Not so long ago, I caught myself thinking that while working on the Simple Science project , whether it be books or videos for TV, I constantly put some kind of framework inside these products. For example, going to sit down to work on another book , I first think about its structure. And this is understandable. It is strange to approach work without a more or less clear plan or idea about it.
But the thing is different: structure is called “structure” because you are trying to somehow structure a certain amount of information according to some rules and algorithms. These rules and algorithms are, in fact, the very limiters or frames. ')
I will give one specific example of my recent, in my opinion, successful products - the “ Experiment in a Box ” kits. The bottom line is this: the box contains everything you need to conduct just one, but spectacular experiment.
What framework was originally set:
price 195r.
self-sufficiency and entertainment
compactness
production on their own on request in unlimited quantities
Now about each item in more detail:
1. Price
On the market of experiments for children there is a large variety of various products. They are both American-made, European, and, of course, Chinese. But there are many domestic sets (although production may be in China). They are distributed in several price groups. I wanted to make exactly the budget decision. Price in 195 p. It seemed to me the most suitable. And yet, an important parameter in sales is the average check: usually, the higher it is, the higher the profit (since profit is a certain percentage of the price).
Conclusion:
The cost of recruitment is crucial.
Decision:
selection of experiments according to the criterion of the cost of their components;
simplify and cheapen the procedure for assembling the sets themselves;
to raise the average check, you need to develop a line of 10 or more articles.
2. Self-sufficiency and entertainment
Although the cost of the product is a budget, I wanted the buyer to receive emotions after using the set much more than from other sets from the same price category.
Conclusion:
you need to get experience from the maximum number of customers, regardless of their skills;
In each experiment, the wow effect is needed at the end.
Decision:
the selection of simple but spectacular experiments - the simplicity of the experiment itself is important;
it is desirable that the effect of the experience was visible immediately.
I chose this experience as an example when developing kits:
3. Compactness
If you pick up almost any set of experiments from the budget series, you can see that there is plenty of free space inside the package. Made it clear from what considerations - to give the product greater importance at a low price. I decided to go another way: to pack the product as compactly as possible, while at the same time wanting to buy it for the money. In addition, miniature sizes will allow to place the product where competitors' goods "do not fit": in the checkout areas, in the kiosks, and so on.
Conclusion:
The solution is in the package.
Decision:
I came up with the idea of ​​a “match” box, but a bit larger. Hence the diminutive, but sweet name was born - “Experiment in a box”.
4. Production on your own on request in unlimited quantities
If the product is in a low price category, then it must be sold in large quantities, otherwise it will not survive. But then you need to produce it in large quantities, and therefore invest in components. And still it needs to be stored somewhere. I faced the problem of storage with the books “Simple Science”, where it is more profitable to print editions of 5000 pieces, which is about seven pallets.
Conclusion:
production of large quantities under the order in a short time;
no problems with the supply of components.
Decision:
development of assembly technology, where production can be quickly deployed for a specific order;
many contractors can act as performers;
Do not take experiments where "exotic" ingredients or "sanction" products are required.
Total
As a result, we managed to develop 25 such sets. We started producing five of them last year, and five more will appear in August. The rest will be released as the market needs.
I believe that I managed to do this only by setting a very precise and understandable framework:
Since the principle of forming the final retail price on the market is the same for homogeneous products, knowing the final retail price, you can easily expand the remaining subtotals. For example, in order for retail price to be 195p, you need to make it about 2 times lower in opte. As a result, you can calculate the necessary cost and decompose it into components: ingredients, packaging, work, etc. You can play with these numbers, for example, reduce the cost of work and increase the cost of ingredients by this amount. It remains to think of how this can be done :)
Having made a box where it is impossible to accommodate “anything” , at first glance it seems that I have complicated my task. But in fact, on the contrary, I simplified a lot. I only needed to pass a lot of experiments through the filter and leave them compact. Or come up with how to reproduce this or that experience on a smaller scale.
If you avoid freezing money in components, then it unleashes a hand for a small business, such as mine. This can be done in different ways, for example, manufacturing products to order from common components. The development of technology "mobile" production solves this problem. And avoiding the use of “exotic” and “sanctioned” products in it when developing a product will reduce the risks of spontaneous purchases.