"As a Trumpista, I have no desire to go to Sweden. As for policies, Clinton, like Sweden wants more immigrant muslims. How has this turned out for Swedes? I was just reading on the riots over there. The new worlders want a world where an elitist class rules and all are equal, equally miserable. Trump is a capitalist and capitalism has brought more prosperity to the world than any other form of government. Yet liberals are uncomfortable with that, feeling, emphasise on 'feeling' that somehow we should all be equal. Well, Clinton wants to up Muslims into America by 500%! That's why she lost. We see what is going on in Germany and Sweden with this planned world order invasion and Americans have said NO!As for moving, how about all the socialist communist supporters of Hillary packing up and moving to Sweden? That works for me. "

"How do I go about approaching one of the big 2? Do I find a smaller component maker or possibly have a small batch made up via competitive bidding on MFG.com? The big 2 aren’t going to sign a NDA, suppliers will. I’m going to need IP protection. A PP will have to reflect the technology in the concept. Is it a do-it-yourselfer? I don’t think so…Issues with the USPTO? Who’s going to litigate? Let’s say I get a PP. I approach the big 2, they review my idea. They may wait to see what the other guy is going to do, assuming that they aren’t already communicating with each other? They may both wait to see what I’m going to do knowing the huge hurdles  to bring to market. They can wait 2.5 years seeing if my non-provisional patent publishes? In the mean-time, having seen my concept, their vast R&D can work on their very own implementation. If I don’t file, they’re golden, if I do, they can negotiate. They have the luxury as a big company sitting back and waiting.This contradicts my previous post, however, after much thought, they can afford to wait. Unless they worry about the other guy, they might try to get an exclusive licensee? "

"Same with a smaller company, I have to protect my IP. It’s not something where I can whip out a PP, make calls, see if I get some interest, then file after the PP expires. I have some very sound ideas, ideas that I have tested on my modified derailleur, ideas I’m making prototypes for. Unless I can show a working prototype, no one is going to show interest, it is just a concept and they probably won’t be interested in investing in the  long road to ‘proof of concept’.  Why invest in new technology when you're the only supplier in town with a steady stream of income?I wish it was a simple idea, it would have been easier. Although it has been an exhilarating ride so far. I’ve learned a bit  of getting concept to functional prototype. The next step, if my prototype proves worthy, is to market via license or manufactureAs to your other question: “And, if companies aren’t interested, isn’t that a test in and of itself?” Absolutely not. In this particular case, why pursue a derailleur that doesn’t break and can be worked on when consumers must constantly replace now? Why shoot the cash cow knowing it will take years for an upstart to garner market share. I’ve also heard the phrase “not invented here syndrome”.Sorry for the length. It has helped me think about my strategy.I appreciate your advice,  Mike"

"Stephen, Site doesn't allow for my full text. Is there an email where I can send the full text?It's not too long and of course it is important to me. Mike wrxcomponents@optonline.net"

"To answer your questions: “Anyone had any experience licensing their ideas to the bike industry?” I have no idea on how to go about answering that. Shimano has over 70 patents defending any minute change they make. If Sram is as aggressive licensing technology as buying up companies then I imagine it has been done. Derailleurs are complicated and  there are few who thoroughly understand them. I worked with a senior engineer last summer and it entailed him questioning every detail, me explaining, him offering alternative ideas, then I explaining why such and such wouldn’t work. I built a stick model to convey the concept. This is before I had access to CAD. He couldn’t work out the mechanics of the concept. He moved, I discovered OnShape.com, worked out the mechanics myself by a repetive modeling and analizing. It was very expensive having help from a professional engineer. As of now, I’m working out the details in order to prove the concept by offering a functioning prototype. The prototype may be crude but a professional can take and refine having the geometry and concept in place.I think this is where your strategy might differentiate from what I need to do, it isn’t “a simple idea”. I’ve spent the last 3.5 years studying derailleurs.  I’ve learned so much in the pursuit of a mechanical idea. I now can model my ideas using OnShape.com and then submit for quotes for manufacturing via MFG.com. It’s been a lot of fun.In your book “One Simple Idea” you have a formula: Unique idea + new technology + 1or 2 major players in market place =  manufactureI’ve heard it say “companies won’t be interested in your idea until you can prove it sells”   I imagine having only 2 players means they’re always looking over their shoulder wondering and worrying what the other guy is doing technologically.  According to my attorney, under the PP the text must reflect the technology or else when I actually file for a non-provisional, it is rejected and I must file anew. Which would mean I would loose the earlier filing date incase of conflicts. A simple idea can be easily formulated into a PP, not so with something as complicated as a derailleur. "

"Stephen, Thanks for taking the time to reply. Sram buying up smaller companies was to illustrate their desire for technology, whether for its innovation, expand their product base, or whatever their strategy. As far as them believing that they do it best , no doubt. I imagine an engineer sitting at his desk staring at a screen, modeling the next derailleur. I think there is a gap between those that ride, ride hard and in certain areas (woods) and those that design. Of course they test, but testers are testing under predefined conditions. If you Bing “broken derailleur” and click images of broken derailleur, you see it’s not an anomaly. I went to a bike expo and a bike manufacturer mentioned that “derailleurs are consumable”. I know I’ve eaten my fair share.Here’s a poll from PinkBike. I don’t know who PinkBike represents: http://www.pinkbike.com/poll/324-how-many-rear-derailleurs-did.html  You will have to make a selection to get some results. The single speeders are usually bikers who got tired of derailleurs, so you can include them. I also know that there are approximately 140M bikes made world wide a year with either Sram or Shimano supplying derailleurs.   Would bike manufacturers like an alternative?  Mountain bikers are technology addicts, anything new, exotic, light-weight, and different, they wil pay. Have you seen the price on high-end bikes lately?  You could spend $10k on a mountain bike. Derailleurs are cheap however, the hard-core mountain biker isn’t able to maintain or rebuild his derailleur. You bend it, you replace it. That is the only paradigm offered. What got me started on the derailleur pursuit was 3 years ago when tropical storm Sandy hit NJ. A stick sent my $110 Sram derailleur into the spokes and I was forced to replace the whole mechanism. No bending or replacing parts. Unfortunately for me it wasn’t “one simple idea” but “necessity is the mother of invention.”"