Entrepreneurs - Vernon Kerswell

Vernon Kerswell

Extreme Fliers

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions

Your Ratings

4.29 out of 5

Rate this

How useful did you find this page?

Name	Vernon Kerswell
Pitching	Extreme Fliers
Investment Required	£75,000
Equity Offered	15%
Brief Description	The world's first remote controlled micro-helicopter and car in one.

What happened to Vernon in the Den?

Vernon gives a confident pitch for his remote controlled micro-helicopter and car in one.

After establishing the retail and manufacturing price of his toy (£30 and £7.50), James Caan wants to know more about the young inventor and he is impressed that the 21 year old has broken off his university studies to visit China and source and manufacture the product himself, having first mastered Manadrin Chinese.

Duncan Bannatyne establishes that of the three products he has brought into the Den, only one has been created by himself, the others are imported.

Theo Paphitis is intrigued by what else he might have up his sleeve and Vernon shows him a protoype aimed at children combining helicopter technology with a wasp-like creature.

Deborah Meaden wants to know what design rights he has on his inventions and the Manchester-based entrepreneur points out he has a patent pending on the use of powered wheels with a helicopter.

Peter Jones reveals he owns 25% of the UK market leader in this area and that there is a global patent for these types of products. The patents are established and water-tight. Much as he would like to work with Vernon, his serious concerns over copyright infringement makes it impossible for him to do so. For those reasons he is out.

James Caan notes that he too had tried to work with someone on a toy product but found it tricky as buying channels were difficult. This, coupled with Peter's concerns, means he is out.

Father of six Duncan Bannatyne points out his six-year-old has a product like this - as does his friends. The Scot thinks there is already huge competition in the market place and so declares himself out.

Deborah Meaden points out that while Vernon is "very investable" his product, for all the reasons her fellow Dragons have given, is not - she is out.

Theo Paphitis wants to know if Vernon has completed his degree yet. The young man replies that he has not. Theo advises that he goes back to university to do so, spending the time developing the product further. He adds Vernon should wait for the current economic climate to settle and then lauch his business. At that point the Dragon would want to invest in him - but not now. The last Dragon is out and Vernon leaves the Den empty handed.

The deal done in the Den:

No investment.

What's your view?

Comments

1. At 5:43pm on 29 Aug 2009, uberstyle1975 wrote:
What's that flying wasp, does that have a twin rotor? I had a single blades helicopter which was harder to control, that looks much more stable

Complain about this comment
2. At 9:54pm on 29 Aug 2009, christiepals wrote:
go vernon go! from all your christie pals xxx

Complain about this comment
3. At 10:17pm on 02 Sep 2009, pax wrote:
You are doing outstandingly well. Peter Jones may be right but I am sure you have explored the patent thoroughly. Theo Pathetis is wholly wrong in his advice. You can take a degree anytime. You have started successfully - keep going and make it happen. If you want business advice for free - no strings attached, contact me - I started a very successful business from scratch like you - and I have no degree!!

Complain about this comment
4. At 07:14am on 03 Sep 2009, Jayser100 wrote:
I'd like to know more about Peter Jones patent. I have long suspected Jones had no idea just how many other products of this type were out there when he invested in Bladez, and now, perhaps, he is using his considerable muscle to crush the myriad of smaller companies distributing this sort of thing in the UK (and abroad too, perhaps). As someone who has a heavy involvement in the UK RC helicopter industry, I can tell you this would be a very serious blow to a lot of 'little people' out there.

Complain about this comment
5. At 09:22am on 03 Sep 2009, U14125327 wrote:
I don't agree with Peter. There are hundreds of hobby helicopters using a similar flying mechanism. We supply helicopters to 3 major retailers in volume, Vernon's flying mechanism is a generic design. Good luck

Complain about this comment
6. At 12:15pm on 03 Sep 2009, Marc wrote:
Vernon - PLEASE TRY TO CONTATCT ME...although I admire what you are doing I think you're missing a BIG trick with these RV helicopters. Whilst watching you last night with great interest, something occurred to me. Potential to re-invent the market for these things......

Complain about this comment
7. At 3:05pm on 03 Sep 2009, Jayser100 wrote:
Perhaps it is just the case that Jones is trying to scare him off? Having watched it again, it does seem weird that so many manufacturers, retailers, distributors and wholesalers are happily selling contra-rotating helicopter products without being sued and taken out of the market. Perhaps PJ's next step is to try and cause mischief for these companies - time will tell. In the meantime, Vernon, if you want contacts that could really get your product going, contact me

Complain about this comment
8. At 3:07pm on 03 Sep 2009, Jayser100 wrote:
Perhaps it is just the case that Jones is trying to scare him off? Having watched it again, it does seem weird that so many manufacturers, retailers, distributors and wholesalers are happily selling contra-rotating helicopter products without being sued and taken out of the market. Perhaps PJ's next step is to try and cause mischief for these companies - time will tell. In the meantime, Vernon, if you really want to get these going, I think you'll do okay - just remember not to ignore the hobbyist market, because they also like this type of thing to play with.

Complain about this comment
9. At 6:30pm on 04 Sep 2009, Laurence wrote:
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
10. At 12:30pm on 05 Sep 2009, BV wrote:
As a patent attorney it was very interesting to hear Peter's comments about the strength of the third party patent. However, while this might give them the right to stop Vernon from selling his product, it does not stop him from patenting an improvement if this is the case. That could then give him leverage to get his own licence from the third party (assuming Peter's is not exclusive), if they want to make a product within the scope of his patent - i.e. a cross-licence deal.

The other thing I noticed was that after the patent discussion, Evan Davies then start talking about COPYRIGHT concerns, which is something completely different - primarily protecting artistic, literary, musical or dramatic works, not ideas. Come on Evan/BBC this was a glaring error (it would be a bit like saying that Peter was concerned over his mortgage when the discussion focused on his pension) and you really should know better.

Complain about this comment
11. At 00:32am on 06 Sep 2009, Laurence wrote:
Will my factually correct stayements be printed? Or is the BBC censoring them? If so could they explain on what area of the moderators rules it has breached? Many thanks, Laurence.

Complain about this comment
12. At 11:46am on 07 Sep 2009, TheEarthAngel wrote:
As an aircraft aerodynamicist for a very large international rotary wing aircraft manufacturer, I feel I too must point out some problems with Peter Jones' interpretation of patent ruling and competition in this area. I will overlook the 'copyright' error made by Evan Davies, although it must be said, that he and the producers of this show ought to have known better than to show themselves up with such an amateur mistake.

But, with regards to Peter's comments I think he has either confused himself, or has totally misunderstood the patent concerned in this instance. While it may be true that the main rotor blade control mechanism falls within a wholly inclusive patent, both in full scale helicopters and scaled hobbyist models of any size (the patent concept and license covers ALL rotary wing craft regardless of size or use, and both commercial and military), it does not cover the rotating blades themselves - i.e. a wing cannot and is not patented, otherwise every aircraft in the world would have to honour a patent to whoever invented the wing. Fixed OR rotary - makes no difference. The patent that Peter was talking about was filed by Paul Arlton in 1999. It covers ONLY the swash plate and vertical blade rotor axis control mechanism. This patent is in itself, an extension and improvement of various other patents filed during the development of the rotary wing aircraft - and there are 35 patents in all, which are globally secure, but ONLY for the control mechanism, which is what Peter was talking about.

If Vernon Kerswell has developed a sufficiently improved contra-rotating blade control mechanism - and it DID indeed look impressive - then he can apply for a new patent wholly separate, and exclusive, covering his control mechanism. Not the rotary blade itself, just the control mechanism which alters the blades' azimuth and tilt function.

Remember, a patent is granted ONLY for the physical embodiment of an idea, you CANNOT patent a scientific principle. If this was not the case then virtually every manufacturer of every tangible item on the planet would owe virtually everyone else a license fee.

Igor Sikorsky's control mechanism in 1940 is broadly the same as the one most aircraft use today, although it has been improved many times since then, with Stanley Hiller and Arthur Young both successfully patenting their improvements. A patent can be applied to any tangible item, device, mechanism, or engineering process as long as it exhibits a new, or useful improvement over an existing invention, or patent. If it shows novelty, or inventive ingenuity (which Vernons system may well do) then a successful patent application may be indeed possible, and which would be exclusive, rendering any patent conflict void, and excusing the applicant from 3rd party dues.

I myself, on behalf of the company, have helped file over 200 patents in the past 17 years, and yes, some of them legally problematic, but we persevered, and in most cases we looked for, developed, and altered designs or just found avenues which helped lead to successful patent grants. There are over 190,000 patents covering the aircraft, many of them similar, but ultimately granted due to sufficient improvement or disparity over an existing design.

Vernon, just ignore anything Peter said and talk to a good specialist aviation patents lawyer, and engineering professionals and you'll benefit massively.

Good luck!

Complain about this comment
13. At 8:45pm on 07 Sep 2009, Laurence wrote:
Hi. I wonder if the BBC moderator could explain why they still won't print my factual statements that tell the truth about Peter Jones "Market leading company", Bladez. The info I detailed in my post on Friday night simply showed Bladez turnover and losses from Companies House for the year ending April 2008. Even now Bladez is a tiny company and nowhere close to being "Market leader" as Peter implied. The patent issue he mentioned was also to coin a PJ comment "complete nonsense".

Complain about this comment
14. At 1:16pm on 11 Sep 2009, Team Dragons wrote:
Hi Laurence. Unfortunately we had to remove your post as it broke the house rules. It contained some content that could "disrupt, provoke, attack or offend others"

Complain about this comment
15. At 10:02pm on 20 Sep 2009, Laurence wrote:
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
16. At 00:31am on 21 Sep 2009, curlywatts wrote:
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
17. At 12:18pm on 01 Oct 2009, kenneldave wrote:
Vernon Kerswell has now been granted all the patents for which he applied and, backed by Theo Paphitis, is developing his products for the Christmas market. Sadly, it would appear that Peter Jones' comments were purely angled at reducing competition.

Complain about this comment
18. At 12:02pm on 01 Nov 2009, Timmyblud wrote:
I Got A helicopter of this guy in Preston City Lancashire With his Boss Type guy Safe Guy

Complain about this comment