Eval recaps sum up the research and discussion that go into selecting winning submissions at Quirky. The info in recaps focuses on general landscape, opportunities and concerns, with a strong bias for Quirky’s business interests. We will not tell people what to do with their ideas if we do not choose it, but this info should give general guidance to submitters and other inventors who want to understand our decision-making process.

EVAL 184

Inventor: Philip Murphy
Selected: Two Handle Pitcher

Community: 8
D: 6
M: 4
V: 7
Staff: 5

Total: 41

Design said this was a simple and easy solution to problem in most homes. Market said that glassware or tableware is new to Quirky, but this seems like a good solution. Viability could not comment on manufacturing without knowing the materials, but did mention that there is a possibility for a patent depending on the final design.

Inventor: Maria Pitallano
Submission: Angled Hand Grater

Community: 32
D: 3
M: 3
V: 5
Staff: 0

Total: 43

Design liked this idea and said that in order to function well the base and grip would have to be very sturdy. Market indicated that other products exist on the market that solve this problem and that this product would compete with our own Grip Grater. Viability said that we would use the same vendors that we used for Grip Grater and manufacturing presents no issues.

Inventor: Paul Schmitzer
Submission: Expandable Lazy Susan

Community: 31
D: 4
M: 2
V: 4
Staff: 0

Total: 41

Design said that this idea was novel and would fit our line of expanding products, but questioned the usefulness of an expandable lazy susan. Market felt this idea did not solve a problem with which many people related. Viability said that manufacturing and engineering seemed  straightforward, but they were concerned shipping costs due to the weight of the potential design.

Inventor: Marc Zech
Submission: Coiled Extension Cord

Community: 30
D: 6
M: 6
V: 5
Staff: 0

Total: 47

Designed liked this idea and said it could be a fun and simple approach to an adjustable extension cord. Market said that this idea fits with out power line of products and that there is a larger market for this product. They added that this product would be easy to merchandise.  Viability noted that ETL testing would be required but after making Pivot Power this would be relatively easy to make.

Inventor: David Bathurst
Submission: Retractable Shower Extender

Community: 27
D: 3
M: 3
V: 7
Staff: 0

Total: 40

Design thought that this idea was interesting, but they had a few concerns with it.  Since this product is designed to protrude the shower curtain into the bathroom, Design felt that this increases the chance of water getting into the bathroom. Also, they wondered about the instillation and how that would effect the stability of the shower rod.  Market had a concern with the installation part of this idea from a selling point of view. Viability said that if we found a good aluminum supplier this product would be easy to manufacture.

Inventor: Paulette Jaques
Submission: Water Bottle With Storage

Community: 27
D: 5
M: 2
V: 5
Staff: 0

Total: 39

Design noted that a water bottle with storage has been done before and that this could compete with Core. In order to create we would have to make something very unique if possibile. Market reiterated Design’s point about competition. Viability said that this would be very easy to make, but they would have to make sure all materials were food safe.

Inventor: C. Dinnison
Submission: Magnetic Thumbtack

Community: 18
D: 6
M: 6
V: 6
Staff: 0

Total: 41

Design liked this idea as a back to college product. They said that they might alter the design a little so people won’t lose the magnet part of the pin. Market expressed that this product would be easy to explain to customers and that it would fit with our current distributers. Viability said that this would be inexpensive to make and fairly simple to manufacture as well.  However, they pointed out that there do exist some related patents that the design team would need to be aware of for the final design.

Inventor: Jennifer Simone
Submission: Swivel Based Carseat

Community: 11
D: 6
M: 4
V: 2
Staff: 0

Total:23

Design felt that this was a problem many parents could relate to and that this idea could be a good solution. They said they could explore this idea as an attachment to existing car seats or create one with this feature. Market liked this idea and said that if created well we could get a foothold in the very competitive baby market. Viability said that it was too early to predict manufacturing costs and issues, but they did wave a red flag for liability. Also, the said that a product like this would require years of regulatory testing.

Inventor: Guillermo Rivera
Submission: Snow Tire Grip

Community: 5
D: 6
M: 5
V: 4
Staff: 0

Total: 20

Design thought that the problem presented was very relatable for people in snowy or sandy areas. Market liked this idea and said that it could fit nicely in our line of auto oriented products. They added that this would be easy to merchandise. Viability said we would need to find an industrial grade metal supplier, but siad that this could be expensive to ship.

Inventor: Herbert Friedman
Submission: Stay-Up Sippy Cup

Community: 12
D: 4
M: 4
V: 6
Staff: 0

Total: 26

Design said this idea could  solve the  problem of small children spilling their drinks. They added that this product had been done before, but with the added features of a straw and enclosed lid would make this product unique. Market noted that this is a very saturated market, thus in order to compete the final design would have to be very unique.

EVAL 185

Inventor: Lauren Lowe
Submission: Cistern Flower Pot

Community: 32
D: 4
M: 2
V: 6
Staff: 0

Total: 44

Design felt that this was a larger version of Petal Drops. They had concerns with standing water which could attract mosquitos. Market had concerns with the variety of sizes needed to fit all flower/planting pots. Viability said we would need to find the appropriate vendors and the there might be a slim chance for patentability.

Inventor: Joe Flatley
Submission: Plastic Bag Recycling Station

Community: 28
D: 4
M: 2
V: 5
Staff: 0

Total: 39

Design said that this idea resembled a magnetic version of our Portotrash. Market reiterate Design’s point. Viability said they would need to source for strong magnets, but manufacturing did not seem to present any issues.

Inventor: Maryam Mohit
Submission: Recycling Sorter

Community: 28
D: 5
M: 3
V: 6
Staff: 0

Total: 42

Design liked this idea, but said that it would be difficult to make this universal for home trash bins and to get the right amount of space in the separated parts to be effective for its purpose. Market did not foresee much consumer interest in this product. Viability said that manufacturing would be easy, but the shipping cost could be a potential issue.

Inventor: Julian Navarro
Submission: Cork Laptop Sleeve

Community: 28
D: 3
M: 3
V: 5
Staff: 0

Total: 39

Design said this idea is very limited. Cork has no stretch, but could potentially have elastic spacers within the sleeve. Market indicated that this a crowded market and that note applications already exist on computers. Viability said that manufacturing would be easy and inexpensive. They added that we would have to source for these new materials.

Inventor: David Cole
Submission: Can-Can Recycling Bin

Community: 27
D: 4
M: 3
V: 4
Staff: 0

Total: 38

Design showed that in order to earn $10 at a collection site one would need to collect 200 cans. In order to store that number if cans the recycling bin would have to be large or have a compacting feature, which would be very expensive. Market felt that this would be a very novelty item and noted it would be hard to educate the consumer about recycling cans before they purchased the item. Viability said that shipping and manufacturing costs would be high for this product.

Inventor: Ketul Shah
Submission: Clothing Recycler

Community: 21
D: 4
M: 3
V: 2
Staff: 0

Total: 30

Design liked the idea of raising the awareness of children and recycling. They felt however, that this message could be better conveyed with a book of patterns rather than shredding clothing. Market noted textile recycling services already solve this problem and they did not foresee consumer interest in this product. Viability waved a red flag for liability with regards to a shredder being around children.

Inventor: Ryan Freestone
Submission: Biodegradable Urine Container

Community: 2
D: 5
M: 3
V: 4
Staff: 0

Total: 14

Design recognized that this is a real issue, but was not convinced that this idea was the correct solution. Market said that this product already exists and noted this was a very niche market. Viability said we would need to find a vendor with appropriate biodegradable materials and that manufacturing presented no issues.