an email about my paper is shown below.
Explains everything that needs to be revised in the assessment.
Just need supporting sources to back up what has already been stated in ALL THREE ASSESSMENTS.
Also attached is the opportunity check list he refers to.
email:-
You need to be more direct and focused on how you can use the checklist. For example, the early part of the paragraph is about "features". That isn't a category of the checklist. Similarly, you talk about the inventor and his expertise. I don't deny that is eventually important to the business, but it isn't a focus of the checklist.
When you use the checklist, be more precise. You say Jeffery clearly defined his target market. Keep in mind that clearly defined isn't what goes with target market -- multiple and converging/ few and disparate are. Are hunters and fishermen clearly defined? Make the case either way -- ages, gender, incomes make it clear or not. You also just glance over the idea of the market being emerging. What evidence are you using to make that argument? You should be more explicit as you do these things... One of the strengths of the idea is that there is only one direct competitor, Cabela's has an application .... But from there you can probably talk about indirect competition or substitutes -- how have people done this before now?
Take the one you have. You say hunters and fishermen are a clearly defined market. That assumes there are no segments within or differentiation between the two? You can do a quick search of sportsmen and see if they are really focused or if there is a great deal of difference -- sport fishermen, deep sea, catch and release, dear hunters (bow and arrow, firearm, black powder), small game, fowl... That is where I think you see differences in the age, income, etc. So it is one part research (or hopefully details from the idea page) and two parts your own abilty to deconstruct what is really happening in the market.
