You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Kim Snider
- Thread starter l3randonf
- Start date
exaltedangel09
Guest
Quote from Debbiekyota:
Many people think that invention submission type companies are the biggest sources for ripping off inventors. But these companies canât even come close to taking money from inventors at a rate remotely near what inventors waste on patent attorneys to file erroneous, inappropriate, and ineffective patent applications.
Hereâs how you get scammed. First you establish a profession of highly paid and powerful lawyers. Then you add a lobbying body like the APLA (American Patent Law Association) to do your gunning for you, both in Washington, and with PR. With this facade of seeming credibility, you publish material and build a case for telling the lowly independent inventors (Iâm in this category, too) that the first thing youâd better do is patent your invention before doing anything else. Some go so far as to inappropriately tell the inventor that they are âprotectedâ by the mere filing of a patent application.
Of course the justification for such advice is many fold. Filing a patent application, and thereby establishing your date of priority certainly may be critical; however, with most inventions being in rather small niche markets, this advantage is mostly outweighed by the inherent risk of losing any and all money you spend on patenting and developing your invention. Every inventorâs situation is different; one size doesnât fit all. As such, should you patent BEFORE spending a little time and money doing some market research? The answer is, normally, and on average, NO.
The next concern of the cautious patent attorney is if you reveal your invention while doing ANY market research, youâll probably lose any chance of receiving foreign patents. Although this may be true, consider these two facts:
1. There is a tremendous amount of market research that an inventor can do on their own, without ever revealing any of the trade secrets of their invention. Isnât it interesting that patent attorneys, as sharp as they are, have never in the 200+ year history of US patents, figured out how an inventor might do some quick preliminary market research before applying for a patent? Since these patent attorneys as a whole, and as a profession, are inept when it comes to invention marketing and especially invention market research, I would humbly suggest that they leave this sort of thing up to marketers, and maybe even glean some advice from the marketing profession and work in concert to help inventors on a more holistic basis.
2. What if you never get a foreign patent? My experience is that foreign patents are not appropriate for over 95% of the hundreds of invention projects that I have personally worked on or been familiar with. This is because it normally requires an investment of well over $100,000 to go down the foreign patenting route. Plus, there are exorbitant costs to maintain those patents on an annual basis. Most inventions by individual inventors are never successful, or only a tiny portion ever get international distribution, and fewer will ever receive enough royalties or other income to justify the investment of foreign patenting.
So, how does an inventor pre-determine whether their invention project is even appropriate for foreign patenting? Well, this is where the market research comes in handy. And whoâs going to do this? Not the patent attorney. You donât hire a brain surgeon to repair your car. And youâll find few patent attorneys referring their would-be clients to a marketing company, especially prior to any patent application.
Are you starting to see the vicious circle here? Patent attorneys have used every apparent credible resource and reason to capture the first dollar spent by inventors. Nearly every day an inventor tells me that they canât spend any money on marketing because they blew their wad on patenting expenses, yes, even mortgaging the farm in some cases. The number of inventors who tell me this dwarfs the number that complain that the submission companies have just allegedly ripped them off.
You may ask, why would these unscrupulous attorneys, many of whom seem nice, want to rip off the poor independent inventor? The answer is simple. When cash flow is tight, do you send the inventor to a marketing research firm to tell the inventor that his âbaby is ugly,â or do you take the first dollar, give him a vanity patent, and make tons more money in the process? Enter â the dark side.
Next thing you know, youâve spent $5,000 to $10,000 for a patent that you will never need and youâve wasted three or more years waiting for a response from the patent office.
In all fairness, I must say that irrespective of all the statements about attorneys Iâve made herewith, I use attorneys all the time, I recommend that my clients use attorneys, and I think everyone should use, at least to some extent, a patent attorney or agent to file their patent application; attorneys have saved my ass, helped my clients, and many are my personal friends. Not every attorney is unscrupulous, and many do recommend that inventors seek marketing and market research results before pursing a patent. You just need to do your research beforehand and know when itâs the right time to use an attorneyâs services, and which of their services to use.
In the next few blogs, I will talk about what inventors can do to learn more about the pros and cons of patenting, and how to establish a patent strategy.
I didn't read a single word of that! I don't come to ET to read a novel, please spare us the agony!!! Don't become JACK #2!
Quote from l3randonf:
If you get .50 of premium every single week with 10 contracts...and you win just 80% of the time... thats $4000 in earnings. The other 20% of the time...lets say you have to buy back your spread at $1.50 per contract... thats $3000 in total loses.
Some fuzzy math here. if you get 50 cts every week times 10 contracts for 52 weeks, 80 pct winners isn't $4000 and if you buy back 20 contracts at 1.50 that's a 2g loss since you got 1G on premium up front.
This does not take into consideration that when you buy back the spread to close, you can limit your losses by opening another position. You also have to consider the credit you received when you first opened your spread. Also, when certain weeks really go your way you can roll your spread up or down and make even more.
when you buy back your spread to close at a loss, it's a realized loss, period. Selling a new spread doesn't limit the previos loss since the new position can also lose. Rolling spreads is cost intensive due to B-A spreads and commissions. When certain weeks really don't go your way you can lose even more.
High probability (low premium) OTM credit spreads will have multifold losses if you wait until the underlying is ATM (unlesss close to expiration)Quote from ForexForex:
I think you are too cautious with this approach, no need to exit when both legs are OTM. I would exit when the short legs reaches ATM, and not a day later.
Wow indeed. From that document:
"While the rules of the Snider Method prohibit selling stocks at a loss, this does not limit or prevent the accumulation of unrealized losses. Nor does it guarantee that a position will eventually close or that unrealized losses wonât persist indefinitely. We are more concerned with the ability to generate an income month after month, not with short-term account values. This can be one of the hardest things for a new Snider Method investor to embrace."
Quote from rew:
Wow indeed. From that document:
"While the rules of the Snider Method prohibit selling stocks at a loss, this does not limit or prevent the accumulation of unrealized losses. Nor does it guarantee that a position will eventually close or that unrealized losses wonât persist indefinitely. We are more concerned with the ability to generate an income month after month, not with short-term account values. This can be one of the hardest things for a new Snider Method investor to embrace."
And then combine that with her application to patent her method, which is Covered Calls, the investor carries all the risk of a downward market, and severely caps gains with the covered calls. But her method is "Patent Pending" so it must be good.
Quote from kinggyppo:
my wow comment had to do with the fact that there is zero discussion of the methodology used, it will cost you a few grand to see the actual dart throwing, sigh!
Read the patent. Her method is covered calls. Patent Application
Small portion from the document:
"15. The method of claim 13, wherein the step of selling covered call options includes selling covered call options that expire in the next calendar month, and selling the covered call options at a strike price at or just above the market price of the stock, wherein the covered call options are sold as soon as possible after current-month options expire so as to maximize a time-premium component of the option premium. "
ET thread where I first originally found out about the patent application: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=63678