Category Archives: Invention

Innovation center would connect investors, entrepreneurs

Posted on http://www.ctpost.com

Magdalene Perez, Staff Writer
Published: 09:33 p.m., Monday, January 10, 2011

STAMFORD — A group of city officials and Fairfield County movers and shakers used a visit from freshly minted U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal Monday as an opportunity to pitch a new business “hub” they envision based in Old Town Hall.

Blumenthal toured the newly renovated space and listened as Kevin Segalla, president of Connecticut Film Center, and Patricia Meagher, of Dakota Ventures, described their idea for the building’s perfect tenant: The Stamford Innovation Center for Entrepreneurship. The innovation center, still in the planning stages and never publicized to date, would serve as a space where startup company tenants could connect with angel investors while thriving off a community environment, they said.

Meagher, a venture partner with Dakota Ventures, would serve as the center’s president, with Segalla as chairman and Bill Gordon, an investor and president of the biotech company Tetragenetics, as vice chairman.

The idea came to fruition in conjunction with the Stamford Urban Redevelopment Commission and the city’s economic development department, whose representatives also attended the meeting.

Meagher said Stamford is an ideal place for such a center, which would attempt to act as an “incubator” for new businesses, mimicking the foment of business startup hot spots such as Silicon Valley and New York. As an example, Meagher cited Astia, a business community committed to accelerating the funding and growth of women-led companies. Of those companies that work with Astia, 60 percent get startup funding within a year, Meagher said.

“We have Greenwich, we have New Haven. Stamford is what’s missing,” Meagher said. “It’s all about surrounding these entrepreneurs with a community and an ecosystem.”

The meeting was an appropriate kick-off for Blumenthal as he launched a two-week listening tour of the state with the stated purpose to solicit ideas from small business owners, community leaders and other residents about creating jobs and rebuilding the economy. Blumenthal announced the tour less than a week after taking the oath of office Wednesday. After Monday’s visit to Stamford, he plans to make stops in Bridgeport, Hartford, New Haven and Danbury among other locations.

Blumenthal said he was enthusiastic about the Stamford Innovation Center idea.

The meeting took place in an airy front room in the former public facility, under a mural of the colonial-era Sen. Abraham Davenport speaking under candlelight during the “dark day in Connecticut” Gov. Dannel P. Malloy referred to in his inauguration speech last week.

“I’ve known this building for a long time, for several decades, at least from the time that it was a government and public hub,” Blumenthal said. “This new use is very exciting as a place for entrepreneurs to take root and grow and take flight eventually. This kind of incubator and hub is very of the moment. It’s not only necessary because it’s very essential as a place where jobs can be created, but also as a place for entrepreneurs to grow.”

The center’s planners said the missing element is a last “bit” of funding to push Old Town Hall’s long-term renovation project to completion. After millions of dollars of investment from the city and other sources, the building has been restored, but about “ten percent” of the work to make the innovation center a reality remains: elements such as data lines, air conditioning and electrical work, Meagher said.

“The reality is we live in an area with more investment dollars perhaps than any other place in the world, and yet they are not investing here in Connecticut,” Segalla said. “It’s only natural that we create the vehicle for investment here in Connecticut.”

Staff Writer Magdalene Perez can be reached at magdalene.perez@scni.com or 203-964-2240.

Read more: http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Innovation-center-would-connect-investors-949166.php#ixzz1CHp9cuuH

Staff Writer at The Advocate
Staff Writer at The Hartford Courant
Reporter at amNewYork
Assistant Editor at Artinfo.comMove to Trash
Education
Columbia University – Graduate School of Journalism
New York University
Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under business, Economy, FreshThinking, Intellectual Property, intellectual property rights, Invention, Journalism, Journalist

Innovators and Genius in Ohio: Andrew R. Thomas PhD

Interview with New York Times Best Selling Author Andrew R. Thomas PhD
by Andrew R. Spriegel
January 24, 2010

Where did you receive your PhD?

University of Bucharest, Academy of Economic Studies, in International Business. A substantial portion of the funding was provided by the U.S. State Department under a Fulbright Scholarship.

How did you become an author?

After I left the transportation business, I wrote my first book on global business strategy. I enjoyed the process – as well as having authored – so I wrote another one; and then another, and another…

How many books have you published?

Authored, co-authored, or edited 15.

What awards have you won?

The Berry-AMA Prize for the best book in marketing for 2010 (The Distribution Trap).

In 2008, my book Direct Marketing in Action was a finalist for this same award.

In 2003, The Rise of Women Entrepreneurs: People, Processes, and Global Trends selected as Harvard Business School’s Working Knowledge Recommended Book on Entrepreneurship.

In 2002, Global Manifest Destiny: Growing Your Business in a Borderless Economy selected as Harvard Business School’s Working Knowledge Recommended Book on Global Marketing.

I am most proud that in 2006, I was selected as the Phi Eta Sigma Student’s Choice Award for Favorite Faculty Member at the University of Akron.

What is the American Marketing Association’s Berry Award?

The Berry-AMA Book Prize for the Best Book in Marketing recognizes books whose innovative ideas have had significant impact on marketing and related fields.  Created by distinguished author and professor Leonard L. Berry and his wife Nancy F. Berry through generous contributions to the American Marketing Association Foundation (AMAF), the prize was awarded for the first time in Fall 2002.

Please tell me about your new book “The Distribution Trap”?

The premise is simple: too many inventions today are left in the hands of others to determine their value in the marketplace. This flawed business approach has enabled Mega distributors to rise up in every sector and control those same sectors. This has lead many innovative products and services to become commodities almost overnight.

What does it mean “marketers of innovations should control the channel themselves”?

To create something requires a huge investment in time, money, thought, sweat, and tears. It flies in the face of reason that once the invention is created, control over the sales and distribution of that invention is given over to a third party, which has no stake and very little real interest in whether it succeeds or fails. It is not logical. But it is what the management “gurus”, business professors, and other thought leaders have told inventors they must do to be successful.

I understand you are quite the world traveler.

I’ve been fortunate to have traveled and conducted business in more than 120 countries on all 7 continents.

How much do you use social networking?

Not much. I do have a LinkedIn account and a Facebook account, although I check them every few days. I prefer a personal visit or a phone call.

If you had to live your life over what would you do differently?

I have never had that question asked to me before. And, I’ve never thought about it, until now. I am totally cool with my life and everything that’s happened to me.

The success rate for inventions is estimated to be less than one half of one percent; I attribute that a high percentage of failures can be attributed to poor marketing.  Would you agree?

I would. From my experience, the way an invention is marketed and sold is so often much more important than the quality of the invention itself.

 

Andrew R. Thomas PhD

Title: Assistant Professor of Marketing and International Business
Department: Department of Marketing
Office: CBA 321
Phone: (330)972-7119
Fax: 330-972-5798
Email: art@uakron.edu
Website: http://www.AirRage.org

The Berry-AMA Book Prize recognizes books whose innovative ideas have had significant impact on marketing and related fields.

Leave a comment

Filed under Blogging, Book, Brand, Branding, business, Innovators and Genius in Ohio, Invention, Market, Marketing, Marketing Strategy, money, Sales and Marketing

Why would you as a firefighter want to use a patent attorney that is a professional fire fighter and an Inventor?

Why would you as a firefighter want to use a patent attorney that is a professional fire fighter and an Inventor?
by Andrew Spriegel
January 12, 2011

Many of the advances made in firefighting and EMS equipment and training have been made by firefighters and paramedics.  So if you are one of the numerous firefighter/EMS inventors, who do you go to write a patent to protect your idea?  Paul Filon, full-time lieutenant and paramedic in the Strongsville Fire Department and a licensed and registered Patent Attorney with the United States Patent and Trademark Office.  Paul works at Spriegel & Associates, LLC (Patent & Trademark Attorneys) in Hudson, Ohio, http://www.Smart2Patent.com.

In addition to working as an EMT/paramedic for 22 years and a firefighter for 16 years, Mr. Filon is also chemistry specialist and Haz-Mat technician for the regional Haz-Mat and bomb teams.  He is experienced in several technical rescue disciplines and teaches a variety of firefighter and EMS classes.

Spriegel & Associates, LLC is gaining a reputation as working with firefighters, Captain Phil McLean is one of their clients and one of those inventor/firefighter types that owns Sensible Products Inc. (www.senpro.net), in Richfield, Ohio.  Phil and his business partner, retired Fire Chief, Russ English are quality manufacturers of unique holders and bracketry for fittings, adapters, brass goods and tools mounted on fire trucks.  Here is what Phil has to say about working with Paul:

I have worked with Paul Filon on several occasions related to product development. With his Fire Service background and knowledge of Emergency Services it made the development and patent process easy for me and my company as we were developing a new product in the business. He is an energetic worker and has a passion for all the work and all of his professions.  His multi-professional experience was and continues to be an asset to our project.

Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Andrew R. Spriegel, Andrew Spriegel, Blogging, Branding, Bucks, business, Easy, Economy, Financially Independent, Fire Fighters, Fire Fighting Equipmrnt, Fires, Free, Freedom, independent, Innovation, Intellectual Property, intellectual property rights, Invention, Licensing, Market, Marketing, Marketing Strategy, Millionaire, Millions, money, New, Patent, Patents, Results, Spriegel, Starting a business

America’s revival begins in its cities

Edward L. Glaeser

America’s revival begins in its cities

By Edward L. Glaeser December 30, 2010
Reprinted with permission

DURING ECONOMIC downturns, we begin to fear that we are entering a permanent period of decline. But we can avoid that depressing prospect if we recognize that a revival will not come from federal spending or another building boom. Reinvention requires a new wave of innovation and entrepreneurship, which can emerge from our dense metropolitan areas and their skilled residents. America must stop treating its cities as ugly stepchildren, and should instead cherish them as the engines that power our economy.

America’s 12 largest metropolitan areas collectively produced 37 percent of the country’s output in 2008, the last year with available data. Per capita productivity was particularly high in large, skilled areas such as Boston, where output per person was 39 percent higher than the nation’s metropolitan average. New York and San Francisco enjoy similar per capita productivity advantages. Boston also seems to be moving past the current recession, with an unemployment rate well below the national average of 9.8 percent.

Since 1948, the national unemployment rate has exceeded 9 percent only one other time: the grave 1982 recession. During the 1980s, we looked at Japan and saw an economy that seemed to be surpassing our own. Today, we watch with unease as China surges.

Yet American decline is not inevitable. During the 25 years after 1982, our real gross domestic product increased by 3.3 percent per year, which was also the rate of growth during the quarter century before 1982. Our post-1982 growth involved massive economic restructuring. Manufacturing employment fell by 39 percent from its peak of 19.4 million jobs in 1979. The 1979-2009 manufacturing decline was more than offset by the 126 percent increase in employment in “professional and business services” and the 184 percent increase in education and health jobs.

Continue reading

2 Comments

Filed under business, Cities, Economy, Innovation, Innovators and Genius in the Cities, Intellectual Property, Invention, Inventions

Innovators and Genius in Ohio

Innovators and Genius in Ohio
Tom Moran
By Andrew R. Spriegel
December 30, 2010

There are many stories about the lack of innovation and the down economy in the Ohio and Cleveland Area.  Enter Tom Moran of Midwest Plastic Fabricators (MPF) in Aurora, Ohio.  Innovator and Inventor of numerous patented manufacturing processes and products, Tom is a 45 year veteran and leader in the industry.

One of the innovative products is a line of NEMA PVC Junction Boxes.  A combination of innovative materials and patented cutting edge technology combines for easy installation and reduced life cycle cost.

PVC offers less resistance than conventional metal in cutting holes for conduit entrance.  In addition, non-conductive PVC eliminates potential shock hazard.  In addition, its non-corrosive properties offer longer life and environmental integrity.

Photo Above: Light weight PC Enclosures offer Heavy Duty Performance for food process applications

Photo Above: Innovative Non Metallic PVC Enclosures feature Three-Point Latching

Photo Above: Patented PVC Elbow Crate Saves warehouse Space and is a dispenser pack.

Consider the Fulton Road Bridge,

a Cleveland engineering landmarks is a $44 million architectural attraction that spans the Cleveland Metropark Zoo


and Big Creek Valley.

Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Andrew R. Spriegel, Blogging, Brand, Branding, Bucks, business, Economy, Genius in Ohio, Intellectual Property, intellectual property rights, Invention, Market, Marketing, Marketing Strategy, Re-Invent Yourself, Reinventing Yourelf, self employed, Starting a business, Success, Wealth, You

Interview with Inventor and Patent Attorney Andrew Spriegel about the Portion PadL

Interview with Inventor and Patent Attorney Andrew Spriegel about the Portion PadL

By Tara1 | Published: December 1, 2010

portion padl pizza cutter

My thanks to Inventor and Patent Attorney Andrew Spriegel for agreeing to an interview with me about his business partner Greg Getzinger’s invention the Portion PadL and how together they brought the product to market. The Portion PadL was invented to enable pizza businesses to quickly and easily slice pizzas into equal pieces. The Portion PadL is available for both commercial and home use.

Tara: Please could you tell me a little bit about yourself, where you are based and your career background?

Andrew Spriegen Inventor and Patent Attorney

Andrew: I worked most of my career as a Manager or a Lead Senior Electro-Mechanical Engineer for Fortune 100 companies, GE, IBM, Lockheed Martin, Invacare and others.  My experience involves a wide range of products, satellites, locomotives, off-highway vehicles, medical durable goods, surgical devices and consumer goods.  I have many US and international patents and had made a lot of money for other companies.  At 48 years old I decided to go to law school to become a patent attorney and commercialize my own products and other’s products.  I now own a patent law firm (www.Smart2Patent.com) and own several businesses commercializing products.

Tara: Is the Portion PadL the first invention you have bought to market?

Andrew: No, I had brought numerous products to market prior to the Portion PadL.

Tara: I understand that the original idea for the Portion PadL was invented by Greg Getzinger with whom you are now in business. Please could you tell me a little bit about Greg, how he came up with his invention and how the two of you connected and set up your business?

Greg Getzinger

Andrew: Prior to owning a pizza business (Pizza BOGO, www.pizzabogo.com) ), Greg was a Vice President for a large Insurance Company.  He developed the equal slice pizza cutting board (Portion PadL, www.PortionPadL.com) for his business to develop school and institutional accounts.  He heard complaints about unequal size slices of pizzas and worked on developing a solution for the problem.  Greg and I met at a networking event that his group was having at the building where my law firm is located.  It was a chili cook-off and Greg brought in a “chili pizza” on one of his prototype boards.  I saw the board and I asked him if it was patented and said that if it wasn’t it would be a great product to patent and commercialize.  We formed NuVo Grand, LLC as equal members.

Tara: Did you start with working drawings of the product or did you make a prototype?

Andrew: Greg built numerous prototypes (20+) of the equal slice pizza cutting board.  He was trying to perfect the cutting board for his business.  He did not have drawings, rather his father-in-law was making various designs based on Greg’s dimensions.  Greg tried numerous materials, sizes, grooves…

Tara: How did you go about protecting the invention?

Andrew: I have written two utility patents on the cutting board and I am working on a third utility patent.  We are building up a lot of intellectual property around the product.

Click here to see Video

Tara; Were there any mistakes, issues or problems you both experienced in the process of commercialization of the idea?

Andrew: Actually it has gone very smoothly.  Greg and I seem to compliment each other’s skill sets.  Greg is great at sales and marketing and I knew how to have the product manufactured, the manufacturers, the processes and protecting intellectual property.  I spent my career commercializing complex products very quickly and therefore I help inventors avoid the mistakes made by the typical inventors. Greg did encounter a big snow storm delivering materials to the manufacturer…a two hour trip turning into a twelve hour ordeal.

Tara: Did you consider licensing the invention or did you always plan to manufacture it yourself?

Andrew: The only products that I pursue are patentable, simple, revolutionary and either we can manufacture or have someone manufacture, preferably one at a time.  I prefer to take an order and then manufacture the product, that way you get to positive cash flow quickly.  Inventors often run out of money because they buy large quantities of product to get a good price on the product and they wind up with a garage full of product they can’t sell.

In my experience, licensing a product is a difficult thing to do.  Either you don’t get a deal, someone attempts to steal or design around the product or you get offered pennies on the dollar.

If you can manufacture and sell the product you start to “take away market share” and companies sit up and notice.  At that point if you sell or license the product you get a much better deal.

Tara: How will you go about marketing and publicizing your product? Do you intend to sell the product direct to businesses and public yourself or are you planning to wholesale it?

Andrew: Greg started marketing the product to large companies right away.  He has a real talent for sales.  Greg knows that it takes a lot of “no responses” to get a single yes.  Now our customers are Domino’s, Schwan’s, Speedway, Piccadilly Circus Pizza…and many Mom and Pop pizza shops.

I built the website www.PortionPadL.com and work with bloggers and social networking to build the brand.  If you Google “Portion PadL” we are the main listing for about the first six pages.

Tara: How long has it taken from Greg’s initial idea to where you both are now with the business?

Andrew: We have been working together less than a year.

Tara: What advice would you give to an aspiring inventor who thinks they have a good idea?

Andrew: We all love our own ideas, you have to determine if there is a market for the product.

Here are some of my key decision factors:

  • 1. Is the product Protectable? (Patent, Trademark, Copyright…)
    • a. If you have a great product and it is not protected people will copy it fairly quickly.
    • b. If you can’t protect the product I wouldn’t bother commercializing it
      • i. However, there are products that sell very well such as the Snuggies, the Amish Fireplace…but those products have been successful because of large ad campaigns
    • c.    The Portion PadL is protected by numerous Utility Patents Pending so it’s met that key decision factor
  • 2.    Is the product Revolutionary?
    • a. If it meets “a need” it is likely a commodity
      • i. People can listen to music on a large number of MP3 players
    • b.    If it meets “a want” it is likely Revolutionary
      • i. The iPod is the product that people want to listen to music on and therefore they have the largest market share.
    • c. The Portion PadL has numerous advantages over the existing products that assist people in cutting and therefore it is a “want” product.
  • 3. Can be manufactured “one at a time” until you have volume orders?
    • a. In the initial stages of commercializing the product we bought a full sheet of Richlite and when a customer ordered one we had the manufacturer make one and ship it.  That way we got to positive cash flow quickly.

Tara: What advice would you give to an inventor who has already developed and manufactured their product and are now looking at ways to publicize and market it?

Andrew: If they don’t have the expertise get help.  Many inventors have a great idea or product but they get in their own way because they have no idea how to sell it.  The product fails not because of the product but because the inventor cannot let go of controlling everything.

Tara: You have started creating a series of books for inventors chronicling the journey of inventors from invention idea to commercialization, perhaps you could tell me a little more about what you hope to achieve with the books?

Andrew: The series is called the Spilled Coffee Chronicles of Invention. I have several writers documenting inventors progress in commercializing products.  I have a high success rate in commercializing products and the books will help inventors avoid the many inventors pitfalls.  The books describe the successes and the failures along the way.  The volumes are just starting to be published but the first volume for the Portion PadL is on Kindle and Amazon at: http://tinyurl.com/2wspqrh and http://tinyurl.com/36ypa6a, respectively.  The books are also written to dispel many of the myths around inventing.  It is not a get rich quick thing, it takes hard work and persistence.  The books generate income for the inventors, the writers, myself and for reinvesting in publishing the series.

3 Comments

Filed under Andrew R. Spriegel, Andrew Spriegel, Brand, Branding, Bucks, business, Greg Getzinger, Intellectual Property, intellectual property rights, Invention, Inventions, Made in the USA, Market, Marketing, Marketing Strategy, Portion PadL, Property Rights, Re-Invent Yourself, Reinventing Yourelf, Sales and Marketing, self employed, Spilled Coffee Chronicles of Invention, Spriegel, Starting a business, Success

Invention Success Rates | Odds of Inventor Success

Invention Success Rates | Odds of Inventor Success
  
What percent of inventor ideas are successful? What percent of patents make money? What percent of inventions are commercialized?
“I’m a risk taker. I get up in the morning knowing that I’m either going to have a spectacular win or loss that is going to be exciting. I prefer theformer but either is more appealing than the warm death of mediocrity.  ”Dean Kamen, Inventor of the Segway human transporter 50% – 1 out of 2.  Earthquake odds. Chances of a major earthquake striking the San Francisco Bay area within the next 30 years [1989 + 30 years = 2019].  “Last week’s shattering earthquake may one day be remembered as a dress rehearsal for the Big One — a cosmic temblor that, according to seismologists, has a 50 percent chance of striking the Bay Area within the next 30 years.”  (Newsweek, October 30, 1989, p. 28) He who doesn’t take risks, doesn’t drink champagne.”
An old Russian proverb

“I could be living in the French Riviera.  But I like hanging out with my friends.”
T. Dosho Shifferaw, Inventor of the Bowflex

“In truth, odds are stacked astronomically against inventors, and no marketing outfit can change them.”
Richard Maulsby
Director of the Office of Public Affairs,
U.S. Patent & Trademark Office


90% of an invention’s success is marketing it and getting it out.  “[T]he idea is about 10 percent of this exercise; 90 percent of it is the marketing of it, getting it together, getting it out.” (Richard C. Levy, inventor of Furby quoted in Liane Hansen, All Things Considered (NPR), “Profile: Independent toy inventor Richard C. Levy,” June 18, 2002)


99.9% fail – 1 out of 5000 inventions have successful product launches.  “[E]xperts estimate that 1 out of 5,000 inventions have gone on to successful product launches.”  Invention success rate.  Percent of inventions that fail. (Williams-Harold, Bevolyn, “You’ve got it made! (developing invention ideas),” Black Enterprise, June 1, 1999)

99.9% fail.  Only 2 products are launched out of every 3,000 ideas.  “Out of 3,000 ideas, for instance, only about two products are ever actually launched — and only one of those succeeds, says Greg Stevens, president of WinOvations, a new product research and consulting firm in Midland, Mich.” What percent of inventions become commercially successful? (Jeannie Mandelker, Reporter Associate: Anne Ashby Gilbert, Marketing, Your Company, pp. 54+, October 1, 1997)

99.8% fail.  Only 3,000 patents out of 1.5 million patents are commercially viable. “In truth, odds are stacked astronomically against inventors, and no marketing outfit can change them. ‘There are around 1.5 million patents in effect and in force in this country, and of those, maybe 3,000 are commercially viable,’ [Richard Maulsby, director of the Office of Public Affairs for the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office], says. ‘It’s a very small percentage of patents that actually turn into products that make money for people. On top of all that, to get ripped off for tens of thousands of dollars adds insult to injury.”  What percent of patents make money?  How many patents become products?  Percent of patents commercialized.  Percent of patents that get approved.  (Richard Maulsby, director of public affairs for the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, quoted in Karen E. Klein, Smart Answers, “Avoiding the Inventor’s Lament,” Business Week, November 10, 2005)  


Why is there such a high inventor failure rateWhy do most inventors fail to get their product to market?

 


99% fail. 1 out of 100 ideas make it.  The reality is that “for every successful business, you have probably 100 ideas or more.  The one out of a 100 that makes it to market, their success rate isn’t that great either.”  What is the probability of becoming a successful inventor?  (Robert D. MacDonald, Entrepreneur Consultant, Lake Oswego, Oregon, “Oregon Ranks No. 8 In Nation In Inventors,” The Columbian, January 9, 1998)

98% fail.  Only 2% earn significant dollars.  What percentage of patents succeed?  “According to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, approximately 2 percent of patents earn significant dollars for their inventors.”  Patent success rates.  Patent odds of success. What percentage of inventors make it? (Susan Glairon, “Boulder, Colo., Inventors Find Joy in Journey from Idea to Product,” Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News, April 17, 2000)

97% to 98% fail – “[O]nly 2 to 3 percent of registered patents ever make it to the market.”  Percentage of patented inventions that make it in the marketplace  Chances of invention making money.   (Stuart West, intellectual property lawyer based in Walnut Creek, California quoted in Marton Dunai, “More inventors try to market products,” Oakland Tribune, September 5, 2006)

95% to 97% fail – Only 3 to 5 out of 100 inventions succeed.  “It is universally accepted that out of every 100 inventions, only three to five will succeed commercially.”  Percentage of inventions that succeed.  Patent commercialization success rate.  (Yeang Soo Ching, “Reaping rewards from inventions,” New Straits Times, December 24, 2000) 

95% fail.  Less than 5% of patents are commercialized.  “And less than 5 percent of the patents received by small inventors culminate in a commercial product.”  Percent of patents commercialized.  Odds of success for independent inventors.  Statistics of odds of independent inventor patents being commercialized.  (Sougata Mukherjee, South Florida Business Journal, June 8, 1998)

1 out of every 20 or 25 ideas becomes successful.  “Only one of every 20 or 25 ideas ever becomes a successful product — and of every ten or 15 new products, only one becomes a hit.”  (Thomas Kuczmarski, Kuczmarski & Associates, Chicago consultant specializing in innovation,  Fortune, 12-2-91 pp. 56)

95% fail – Only 5% earn money.  “It’s been reported, without confirmation, that worldwide, only 5% [five percent] of all patented inventions ever earn any money for their inventors.” (Business Daily, Philippines, November 27, 1998)

95% fail – Only 5% of independent inventor patents are produced in the marketplace.  “Independent inventors …are responsible for 15 percent of all U.S. patents. Fewer than 5 percent of those patents are ever produced in the marketplace.”  Percentage of independent inventor inventions that make it in the marketplace.  (Tim Lemke, “Invention + market savvy = successful product”, The Washington Times, April 16, 2001)

95% of all new products fail.  “But the market can’t absorb that many new ideas, and an estimated 95% of all new products fail. In part, this reflects the way many new products come about.  Individual inventors often work outside corporate structures, have limited product-development funds and are unfamiliar with industry standards and practices.” Success rates for independent inventors. (Caryne Brown, “Making money making toys: how black inventors are bringing innovative ideas to the toy market”, Black Enterprise, November 1, 1993)

6% probability of commercial success for independent inventors.  “The probability of commercial success for inventions developed by independent inventors was determined to be exceptionally low: 6.5% ([+ or -] 0.7%).” Probability of a successful invention.  How many inventors succeed?  (Thomas Astebro, “Basic statistics on the success rate and profits for independent inventors”, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, December 22, 1998)


90% fail.  Only 10% of those who make prototypes end-up making money.  Brian Miller, PRe Plastics’ director of operations, saiabout 10 percent of inventors who come to him leave with a mold, and about 10 percent of those people make money.  ‘They have to survive the cost of the mold. Very few inventors who come through the door get the mold done, let alone find success.’”  Success rate of inventions and prototypes.  (Brian Miller of PRe Plastics quoted in Thuy-Doan Le, “Entrepreneurial spirit starts to pay off for Sacramento, Calif.-area inventor,” The Sacramento Bee, December 12, 2004)

80% fail.  1 out of 5 succeed.  “Typically, small manufacturers experience about five failures for every one success.” (By Courtney Price, “Outsourcing helps inventor bring product to market, Denver Rocky Mountain News, November 2, 1997)

76% fail.  Percent of cases lost by patentees in doctrine of equivalents cases.  “By far the most dramatic finding of our study is that patentees rarely win doctrine of equivalents cases. Overall, patentees won only 24% of the doctrine of equivalents cases decided in the last eight years. Compared to the overall patentee win rates on other issues — 54% on validity alone in cases at various stages of litigation, (51) and 58% overall in cases that make it to trial (52) — and the baseline assumption in the economics literature that plaintiffs should win about 50% of the time, (53) this is a remarkably small win rate for patentees.” (John R. Allison and Mark A. Lemley, “The (unnoticed) demise of the doctrine of equivalents,” Stanford Law Review, February 1, 2007)  Peruse more books by John R. Allison and Mark A. Lemley.

75.6% fail.  Patentees lose 75.6% of the time against accused infringers.  “An empirical study of the results of patent litigation at the appellate level during the period 2002-2004. Dispositive case results, i.e., those not involving a remand on the merits, are compiled. Patent owners won 24.43% of the cases and accused infringers the remainder. The cases were further analyzed to determine the characteristics of winning and losing parties, including nationality, financial strength, location of principal offices, and several other factors.”   (Paul M. Janicke, University of Houston Law Center and Lilan Ren, University of Houston, “Who Wins Patent Infringement Cases?,” American Intellectual Property Law Association Quarterly Journal, Vol. 34, p. 1, 2006)  Find other publications by patent attorney and law professor Paul M. Janicke.

70% fail – 7 out of 10 new products fail.  “Nearly seven out of 10 new products fail either because no market really existed in the first place.”  (Gary Miller, president and founder of Aragon Consulting Group, St. Louis, Missouri, “’New Coke’ And Other Disasters Can Be Avoided”, Viewpoint, September 22, 1997)

59% fail – 41%. percent of U.S. patent applications were approved in 2006. “Patents themselves don’t come easily. In 2006, the patent office received 443,652 patent applications, but only 183,187 were issued that year.”  183,187/443,652 = 41%.  (Joyce Smith, Business Columnist, “Seeing your invention through: Entrepreneur week helps highlight some success stories of those who dream big,” Kansas City Star, February 27, 2007)

50% to 89% fail – Between 11% and 50% of entrepreneurs succeed in starting a firm.  “Wholly reliable statistics are not available on the likelihood that inventions developed by individuals succeed in reaching the marketplace. Data are limited to those that reveal how many nascent entrepreneurs actually succeed in launching a firm. Reynolds and White (1992) first reported that somewhere between 11% and 50% of all nascent entrepreneurs succeed in starting a new firm. In a later study, White and Reynolds (1994) estimate that between 30% and 50% of all entrepreneurs succeed. Katz (1989), on the other hand, reports that 15% of all nascent entrepreneurs in the U.S. enter self-employment.” (Thomas Astebro, “Basic statistics on the success rate and profits for independent inventors”, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, December 22, 1998)

50% to 80% fail – Failure rate is 50% to 80%.  “Conservative estimates put new product failure rates between 50 to 80 percent, according to the United States Small Business Administration, which cites another discouraging statistic. For every 100 ideas offered by innovators, only five will ever be produced, and only one has even a chance to make money.”  Patent success ratio. Invention failure rate.  (Barbara Bradley, Scripps Howard News Service, San Jose Mercury News, Sunday, February 18, 1990, p. 1PC)

 

99% fail. Only 1 out of 100 patented products make money.  “Even an inventor whose product is unusual enough to receive a patent faces daunting odds. Only an estimated one out of every 100 patented products makes money.” Percentage of patents that make money. Percentage of inventions that make it to market.  (Mimi Whitefield, Herald Business Writer, Miami Herald, February 5, 1996, p. 22BM)

46% fail – Only 54% of patent applications are approved.  “Only 54 percent of patent applications receive approval, according to the patent office.”  Odds of patent approval.  (Julia Feldmeier – Washington Post Staff Writer,, “Any Bright Ideas?; How Local Inventors Try to Capitalize on That ‘Aha!’ Moment,” The Washington Post, March 4, 2007)

40% fail – 60% of patent applications are approved.  About 60 percent of applications are approved. Patent approval odds.  (U.S. Patent Office spokeswoman Brigid Quinn quoted in Thuy-Doan Le, “Entrepreneurial spirit starts to pay off for Sacramento, Calif.-area inventor,” The Sacramento Bee, December 12, 2004)

25% win rate.  Patent owner long-term contested win rate.  “The long-term contested win rate for patent owners varies around 25 percent.” (LegalMetric press release, “LegalMetric Data Of KSR Effect On Patent Owner Win Rates,” eWorldwire, September 12, 2007)

20% – 1 in 5 error rate.  Loan error odds. Estimated odds that an American’s consumer credit reports have loan errors.  “Odds are 1 in 5 that your credit report has errors damaging enought to keep you from getting a loan.  And, says Consumers Union, odds are even greater — almost 50-50 — that your report has an error of some kind.  Lenders rely on credit reports, which show consumers’ records at repaying debts.  Three private companies — TRW, Equifax and Trans Union — compile most of the USA’s consumer credit data.”  (USA Today, April 30, 1991, p. 1A)

6 Comments

Filed under Andrew R. Spriegel, Andrew Spriegel, Blogging, Brand, Branding, Bucks, business, Cash, Economy, Freedom, Internet, Invention, Inventions, job, job search, Market, Marketing, Marketing Strategy, Patents, Product Acceptance, Re-Invent Yourself, Reinventing Yourelf