User Power
Value/Post Ratio
250%
- Jun 6, 2013
- 347
- 866
- 36
Hey Guys,
I've had a big idea, and while initially I was hesitant to discuss it openly, MJ has taught me that it's pointless to be over-protective of an idea, as idea's are worthless and most people can't/won't execute.
My Idea:
A Marketplace for 3D printer designs, where you pay Per Print, as opposed to buying a model and being able to print this countless times. Much like buying a licence for a piece of software, you can only use it as many times as you have purchased it.
How It Works:
Business structure would be much like the iTunes store, we just take a cut of the profit. As for technically how it works, I'm a programmer and have thought up a way of doing this. It is inevitable this would end up creating a market for 3d printing design piracy, but it would have various programmatical and procedural safeguards against this.
The Benefits:
To Producers:
Producers would be paid more for their designs. This would allow them to spend more time developing more designs, and adding to the complexity of their designs. Essentially they would be correctly rewarded for their hard work, in direct proportion to the end-demand of their produced design and the product it will ultimately produce.
An example for down the track when 3D printers have multiple materials, and are capable of producing much more complex designs, is the printer designing a car part worth $800. Eight people could chip in together $100 each, and receive this product for far below retail - but the producer that designed this part is never properly rewarded. This devalues his time, and results in him having to pump out more designs, in comparison to better and more complex designs.
To The End Consumer:
With more money behind them, Producers will eventually produce more innovative designs. Consider the Pharmaceutical industry for a moment - by patents being worth so much, and so much money backing innovation, billions are pumped into Research and Development, and this creates better end-products for the consumer over time.
The consumer also doesn't pay excessive amounts for once-off, they pay proportionally for their needs. In the traditional model, a producer may design a simple Cup, and charge $3/licence, as he only has the potential to be paid once for it, he needs to receive $3. This may be expensive for a consumer, as the cup is only really worth $1. Under my model, they would only pay $1 for the cup, but if they eventually needed six cups, they would pay $6. If a company wanted to produce thousands, they could pay a lesser amount for bulk quantities. This means fair pricing in proportion to need.
To The Industry:
Essentially the industry would thrive due to this. More innovation means more need for 3d printers, as this increases, it then funds further innovation in a circular loop. The printers become a necessity, and the introduction of new users increases the demand for better printers and better designs, fueling the industry.
Technical Concerns:
There are many to be honest, such as handling mis-prints (which will decrease as printer quality improves), down to piracy. These can all be overcome, and will be addressed individually during the execution phase. I would love some insight into any glaring issues I may have overlooked.
Becoming The Industry Standard:
I would imagine that if I pushed it hard enough, with a solid Brand, it would become the industry standard. As the technology develops over the years, it will become much more lucrative. But shonal,uld I be considering Patents on the encryption technology I develop, to keep competition out of this as a factor? Obviously not until I have everything working, functional, and making money - but is this a consideration? Should I be designing it in a certain fashion to ensure it is patentable?
Validation:
This, is where I am stuck, and would LOVE some help. Before spending countless hours designing both the encryption software, the website, and marketing the marketplace - I need to know that it is needed. Common sense isn't enough, While it does seem as though there is definitely a need for this, and other marketplaces using a once-off-payment system are making money, what is the best way to validate this idea?
Essentially my first form of validation is most likely going to be approaching producers, and asking would they come on-board with such a model. It seems much more lucrative to them, and would be a complete game-changer.
Your Criticism Is Welcome!
I love criticism, and would love your thoughts on the idea. Thank you very much for taking the time to read this, I know it's a huge amount to go through, and I really do appreciate it.
I've had a big idea, and while initially I was hesitant to discuss it openly, MJ has taught me that it's pointless to be over-protective of an idea, as idea's are worthless and most people can't/won't execute.
My Idea:
A Marketplace for 3D printer designs, where you pay Per Print, as opposed to buying a model and being able to print this countless times. Much like buying a licence for a piece of software, you can only use it as many times as you have purchased it.
How It Works:
Business structure would be much like the iTunes store, we just take a cut of the profit. As for technically how it works, I'm a programmer and have thought up a way of doing this. It is inevitable this would end up creating a market for 3d printing design piracy, but it would have various programmatical and procedural safeguards against this.
The Benefits:
To Producers:
Producers would be paid more for their designs. This would allow them to spend more time developing more designs, and adding to the complexity of their designs. Essentially they would be correctly rewarded for their hard work, in direct proportion to the end-demand of their produced design and the product it will ultimately produce.
An example for down the track when 3D printers have multiple materials, and are capable of producing much more complex designs, is the printer designing a car part worth $800. Eight people could chip in together $100 each, and receive this product for far below retail - but the producer that designed this part is never properly rewarded. This devalues his time, and results in him having to pump out more designs, in comparison to better and more complex designs.
To The End Consumer:
With more money behind them, Producers will eventually produce more innovative designs. Consider the Pharmaceutical industry for a moment - by patents being worth so much, and so much money backing innovation, billions are pumped into Research and Development, and this creates better end-products for the consumer over time.
The consumer also doesn't pay excessive amounts for once-off, they pay proportionally for their needs. In the traditional model, a producer may design a simple Cup, and charge $3/licence, as he only has the potential to be paid once for it, he needs to receive $3. This may be expensive for a consumer, as the cup is only really worth $1. Under my model, they would only pay $1 for the cup, but if they eventually needed six cups, they would pay $6. If a company wanted to produce thousands, they could pay a lesser amount for bulk quantities. This means fair pricing in proportion to need.
To The Industry:
Essentially the industry would thrive due to this. More innovation means more need for 3d printers, as this increases, it then funds further innovation in a circular loop. The printers become a necessity, and the introduction of new users increases the demand for better printers and better designs, fueling the industry.
Technical Concerns:
There are many to be honest, such as handling mis-prints (which will decrease as printer quality improves), down to piracy. These can all be overcome, and will be addressed individually during the execution phase. I would love some insight into any glaring issues I may have overlooked.
Becoming The Industry Standard:
I would imagine that if I pushed it hard enough, with a solid Brand, it would become the industry standard. As the technology develops over the years, it will become much more lucrative. But shonal,uld I be considering Patents on the encryption technology I develop, to keep competition out of this as a factor? Obviously not until I have everything working, functional, and making money - but is this a consideration? Should I be designing it in a certain fashion to ensure it is patentable?
Validation:
This, is where I am stuck, and would LOVE some help. Before spending countless hours designing both the encryption software, the website, and marketing the marketplace - I need to know that it is needed. Common sense isn't enough, While it does seem as though there is definitely a need for this, and other marketplaces using a once-off-payment system are making money, what is the best way to validate this idea?
Essentially my first form of validation is most likely going to be approaching producers, and asking would they come on-board with such a model. It seems much more lucrative to them, and would be a complete game-changer.
Your Criticism Is Welcome!
I love criticism, and would love your thoughts on the idea. Thank you very much for taking the time to read this, I know it's a huge amount to go through, and I really do appreciate it.
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum:
Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.
).
, and of all the ideas I think I liked this one the most. It was also really interesting to read about your experiences doing the delivery venture. You've definitely got the drive, wish you the best in all that you do.
