Ask Slashdot: What Is the Best Way To Approach Big Companies With Your Product?

New submitter ily2013 writes: My family have invented a product that will prevent electrical related fires for homes and businesses. A patent has been filed and approved worldwide, which includes the United States. Now I would like to take this product, and ask Apple/Microsoft/Big vendors to see if they would be willing to integrate our product into their existing and future products, because we believe the product will truly change the way safety of electric/electrical devices are viewed. What is the best way to approach this? Should I start by cold-calling Apple/Microsoft/Big vendors? or send them a mail/email?

Comments

Do it yourself

[LynnwoodRooster]

First off, there is no such thing as an international patent. You file a patent in one country, and then can file for a PCT which - if it's granted in the first country - means other PCT signatories will agree to "respect" the patent. But you really still need to file in those other countries to get true protection (I recommend filing in the US, Germany, Japan, and China - you'll cover the biggest markets in the world, ones counterfeiters will not ignore, and you will cover the source of most counterfeit goods - and China is very protective of their own filed IP).

Next, roll it yourself. Prove it's capable of actually making money. So you invented something - big deal. Unless you can make money with it, it's worthless. So start your own small business, show that there is a market for it. You don't have to sell tens of millions or make millions in revenue. Just a small stream will show it's commercially viable.

THEN pitch the idea of licensing or buying the company to bigger players. Target contract manufacturers, not direct end-customers. I've had a LOT better success getting factories to license my patents, then they reuse them with their bigger clients. Going straight to the end customer (Microsoft, Apple, Dell, etc) is very hard to do; getting their CM to accept it (the Foxconns, Flextronics, Fosters, and Quantas of the world) would be more receptive.

Insurers do this (and create UL) to reduce THEIR c

[raymorris]

Insurers are in fact a major, major source of funding for safety initiatives of various kinds, because reducing -their- customers' claims reduces their costs. You may have noticed your home insurance company sends you stuff about fire safety and burglary prevention on a regular basis. This month, they probably sent you something about Christmas trees, Christmas lights, and fires. If you haven't seen this because you don't yet have your own home and car, perhaps go upstairs and ask your mom if they insurance bill is around somewhere. In the envelope you'll see safety tips.

You've probably heard of Underwriters Laboratories, the #1 organization in the US for ensuring products meet safety standards. "Underwriters" in the name means insurance underwriters.

So how does this all work with profits? Suppose in 2014 you bill $350 million in premiums, spend $270 million paying claims, $40 million on marketing, $10 million on customer service and overhead. You end up with a net profit of $30 million. With me so far?

Now suppose your customer outreach, telling YOUR CUSTOMERS how to be safer, reduces their claims by 5%. A 10% reduction in claims is $13.5 million. You've just increased your profit from $30 million to $43.5 million. So a modest 5% reduction in claims from your customers increased your profit by 45%.

Companies generally like to increase their profit by 45%, so that's why insurance companies are in fact a primary driver of safety in the US.

Five steps will do you.

[tlambert]

Five steps will do you.

(1) Get a patent

(2) Find an adorable blond little girl or baby who was horribly burned and scarred (living is required, as that means they can appear on camera a lot), preferrably on one side, so you can pan around from the "isn't she cute" to the "OMG!" side at any photo op, on 20/20, on 60 Minutes, and so on

(3) Get the parents to sue the shit out of the company that made whatever product was the culprit in the fire for not including your safety device (doesn't matter if it wasn't invented at the time)

(4) Get it written into the regulations that your device is required

(5) Profit!

Re:Obvious Answer

[Anonymous Coward]

It's funny because it's an immoral way of making money. The companies didn't need the inventor's help to do something, and somehow they're forced to pay the inventor because of a loophole in patent law.