Browse Category: Inventor Education

Patent Drafting: The most valuable patent focuses on structural uniqueness of an invention

From a conceptual standpoint is would seem logical to assume that writing text to describe an invention ought to be easy for the inventor of the invention. While that probably makes sense in theory, in reality, it just doesn’t play out that way. It can be enormously difficult for inventors to describe their own inventions. This is true not because the inventor doesn’t know what they’ve invented, or even because the inventor is not in the best position to explain the invention. Indeed, the inventor of a new and useful invention is absolutely in the best position to describe the invention. The problem lies with the reality that most inventors simply don’t understand what needs to be described in order to satisfy the U.S. patentability requirements.

For example, most inventors can write volumes about why they came up with the invention, but why the invention was made isn’t particularly relevant to patentability.

Similarly, inventors are very good at describing how their inventions can be used and why their invention is superior from a usability standpoint to anything available in the marketplace or previously known. The trouble is describing how an invention can be used, while a prerequisite, will not distinguish a tangible invention from the prior art.

Before moving forward let’s recall that in order to satisfy the enablement requirement in a patent application it is necessary for the drafter of the patent application, whether a patent attorney, patent agent or the inventor themselves, to describe in great detail how the invention can be both made and used so that someone of relevant skill in the particular art or science will be able to understand how the invention is both made and used. This being the law, it is obviously necessary to explain how the invention will be used in order to fulfill the patentability requirements. Unfortunately, when inventors represent themselves they nearly universally focus overwhelming on the use and at the expense of actually describing the structure.

It is necessary for an invention directed to a tangible invention —referred to in patent law interchangeably as either the machine, device or apparatus — to be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than in terms of function. This is true because an invention description that only focuses on the manner in which the machine or apparatus is intended to be used does not differentiate from the prior art if the prior art teaches all the structural limitations of described tangible invention.

For example, let’s say you invented an ordinary garden shovel. You attempt to distinguish your garden shovel from previously existing garden shovels by saying that your garden shovel is used not to dig, but instead as a stickball bat. By focusing on the different use you are saying nothing about the structure whatsoever. While you can obtain a patent on a new method for using a known product, even copious amounts of information about how to use your garden shovel will not translate into allowing you to claim your shovel.

If you focus your description only on use then at best you can obtain a patent on a new method for using a known product. The problem with those types of claims, however, is that in the hands of an individual new and non-obvious claims to a new method of a known product became difficult, if not impossible, to enforce. The thought process goes like this: Whom will you sue for infringement of your new method patent? In almost all cases, the infringer will be the user, not the manufacturer, distributor or seller of the shovel. But if you define your invention from a structural standpoint instead of a use only standpoint the infringer would not only be the user, but also the manufacturer, distributor, and seller. Being able to control the tangible invention and not just the method of use is what you want to do because it allows you to stop infringement at the source.

Of course, method patents are not useless, and in fact can be quite valuable in the right hands. For example, if you were to invent a cheaper, faster, more efficient way to create a known product then you could sell that known product for less than what others could who are not using your method. These types of commercial methods can become quite valuable and must be distinguished from the typical method of use that an inventor describes.

Still further, in my experience, the method of using an invention that is typically described by an inventor is one that frequently cannot be patented because the method often lack novelty or would be obvious. Returning to our example with the shovel, is it truly new and nonobvious to use a shovel as a stickball bat. Sure, it might not be ideal or even convenient, but substituting one known device for another similar device to accomplish the same task is considered obvious, at least after the Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in KSR v. Teleflex.

The moral of the story is this: When describing an invention you absolutely need to describe how the invention will be used, but to obtain the most valuable patent you need to describe the structural uniqueness of your invention.

So where do you go from here? One of the most effective (and economical) ways to disclose structure is to include multiple high quality patent drawings. For more information on patent drawings please see:

By Gene Quinn  via http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2017/12/09/patent-drafting-valuable-patent-structural-uniqueness-invention/id=90955/

Why Innovation Isn’t (Only) About The Product

Innovation isn’t (only) about the product, its also about the business model!

Innovation can be a function of any company or any industry but it’s the disruptors that are innovating on so many fronts which is having such ineradicable impact. They are the ones bucking the old way of doing things for a more modern innovation mindset. If you were to stop somebody on the street and say, “what is innovation what’s innovative?” They may say the iPhone is innovative. Seventy-five percent of the answers you will get will be about a product. Jim says, “Products only develop or deliver 10 percent of the value in an innovation ecosystem. Ninety percent of the value is by innovating around the business model, customer experience, and process.”

A great example of this is Dollar Shave Club. For decades, the shaving category was entirely focused on product innovation, launching new and improved ‘blades’ at an ever-increasing premium price. However, we can’t forget some early product marketing and business model innovation done by Gillette —to essentially give away the handheld razor in order to sell more high margin razor blades. When Dollar Shave Club was launched in 2011, it knew that competing for head-on with Gillette or Schick (razors) in product innovation or for shelve space of retailers wasn’t a smart move. So instead, Dollar Shave Club decided to compete in contrast to the very business model that had historically been Gillette’s strength.Image result for dollar shave club

They didn’t create a revolutionary new razor (product innovation) or try to compete on price. Instead, they disrupted an entire industry with its business model innovation. Yes, they used a funny video (that has since been seen more than 25 million times) on social media to spread the word about great their product is. The anti-marketing-marketing approach of Dollar Shave Club focused on humor, simplicity, and value, instead of the traditional slow-motion shave and hand-on-face messaging of Gillette. And if you were really paying attention during the entire 1:33 second YouTube video, you would have noticed they started with “for a $1 per month we send high-quality razors right to your door” which got culminated with Dollar Shave Club’s $1 billion sale to Unilever.

All that sounds great – a one in a billion (literally) opportunity and you might be right. But there are ways which can you make a difference within your own company when you see an opportunity to create a new business model but face existing systems, structures, and C-Suite power?

First, embrace your idea or concept. Think through how the normal way of doing business is getting in the way of doing business as normal.

Second, create an innovation lab that (1) can’t be thwarted by high-level execs and (2) is left alone to innovate not only products but business models as well.

The next time you’re ready to tackle disruption, don’t make the mistake of just focusing on innovating around your product. Think about tipping the business model to drive an even greater change.

This is an episode you won’t want to miss. For more insights from Jim, listen to our conversation and subscribe to the What’s Next! podcast on Apple Podcasts.

Jim Harris, a principal of strategic advantage with 20 years’ experience as a professional speaker and consultant. Jim speaks internationally at more than 40 conferences a year on topics including innovation and creativity. Jim is also a columnist at The Huffington Post and author of the international best-selling book, Blindsided: How to Spot the Next Breakthrough That Will Change Your Business Forever.

 via https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/why-innovation-isnt-only-about-the-product_us_5a53e492e4b0f9b24bf319e4

The Most Iconic (and Patented) Games

Monopoly®

Monopoly patent

In 1935 the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued U.S. Patent No. 2,026,082 on Monopoly®, one of the most successful and beloved board games of all time.

As the story goes, Charles Darrow, an unemployed salesman, was struggling to support his family during the Great Depression. It was during this time that he claimed to have fondly remembered summers in Atlantic City, New Jersey, and dreamed about being a real estate mogul. These diversions purportedly lead to him formulating what has become the most popular board game of all time – Monopoly®.

Darrow felt certain he had a hit on his hands so he contacted Parker Brothers, who initially turned him down, but only after explaining that his game violated some 52 fundamental rules of a board successful game. Undeterred, Darrow marketed the game himself. As fate would have it, a friend of Sally Barton, the daughter of Park Brothers’ founder, George Parker, bought the game. At the time Mrs. Barton’s husband was the President of Parker Brothers. One thing lead to another and eventually, Parker Brothers became convinced that this game, with minor modifications, could be a huge success. As a result of his invention, Darrow became the first millionaire game inventor, thanks to royalty payments.

The irony, however, is that Darrow may not have invented the game at all, but rather he may have taken a locally popular game and made only a few changes. By the time Parker Brothers realized that Darrow might not have been the true inventor the game was already a huge success. To protect the game and its investment the decision was made to buy up all patents and copyrights on any related game, thereby ensuring the monopoly on Monopoly®.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rubik’s Cube

One of the most popular games of the 1980s was the Rubik’s Cube, a puzzle game that proved enormously frustrating to many who attempted to unlock its solution.

Invented in 1974 by Hungarian inventor Ern? Rubik, the device was patented in the United States with the issuance of U.S. Patent No. 4,378,116 on March 29, 1983, with the title Spatial logical toy.

On a classic Rubik’s Cube, each of the six faces is covered by nine stickers, each of one of six colors: white, red, blue, orange, green, and yellow. See Wikipedia. A Rubik’s Cube craze captured worldwide attention in the 1980s, with tournaments and even the Guinness Book of World Records recognizing the fastest attempts to solve the puzzle.

Today the Rubik’s Cube has been a part of pop culture for decades, and has once again gained a new following with over 40,000 YouTube pages dedicated to the puzzle game.

 

 

 

 

Battleship

 

Battleship

Another long time favorite game is Battleship. U.S. Patent No. 1,988,301 was issued on January 15, 1935 under the title Game board, the originally patented game does not bear a lot of resemblance to the one that many of us grew up playing.

The patent explains that the invention relates to a perforated game board and pins insertable in the perforations. Although the patent explains that this perforated game board could be used for number of different games, the game we know as Battleship is described.

“The game herein illustrated as in progress might be called Battleships,” the patent reads. The game is described as requiring two players to sit facing each other. “One player, making use preferably of some erasable marking means, such as chalk, places an enclosure or line around a number of arbitrarily chosen series of perforations in groups of 4 (representing a battleship), in groups of 3 (a cruiser). The patent explains that play will go back and forth with each player calling out shots at the unseen target created by the other player. “Play continues thus and when one of the series of perforations within an enclosure has been filled with pins, that ‘ship’ is ‘sunk’.”

 

 

 

Rock’em Sock’em Robots

Rock'em Sock'em Robots

 

U.S. Patent No. 3,235,259, titled Toy boxers, was issued on February 15, 1966. The patent explains: “It is the primary object of this invention to provide a new and amusing toy in the form of a novel boxing game manually operated by opposing players.” Inventors Marvin Glass, Harry Disko and Burton Meyer, assigned the patent to Marvin Glass & Associates, and the first version of the Rock’em Sock’em Robots game was manufactured by Louis Marx and Company in 1964.

Rock’em Sock’em Robots was a game of battling robots, with each player trying to knock the others head off the block. The Red Rocker and the Blue Bomber would battle it out inside the ring.

Designed for two players, this boxing game required each player to a robot by operating the mechanism with his or her thumbs.

 

 

 

 

Twister

Twister has to make this list just because of the patent art on display in Fig. 3 (to the left) alone.

Invented by Charles Foley and Neil Rabens, and assigned to Milton Bradley Company, U.S. Patent No. 3,454,279, titled Apparatus for playing a game wherein the players constitute the game pieces, was patented on July 8, 1969. The patent explains: “The invention relates to a method of and equipment for playing a game of skill and chance for amusement and exercise purposes.”

The game is played with a playing surface the size of a large blanket, which has “a plurality of columns of loci, said loci being of such size and so spaces as to enable the players to place a hand or a foot on any designated locus, the columns of loci being different colors…” Don’t you just love the way patent attorneys write?

A “chance device” such as a spinner is included with the game. Someone not playing (i.e., a referee) will spin the wheel and call out a hand or foot with a corresponding color, which requires the players to twist and contort themselves in order to place the appropriate hand or foot on the color. The object of the game is to move into the appropriate position without falling. If a player falls or touches an elbow or knee to the surface the game is over and the other player declared the winner.

 

 

Simon

Ralph Baer, Hall of Fame inventor of the video console, was also the co-inventor of this extraordinarily popular, frustrating, and fun game. Baer, along with co-inventor Howard Morrison, invented this electronic game in the late 1970s, and launched in 1978.

U.S. Design Patent No. D253,786 was issued on Christmas Day 1979 (Fig. 1 of the patent shown left). While that might seem odd to many, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issues patents every Tuesday, and December 25, 1979 happened to be a Tuesday. Obviously, all the work to allow the patent to be done was complete well in advance. In the U.S. a patent is not officially issued until it is published, which occurred on Christmas Day 1979.

For those not familiar with this iconic game, the device is made up of four colored buttons, which light in a series. The player must repeat the sequence correctly once the lights stop. Each time the player successfully completes the correct sequence the sequence becomes longer, and as the player continues the sequence gets faster and faster. This game can still be purchased today, but the new age Simon Optix seems more virtual reality headset than anything else. In an attempt to keep the game fresh for the next generation you wear the headset and wave your hand in front of the proper color in sequence. Other varieties of this classic game include the Simon Swipe and Simon Air.

 

 

By Gene Quinn & Renee C. Quinn 
December 24, 2017 ipwatchdog.com

Rigby man’s toy invention being considered for national award

 

 

A Rigby man’s toy invention is being considered for a Toy of the Year award.

Jeff Larson grew up playing watermelon ball, a water game similar to football or rugby, at the Ammon swimming pool with his friends. When he went to college, he would play the game at the pool in his apartment complex.

“The games got really intense. We went through a lot of watermelons,” Larson told EastIdahoNews.com.

The reason they played with the fruit is because watermelons would sink to the bottom and slowly float to the surface, making for easy handling in the water.

The watermelons would often break and make a big mess.

That’s when Larson started thinking of a way to play with a ball that looked, felt and floated like a watermelon, yet was durable enough to withstand intense use.

“After college, I kept getting the feeling I needed to do something about this idea,” Larson said.

He put his mechanical engineering degree to work on designing a ball that lets players dribble, kick, bounce, pass and intercept under water. In 2009, Larson began working with a manufacturer.

“I got started selling this on Amazon, and it just took off. Then I decided to license it out to a bigger toy company to reach more people,” says Larson.

Today, the watermelon ball is

 

 

 

distributed by PlaSmart Inc. , and is a finalist for a Toy of the Year award.

“Each and every one of the TOTY finalists have brought joy, laughter, and learning to children around the world. From classic board games to innovative tech toys, these playthings represent the ‘best of the best’ in the world of toys and games,” said Steve Pasierb, The Toy Association’s president & CEO in a news release.

From now until January 5, people can vote for their favorite picks in each of the 17 categories. Industry professionals will determine the finalists that will move on to the Gala award ceremony held in New York City Feb. 16.

Larson is encouraging you to click here and vote for the watermelon ball.

“This is my first product, and to be a finalist for the first product I’ve come up with is pretty cool,” says Larson. “This is equivalent to being an Oscar nominee in the toy industry. That’s how big it is.”

 

 

 

 

via https://www.eastidahonews.com/2017/12/rigby-mans-toy-invention-considered-national-award/

 

10 Critical Pieces of Advice for Inventors By: Gene Quinn (IPWatchdog)

There really is no one-size-fits-all approach inventors can follow, and there is no inventing roadmap to success that will work in all cases. Notwithstanding, there are certainly a number of things that can and should be understood if an inventor is going to pursue inventing as more than a hobby.

By understanding some basic but critical information at the outset you will substantially raise the chances of succeeding. This is not to say that you won’t make mistakes; mistakes are inevitable. You will, however, make fewer mistakes if you give thoughtful consideration to what it is you are attempting to do. Indeed, running off and starting without an appreciation for the process will prove costly.

What follows are 10 critical pieces of advice for inventors.

 

1. Find Your Passion as an Inventor

If you are a serious inventor and do not plan on giving up the first time an obstacle is placed in front of you, then you absolutely need to focus on something for which you have a true passion. The point here is simple: The act of inventing takes a lot of time so you need to love it to make it work. There will inevitably be both successes and setbacks, and any inventor who is honest will tell you the setbacks outnumber the successes. What makes inventing rewarding is the pursuit of success and the challenge. If you are not passionate about your invention and the field of endeavor the likelihood you will succeed is very low.

2. Inventors Must Become an Expert

The biggest mistake I see all inventors make is they rush into a field of endeavor without really understanding what they are getting into, or to solve a problem in an industry they don’t know. For example, every new parent suddenly becomes an inventor in the baby products space, but how many have any idea about the onerous government safety regulations imposed on baby products? While passion is required, knowledge is also absolutely necessary. A successful inventor will learn everything they can about each aspect of the field, from the technology, to the business, to the competition.

3. The Goal is Not Simply to Obtain a Patent

The goal is not to create an invention that is cool, the goal is not to get a patent, the goal is almost universally to make money. The cool invention and patent are a means to the end, not the end in and of themselves. Don’t get so caught up in the creation aspect of inventing that they fail to stop and ask whether they should be investing the time, money and energy into the creation. The moral of the story is that the best innovation can lead to no financial reward, while sometimes modest improvements can lead to financial riches. For that reason it generally make sense for inventor to focus on inventing to solve specific problems, and not just inventing to create something unique.

4. Approach Inventing in a Business Responsible Way

Given the inherent uncertainty that characterizes the inventing business it is critical that inventors treat inventing as a business endeavor from the earliest stages and approach your efforts in a business responsible way. Treat your invention from day one as if it will be wildly successful, because by the time you realize that this is the invention that will be wildly successful it will be too late unless you have planted the seeks for success early. This means inventors really must have immediate, short-term, intermediate and long-term goals in place. Give consideration to what the next several phases of development will be if phase 1 turns out to be successful enough to warrant phase 2 and beyond, but for goodness sakes if phase 1 isn’t promising move on to something else. Don’t fall in love with an invention that is failing when you can move on to the next project, which may be the one that will succeed.

5. Don’t Underestimate Importance of a Patent Search

Patent searches are an important first step on the road to seeking a patent because they will let you get an idea about what, if any, rights you can likely expect to obtain. If it looks like only extremely narrow patent protection will be available it probably makes more sense to simply move on to your next invention, because inventors always have a next invention. Patent searches are also excellent learning tools because they give you an opportunity to discover which aspects of your invention are most likely to contribute to patentability. Thus, if you are going to move forward with filing a patent application you can focus your description on those aspects of the invention most likely to contribute to patentability.

6. Don’t Underestimate the Importance of an Internet Search

Over the years I have preached to inventors about the importance of doing a patent search.  Earlier in my career I would hear from inventors who would say that they searched the Internet thoroughly and could not find the invention so they want to move forward. But there are numerous reasons why a product might be patented and not available for purchase.  Having said that, there are also numerous instances where a product is available for purchase but a patent application has not been filed. Therefore, it is critical to remember that a patent search is just that: A search of patents and published patent applications.  You hire trained professionals to do a patent search, but the patent search does not typically include a product search online.  That is generally the responsibility of the inventor. So for goodness sakes, if you come up with an invention the very first thing you should do is see whether it exists and can be purchased online or in stores.

7. License Inventions Not Ideas

Without a patent pending you don’t have anything to license other than an idea that lacks tangible boundaries. When you seek to license an idea alone you can easily scare companies. In fact, even listening to an idea without tangible boundaries as defined in at least a provisional patent application can scare companies to the point where some, perhaps many, won’t want to do it. Moreover, the further you can develop your idea the better and more valuable it will become. So an idea may be worth a little to a very limited number of people, but an idea that has taken shape and has become an invention is worth even more and to more people. An invention that has been defined in a provisional patent application is worth more. Prominent inventor coach Stephen Key talks about a filed provisional patent application creating “perceived ownership,” and he recommends his inventor students seriously take the time and energy to define their ideas in tangible ways to create those perceived rights with a provisional filing. That is excellent advice.

8. Set a Budget

Inventing and commercializing can be extremely expensive, and if you really are an inventor that means you are creative and it is crazy to think that your current invention will be your last. In fact, most inventors have a handful of inventions at any one point in time, so the difficulty they have is picking which one to pursue first. That being the case, and the inevitable reality that you might not score with the first invention you choose, you need to set a budget and constantly reevaluate through the process to make sure that it continues to make sense to pursue the invention. Investing time and money is one thing, but investing good money and your time once the pursuit has been demonstrated to likely not be fruitful is nothing short of a disaster.  So I recommend you set a budget, which you can reassess if things seem to be moving forward in a positive direction.  Once you reach your budget limit if there is no positive momentum you need to move on to what is next. Of course, don’t throw your work away, you never know when it might become relevant or you might have a breakthrough inspiration.

9. Proof of Concept

At some point it will become necessary to prove your invention, which is called a proof of concept. This is an important step because many times things will seem to work on paper, but then when you build out the invention things are not as they would seem. While it is true that an invention with a proof of concept will be more valuable than one without such proof, it is still necessary for inventors to be cautious. Everyone typically wants a prototype, but that can sometimes cost tens of thousands or dollars if you rush right to a prototype firm. It is best to start out crude and work you way down the path. You might begin working with artist who can sketch your invention first on paper. After that you might directly work with an engineer to obtain 3D renderings and ultimately with engineering drawings. When you work with a capable engineer or design firm many things become clearly inoperable as you move through the sketch, 3D model and engineering drawings phases.  Additionally, if you are going to be thinking about a provisional patent application at some point having those sketches, 3D models and engineering drawings can be quite helpful to attach to your application. They can also make great attachments to a business plan you might put together to show investors. Ultimately, before you get to the point where you hire a prototype firm you might want to consider trying to get access to a 3D printer, which many local inventor groups may be able to help with.

10. Plausibly Estimate the Size of the Market

There is nothing wrong with dreaming, but there is an extremely important cautionary tale to be told about the tremendous harm that can be done to opportunity when inventors exaggerate the market size for their invention. You don’t want to be the one who confidently proclaims: “Everyone is going to need to buy this invention.” No one ever achieves 100% market share, and if that is what you expect you will be very disappointed. If you are serious about determining the true size of the market you will research publicly available information and dig through the data applying reasonable assertions. For example, according U.S. Census data, in 2016 there were 40.6 million people living in poverty in the United States. The poverty line for an individual was $12,228, while the poverty line for a family of 4 was $24,563. So exactly how many people can afford to purchase your invention? And then consider how many people might actually need the invention. For an example about how you might approach this decision matrix see Plausibly estimating the market for your invention.

 

Does your invention solve a problem? Does it make life easier?

Tips and Strategies for your Invention 

  1. When genius strikes and you come up with a great idea, create a record of your idea before going any further with it. The record of invention should be written in ink and should include:
    • a clear description of your idea,
    • the date,
    • your signature, and the signatures of two people you trust who have “witnessed and understood” your invention and the dates they sign.

 

 

 

 

 

  1. You must have a prototype built as soon as you can to transform the idea into a physical object.Once you have a complete drawing we can help you build your prototype.
  2. Be discreet. Do not talk about your invention with people who are not bound by a confidentiality agreement.

                     Always protect yourself from potential scams with a non-disclosure agreement.

 

  1. Keep good, complete, and accurate written records, including:
    • A written lab book or log, kept up to date as you work on your invention, that documents each day you did something, describes the efforts you have made in taking your invention from idea to reality (including testing results, experiments, modifications).Note: Have two witnesses sign and date your record book stating that they have “witnessed and understood” the work you have done to build and test your invention.

Copies of all correspondence (including e-mails!) and any receipts relating to your invention.

 

  1. Don’t do too much work on your invention until you get a good idea of whether it will sell well.
    • A suggested rule of thumb to determine whether your invention will sell well is that the total sales will be at least twenty times the cost of inventing and patenting it.
    • Include in your cost calculation the cost of filing fees, hiring a lawyer to help with your patent filing and the person who prepares the drawings of your creation.

Do market research, go to the public and see if they would be interested in buying a product like yours. This is a good way to discover value and set price point for your product.

 

  1. Assess whether you will be able to get a patent on your invention. Answer the following questions:
    • Is your invention novel?
    • What is the prior art?
    • If you are improving on something that has already been patented, is your invention a new physical feature, a combination of prior separate features, or a new use of a prior feature?
    • If you are improving something that has already been patented, is your invention not obvious?
    • Does your invention produce a new and unexpected result?
    • Does your invention fall into one of the five classes of items that may be patent-able? That is, is it a process, machine, an “article of manufacture,” “compositions of matter,” or a new use of any of those items?  At Source Direct, we have a network of preferred attorneys licensed by the Patent and Trademark Office. Our patent attorney locator on our website is growing every day! Look for an attorney near you on our locator and let them know you found them on our website!    

 

  1. Have your attorney conduct a patent search.

 

 

  1. Keep a file for your invention that contains items and information you and your lawyer will need while you prepare your patent application.
  2. Market your invention.

At Source Direct we can handle website development and maintenance, social media management, and online sales. We help you develop your brand while you do what you do best! Don’t stress about contacting big-box retailers or posting daily on your social media we can handle it all!                                                                                                                                         

As an inventor, you would likely rather spend your time perfecting your new invention or idea. Give the experts a call today and see how we can help you take your invention to the next level!

 

Marketing your product

When it comes to bringing a new product to market it’s your responsibility to get your product out there and seen.
You have a great invention that solves a huge problem for people but no one will buy it if they do not know it exists! Marketing is key in product success it can make or break you!

When marketing your product it’s important that your product is seen by your target demographic. Knowing how to reach them and what content potential customers are looking to is imperative! Building a community of potential customers that are engaging and resharing your content is key!

Create value for your followers, a user is likely to unfollow a page that does not push out different content and only is pushing ads for sales! If you have a fitness product keep potential customers engaged by continuously posting fitness related content, recipes of nutritional value, quick workouts, and other fitness products that interest you. Sharing the content of other pages and businesses also helps your reach by tapping into a network of potential customers that you may not have been able to reach otherwise!


At Source Direct we can schedule posts for you across multiple social media platforms, edit and bulk upload your images when you use our services. We target your preferred demographic when posting ads. We want to show how great your product is to people who may be looking for a product just like yours! Using state of the art technology and our expert designers, you will receive the highest quietly representation of your product. We make it affordable and convenient for us to manage your social accounts. get in touch with us today for more information!

 

888-373-3876 X 214