any sizeable assets, whats the point of pursuing the dexpensive legal route if d patent is in place?

The idea? A lock for bikes, going to manuf the first batch tomorrow! Bought the pakaging today! Its going to happen. I will soon be an entrepreneur!

That post really calls into question what you are saying, it is most vague.......

If, as you claim, you already have ‘first hand of the crap legal system in ireland', and a case ‘ongoing a number of years’, why don’t you know more about the legal system? (Not crap, BTW, just slow ) Surely you discussed a few key points with your lawyers before you issued proceedings? How come you are not aware of what happens when a patent is breached? Also, if, as you claim, your case is at 20k, that amount is far below the threshold for the High Court. What are you doing in the High Court, when the Circuit court is where you should be, is faster and cheaper?

have2flushtwice

Thats my costs at the moment, i never mentioned the value of the asset of the case i referenced. I am question the value of the patent should someone copy my product.
Be careful on that high horse.

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

That post really calls into question what you are saying, it is most vague.......

If, as you claim, you already have ‘first hand of the crap legal system in ireland', and a case ‘ongoing a number of years’, why don’t you know more about the legal system? (Not crap, BTW, just slow ) Surely you discussed a few key points with your lawyers before you issued proceedings? How come you are not aware of what happens when a patent is breached? Also, if, as you claim, your case is at 20k, that amount is far below the threshold for the High Court. What are you doing in the High Court, when the Circuit court is where you should be, is faster and cheaper?

pedroeibar1

have2flushtwice wrote: »

Thats my costs at the moment, i never mentioned the value of the asset of the case i referenced. I am question the value of the patent should someone copy my product.
Be careful on that high horse.

No high horse, just trying to understand what you are writing about, which remains unclear, contradictory and at best ambiguous. The value of a patent is exactly what you expect to gain from it financially over its lifetime. If that amount is less than the costs of defending it legally, it is not worth much, as the legal outcome is a gamble. You’d have to sell a lot of bicycle locks to recover the 100k you are talking about and the 20k you have spent. Good luck.

Peterdalkey

Defending a patent infringement can be hugely expensive, the stakes rise even further if the infringement is based outside this jurisdiction. The costs of establishing patent protection in say USA and EU are also a hefty sum.
The above probably explains why so many such novel products end up getting sold to very large companies who have the resources to protect the IP rather than being them being fully exploited by an individual inventor. They also bring much to the overall success of the product in terms of manufacturing efficiencies, finance, marketing and distribution etc.

have2flushtwice

have2flushtwice wrote: »

Ive posted before about a product i have developed. Its almmst ready for sale, which is exciting. I want to ask 20 euro incl p&p. There is 10 profit in each one. iv been told to ask 30.
I saw an alternative for 58 off the shelf. I can see flaws that mine hasnt. Which is good!
So. my product is simple, easy to manufacture. Not a diy job, it needs industrial help to produce
Is it worth getting a patent? How do i make that decision?

Have you made any units yet? Do you know your manufacturing cost? Sounds like you haven't factored in a variety of things to your pricing and this is why you want to ask 20 euro. Do you know how much a retailer wants margin wise? and a distributor? Factored in VAT, import duties?
Which type of patent would apply to your product? Design or Utility?

So many questions, and without knowing anything about your product its basically impossible for you to get any serious advice here. Getting a patent is not a general question, its a specific question which applies to the specific product your making.

have2flushtwice

El riflle,

Yes. 25 being made in next hour. I have made 5 already, brought them for reviews with users, and engineering fabricators.
I know manufaturing cost, packaging has been purchased, market is iffy. Small number to start off with, can make any amount in a short period.
I have raw material in easy reach. Vat, nothing done, if its worth making a return, il deal with that. Havent sold anyting yet. If it goes well, il get an acc to advise. Thanks for the constructive questions.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Have you made any units yet? Do you know your manufacturing cost? Sounds like you haven't factored in a variety of things to your pricing and this is why you want to ask 20 euro. Do you know how much a retailer wants margin wise? and a distributor? Factored in VAT, import duties?
Which type of patent would apply to your product? Design or Utility?

So many questions, and without knowing anything about your product its basically impossible for you to get any serious advice here. Getting a patent is not a general question, its a specific question which applies to the specific product your making.

As for other questions re legal, the case referenced is nothing to do with patents. I was making reference to my experience with legal eagles.

this is my first attempt at a venture of make and sell. Who knows if it wil be a failure or success? The man who never made a mistake made nothing. If it fails, i tried.

Hootanany

Stack them high sell them cheap I applaud you you for not going the normal rip off route that others here want you to take.

If you our confident enough at your price margin go for it blow the other product out off the water

All the best in your venture.

have2flushtwice

have2flushtwice wrote: »

El riflle,

Yes. 25 being made in next hour. I have made 5 already, brought them for reviews with users, and engineering fabricators.
I know manufaturing cost, packaging has been purchased, market is iffy. Small number to start off with, can make any amount in a short period.
I have raw material in easy reach. Vat, nothing done, if its worth making a return, il deal with that. Havent sold anyting yet. If it goes well, il get an acc to advise. Thanks for the constructive questions.


As for other questions re legal, the case referenced is nothing to do with patents. I was making reference to my experience with legal eagles.

this is my first attempt at a venture of make and sell. Who knows if it wil be a failure or success? The man who never made a mistake made nothing. If it fails, i tried.

Sounds like the best option is see how the sales go then before doing anything. It would only be really worth going for a patent if your looking at big orders with major retailers, or if you could license your idea to one of those existing players. A lot of people put the cart before the horse and get patents before testing the market and realising the product won't actually sell. Obviously there is some risk to this strategy but its the best option if you dont have a lot of funds to be spending on patents that might never be worth anything.

Cianos

Selling a bike lock is selling security - you're selling something that will stand between your customer's prize possession and a thief. Do they value this at €20?

Even if it was the most effective bike lock in the world, if it was priced too low people would perceive it to be ineffective.

People are happy to pay for quality, and happy to pay for peace of mind. If you can offer them both, and if your product has unique qualities, then your price can be significantly higher.

pedroeibar1

Cianos wrote: »

Selling a bike lock is selling security - you're selling something that will stand between your customer's prize possession and a thief. Do they value this at €20?

Even if it was the most effective bike lock in the world, if it was priced too low people would perceive it to be ineffective.

People are happy to pay for quality, and happy to pay for peace of mind. If you can offer them both, and if your product has unique qualities, then your price can be significantly higher.

You are quite right. Price positioning is very important in the security business. However, a debate on pricing does not matter a dam# in this case because there is a total absence of credible (or even basic) information .......

Any cyclist can give the basic rule of thumb - a bike lock should cost about 10% of the bike it is being used on. There also is 'Soldsecure' - a certification process for bike locks and and an approved lock is required by many insurers before they will pay a claim. Some randomer manufacturing 'yokes' in a shed no matter how keen s/he is or how good the product is........just will not make the cut.

have2flushtwice

YOKES!

Love it!

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

You are quite right. Price positioning is very important in the security business. However, a debate on pricing does not matter a dam# in this case because there is a total absence of credible (or even basic) information .......

Any cyclist can give the basic rule of thumb - a bike lock should cost about 10% of the bike it is being used on. There also is 'Soldsecure' - a certification process for bike locks and and an approved lock is required by many insurers before they will pay a claim. Some randomer manufacturing 'yokes' in a shed no matter how keen s/he is or how good the product is........just will not make the cut.

Peterdalkey

Are your "yokes" any good? if so, can you stand up your claims with independent evidence/certification?
This thread started out looking for advice as to whether it is worth getting a patent and has moved through setting a price point to product effectiveness. A bit all over the shop really!!

have2flushtwice

Peterdalkey wrote: »

Are your "yokes" any good? if so, can you stand up your claims with independent evidence/certification?
This thread started out looking for advice as to whether it is worth getting a patent and has moved through setting a price point to product effectiveness. A bit all over the shop really!!

Peter,
perhaps it is a bit all over the shop. however I am trying to answer questions which have been asked, so am I being would up by arm chair experts, or am I receiving valid and realistic questions, which are off topic?

for example, pedroeibar1 questioning my knowledge on the Irish legal system, after I referenced it to demonstrate that I would not be interested in a legal case.??

As opposed to PeterDalkey offering constructive comments, while off topic, is opening up realistic challenges which I was unaware of, and thankful of also.

Voltex

General rules of thumb on patents from an industrial economics text book:

• The product must be new in the sense that it has not been previously used, published or demonstrated in the public domain. There are certain ideas that can not be patented such as scientific discovery, mathematical formulae, mental processes and artistic creations.
• It should be non-obvious in so far as it would not have occurred to reasonably well informed people in the field. in other words, the product requires an inventive step to have been taken.
• It should be capable of industrial application, so that it can, in theory, be usable in some form as a piece of equipment or as a process.

Peterdalkey

Voltex wrote: »

General rules of thumb on patents from an industrial economics text book:

• The product must be new in the sense that it has not been previously used, published or demonstrated in the public domain. There are certain ideas that can not be patented such as scientific discovery, mathematical formulae, mental processes and artistic creations.
• It should be non-obvious in so far as it would not have occurred to reasonably well informed people in the field. in other words, the product requires an inventive step to have been taken.
• It should be capable of industrial application, so that it can, in theory, be usable in some form as a piece of equipment or as a process.

All quite valid of course, but rather leaves out the most important criterium, is there a market for it? and is that market prepared to pay for the embodied design benefit? . Just because it is new, clever, unique or innovative does not bestow a real and exploitable value proposition.

Voltex

Peterdalkey wrote: »

All quite valid of course, but rather leaves out the most important criterium, is there a market for it? and is that market prepared to pay for the embodied design benefit? . Just because it is new, clever, unique or innovative does not bestow a real and exploitable value proposition.

As with a lot of economic theory, and of course text books, authors assume unbounded rationality...which of course doesn't take into account the impact of lots of other variables.
The existence of patents allows monopoly rights on the sale of a product, which in theory generates above average profits. What the OP needs to figure out is if the total costs associated with innovation, R&D, patent application, commercialisation, patent costs, renewal fees and policing of the patent will be covered by the supernormal profits theoretically generated by the patented product.

But I totally agree...not worth a jot if theres no market for the product!!

ambro25

Voltex wrote: »

General rules of thumb on patents from an industrial economics text book:

• The product must be new in the sense that it has not been previously used, published or demonstrated in the public domain. There are certain ideas that can not be patented such as scientific discovery, mathematical formulae, mental processes and artistic creations.
• It should be non-obvious in so far as it would not have occurred to reasonably well informed people in the field. in other words, the product requires an inventive step to have been taken.
• It should be capable of industrial application, so that it can, in theory, be usable in some form as a piece of equipment or as a process.

These are the 3 fundamental legal requirements to be granted a patent for a product claimed invention.

OP, some simple IP pointers:

patents protect technical concepts/developments/solutions ("how it works", "how it's made")

designs protect physical embodiments of such technical concepts (i.e. the features of shape, configuration, ornamentation <etc.> of a product which includes the patented solution) ("how it looks")

trademarks protect how the unique origin of products/services is represented ("what it's called int he marketplace")

copyright and trade secrets protect the rest, but in *real world* economical terms, they're worth precisely SFA 99+% of the time.

All such IP rights are inherently teritorial. You can get a full-term (or short-term) Irish patent, because there is an Irish Patents Act (1992) which says that when you apply for a patent for an invention which is new/inventive/capable of industrial application, subject to a few procedural hoops and jumps, you get one. That Irish patent applies to the Republic of Ireland - period. Nowhere else. Same principle for registered designs and trademarks, same principle to any jurisdiction you care to name.

Tryng to answer the "do I need to take a patent?" question purely on the basis of a potential litigation-based cost-benefit anaylis is wrong. In *real world* economics, patents are never used in Court: if and when they should be, either someone is doing business with their gonads rather than their head and/or someone f*cked up rather gravely on either side of the negotiation table. Having a patent gets you (or the other side) to the table (if/when needed). Not having one leaves you wide open for me-too infringers from the get-go.

Disclaimer: I am a patent attorney (and I am on that Register linked earlier int he thread). The above is posted by way of personal commentary only, and not in a professional capacity, and is not to be taken or constued as legal advice howsoever