YouZingIt and Fiverr have similar offerings, along with other invention contractors on the Google nets, LambertInvent.com offering a flat rate of $199 to look at your idea and tell you if they can do something with it. Get Satisfaction also has a similar idea for products and tech support, but I like the idea of posting bounties to problems, and actually getting things done by throwing money at it until it goes away.
Looking at this from the posting of concepts direction though, I’d be a smidge paranoid disclosing ideas to a third party where I pay them a buck to make one and they can sell the finished product for ten because they have the skills and resources to bring it into reality and I don’t. I dunno if that’s an unrealistic expectation or me being lazy and code illiterate, (too many words all over the place) but if who owns what is a barrier of entry, the idea of a marketplace for hire might go pear shaped if someone strikes it rich.
You’d be “a smidge paranoid” to publicly “disclose ideas” to a party you couldn’t afford—or couldn’t find—as a dev team, anyway? The goal of this ReverseKickstarter, in my eyes, is to get those ideas out of people before they die! The alternative to this marketplace is a) be a dev, b) pay a dev.
Those are both pretty high barriers to entry. They discourage a lot of people from contributing meaningfully or significantly to this revolution.
How can we lower the barriers to contribution? I think AltonSun has an answer.
Maybe I don’t understand your ideas of “who owns what” , “marketplace for hire” or “pear shaped”.
For the sake of argument, lets say I’m a somewhat greedy bastard who would like some compensation for bringing my spark to your kindling, and I am afraid of this system because while I can only give away my idea once on the internet for it to be infinitely copied and modifiable, you can package it hundreds of times to hundreds of different people to make a mint. Common good can wait for me to produce it myself and be the flamebringer to the masses, because If I give it to you, you get the glory, financial security, and reputation that means you can live to develop another day. How do you sell this to me?
EDIT: So we don’t ninja each other anymore, I’ll just leave it at “this is going to be a hard sell if you want idea people to play along.” But for all I know, that may be part of the plan to get more people intrested in pitching in and being responsible idea parents.
I’m asking how you plan to market the Reverse Kickstarter to people who have an idea, want to see it come into reality, but do not want to have their brainchild run away from them and have it’s own life /without them/. Maybe I’m looking at it from a more entitled direction than I should, but as far as ideas having little value without execution, the Great Patent Wars speaks otherwise.
Early adopters will always have to pay a premium to pioneer new areas of innovation. With time, the goal would really be to lower the barriers to awesome ideas entering the market, both physical and startup-related.
The bottom line is that you could then get a product for ten dollars when the alternative would be you getting nothing and being eternally annoyed at whatever issue initially motivated you to post in the first place.
YouZingIt and Fiverr have similar offerings, along with other invention contractors on the Google nets, LambertInvent.com offering a flat rate of $199 to look at your idea and tell you if they can do something with it. Get Satisfaction also has a similar idea for products and tech support, but I like the idea of posting bounties to problems, and actually getting things done by throwing money at it until it goes away.
Looking at this from the posting of concepts direction though, I’d be a smidge paranoid disclosing ideas to a third party where I pay them a buck to make one and they can sell the finished product for ten because they have the skills and resources to bring it into reality and I don’t. I dunno if that’s an unrealistic expectation or me being lazy and code illiterate, (too many words all over the place) but if who owns what is a barrier of entry, the idea of a marketplace for hire might go pear shaped if someone strikes it rich.
You’d be “a smidge paranoid” to publicly “disclose ideas” to a party you couldn’t afford—or couldn’t find—as a dev team, anyway? The goal of this ReverseKickstarter, in my eyes, is to get those ideas out of people before they die! The alternative to this marketplace is a) be a dev, b) pay a dev.
Those are both pretty high barriers to entry. They discourage a lot of people from contributing meaningfully or significantly to this revolution.
How can we lower the barriers to contribution? I think AltonSun has an answer.
Maybe I don’t understand your ideas of “who owns what” , “marketplace for hire” or “pear shaped”.
For the sake of argument, lets say I’m a somewhat greedy bastard who would like some compensation for bringing my spark to your kindling, and I am afraid of this system because while I can only give away my idea once on the internet for it to be infinitely copied and modifiable, you can package it hundreds of times to hundreds of different people to make a mint. Common good can wait for me to produce it myself and be the flamebringer to the masses, because If I give it to you, you get the glory, financial security, and reputation that means you can live to develop another day. How do you sell this to me?
EDIT: So we don’t ninja each other anymore, I’ll just leave it at “this is going to be a hard sell if you want idea people to play along.” But for all I know, that may be part of the plan to get more people intrested in pitching in and being responsible idea parents.
To be honest, I’m not even sure what you’re asking.
Though, it’s not clear that it would be valuable to convince you either?
I’m asking how you plan to market the Reverse Kickstarter to people who have an idea, want to see it come into reality, but do not want to have their brainchild run away from them and have it’s own life /without them/. Maybe I’m looking at it from a more entitled direction than I should, but as far as ideas having little value without execution, the Great Patent Wars speaks otherwise.
Hey, this is exactly what I was looking to convey, but in less words and more concise ideas. Thanks.
Plus, this video is great: http://vimeo.com/25380454
Well said, potential tagline:
“Incremental bounties for instrumental solutions.”
The idea is to bring abundance to awesomely executed ideas. Right now, it seems like much of the silicon valley is more obsessed with the idea of making things happen than actually making them happen. Besides, it’s the idea multiplied by the execution that creates value. And thankfully, startup ideas are not patent-able.
Early adopters will always have to pay a premium to pioneer new areas of innovation. With time, the goal would really be to lower the barriers to awesome ideas entering the market, both physical and startup-related.
The bottom line is that you could then get a product for ten dollars when the alternative would be you getting nothing and being eternally annoyed at whatever issue initially motivated you to post in the first place.