Thanks for reading.

-Gene

I am not sure that John is saying that this particular product has a larger market. Perhaps he is. If that is the case it is surprising though. Not because it relates to pets though. The pet industry is a large one, and because we have such an attachment to our pets, particularly dogs (at least in my household) there will always be available income to purchase items for our “best friends.” I also think inventions that relate to hobbies (such as fishing) are also lucrative because everyone has time and money for what makes them happy and what they find enjoyable.

This being said, an important question for all inventors is whether that which they bring to the table is different enough and enough of an improvement to cause consumers to pay for it. Because of the investment necessary in obtaining patent protection and going to market the money collected needs to reflect a premium. So I always tell inventors to consider whether their invention is a big enough improvement over what already exists, including those things without patent protection, in order to get someone to pay for the patented product. For example, if a patented product costs $25 and there are other available products which are substitutes, and they cost $10, the question becomes whether the patented product is superior enough to warrant a $15 premium.

I don’t know what the numbers would be for this invention, but if you wanted to raise your dogs bowl you could do that by buying some lumber at Home Depot and nailing together a structure on your own. You could also use a plastic crate or box of some sort. Would people do that? If the cost is too high and the effort is not much, maybe.

All I am saying is that inventors need to consider cheaper alternatives which they will compete with.

-Gene

Most pet owners see the pet as part of the family. Human, almost. By the same logic as in the last paragraph of your post, you or I could just as easily eat off of a TV tray. But, I am guessing we both have a nice table that we paid good cash for. Same for pets and pet owners. John is saying that although we don’t think it would be a viable money-making market, it is.

-Confused

I have no doubt that what you say is correct in terms of health of the animal, but why would someone use this rather than say putting the dish on a block of some sort?

The problem that many inventors fall prey to is thinking that just because they can get a patent they are going to make money. A key question that must be asked is — would consumers elect to spend money on the product you are offering? The answer must consider what else is available, both patented and unpatented. If you are going to spend the time, money and energy to get a patent to make the effort worthwhile you will need to be able to collect a premium from consumers, which means that they will have to see the benefits provided by the invention and believe what makes the invention unique is worth paying for, rather than using something else, which may be cheaper.

I have no doubt there is a big market for pet owners, many of whom have a substantial connection with their pets. I would just question whether individuals would spend money for a tray like this when getting a block of wood (for example) would achieve the same thing, presumably for less money.

-Gene