You better not lie

About shipping times

I’m telling you whyBuyer lawsuits are coming to town 🎶

The holidays are upon us, and Black Friday sales have already kicked off as companies anticipate shipping delays due to current supply chain issues.  As such, some companies, such as Disney, will not be offering rush shipping at all this holiday season.  Walmart has gone so far as to charter its own cargo ships to various ports throughout the country to ensure goods make it to consumers on time.  Product distributors may want to implement similar policies and tactics through year-end to avoid be gifted lawsuits in their stockings for failure to timely ship to consumers pursuant to state and federal laws.

Case in point, Kanye West (or “Ye” as the billionaire is going by these days) recently saw his companies Yeezy Apparel LLC and Yeezy LLC slapped with a lawsuit in California alleging “unlawful business practices and false advertising by failing to ship items in a timely manner.”  According to the complaint, Yeezy “repeatedly violated” state law by (1) failing to ship items within thirty days; (2) failing to provide adequate notice of shipping delays to California consumers; and (3) failing to offer and provide refunds to those consumers whose goods were not shipped within the requisite 30-day time frame. Moreover, the complaint goes on to contend that Yeezy made misleading statements by posting two-to-seven-day shipping estimates on its websites; and, most egregiously, charged consumers additional fees for expedited shipping.  Yeezy will pay $950,000 to settle the claims which includes $50,000 in restitution, $100,0000 for investigative costs, and $800,000 in civil penalties.

The 30-day shipping requirement that Yeezy ran afoul of is not unique to California.  Many states have similar laws, and the Federal Trade Commission requires sellers who solicit buyers to order merchandise through the mail, via the Internet, or by phone to have a reasonable basis to expect that the sellers can ship within the advertised time frame, or, if no time frame is specified, within 30 days. The rule also requires that, when a seller cannot ship within the promised time, the seller must obtain the buyer’s consent to a delay in shipping or refund payment for the unshipped merchandise.

To ensure a happy holiday for all parties involved, product distributors must be transparent about shipping times (and delays) and offer consumers the right to cancel and receive a refund for product that does not ship within 30 days.  Contact and attorney familiar with FTC regulations if you need help drafting or reviewing consumer policies and website ordering terms. 

More common than not, their products and pitches end up being ripped to shreds by the sharp teeth of the judges (successful entrepreneurs such as Mark Cuban or Barbara Cochrane). 

They may walk away empty-handed, but hopefully, take away from the experience some advice as to what the inventor needs to do differently in order to be successful. In any event, it is good exposure and may prove to be good publicity to drive buyers to their websites. 

Inventors are all clamoring to get on this reality show for their 15 minutes of fame to start, save or grow their businesses. 

Shark Tank is appropriately named because when you embark on the business of inventing and selling your product; you are quite literally swimming with “sharks.” The most successful marketers and distributors in the product industry have negotiated thousands of licensing contracts, and their revenues are in the billions. They think fast and they talk even faster, and their ability to negotiate deals on behalf of their companies has catapulted them into a league of their own. The companies who distribute products such as Snuggies®, ShamWow®, Thigh Master® and Red Copper® pans, are responsible for the bulk of the products you see advertised on TV, on home shopping channels, or on the shelves of Target or Walmart. These are the great whites of the industry and when working with them, you will likely receive only a small fraction of product revenues (if any), if you don’t know the key terms to include in your licensing agreements. 

Consultants or inventing schools that charge you an upfront fee or a monthly consulting fee to help launch your product or get you on Shark Tank are happy to take your money even if your product (1) is not unique (e.g., it has been done before); (2) does not have a big enough market to generate considerable profits; or is too costly to manufacture. There are also plenty of inventor-mentors who are happy to share their experiences (at no cost to you) to steer you in the right direction. A consultant who charges fees (usually a percentage of royalties) on a success basis only is the better way to go when embarking on the inventing journey. 

Are you Shark Tank ready? Tracy Hazzard, CEO of Hazz Design, Podcast Host, Brand Strategist shares the following stories followed by Stephan Palios helpful summary of Shark Tank deals – what the inventors asked for, what they received and how the business turned out. 

Shelly Ehler is an inspiring entrepreneur and the inventor of the ShowNo towel. Her towel has also been featured on The TODAY Show, The View, and Good Morning America. She was featured on Season 3 of Shark Tank, and her product and presentation were such a hit that she had three “Sharks” fighting over her. Shelly is the only entrepreneur in the show’s history to ever leave with a check in her hand from Lori Greiner. Ehler had been hand-sewing her towels, 

borrowing to prepare for what she thought would be the ride of a lifetime, and felt like she was patiently waiting on the verge of success she had been dreaming about as she poured blood, sweat, and tears into her business. Then she went on Shark Tank and was handed a check! Sounds like the ultimate Shark Tank success… right? Wrong! 

“Don’t cash that check,” Ehler was told following the show. However, that was not the call Shelly was expecting to receive from Lori Greiner. Shelly’s mouth hung open as Greiner listed her concerns on the other end of the line. “Your business is too new, the deal we made isn’t the deal I want to make now…blah, blah.” As Ehler listened to the words that were her new reality, she could feel the anxiety and stress wash over her. Entrepreneurship can be full of angst, desperation, and a constant stream of a steady inner voices asking you if you’re worthy enough to “be here.” In that moment, those very same entrepreneurial fears planted firmly in Ehler’s mind because she put her trust in a “Shark.” But “Sharks” prey on eager bait, and this story isn’t the only one where we can see the damaging effects of Shark Tank on entrepreneurs and inventors who are just trying to make their dreams come true for themselves, and their families. 

“Whatever you think,” said Shelly. The new deal on the table offered Ehler a 70/30 split, with the latter being her percentage. In her gut, she knew this deal wasn’t fair, but she was met with aggression when she spoke out. When she started asking me questions like, “Do you know what I can do for you?” or, “Do you know how much I charge for my time?” Then, she followed that up with statements like, “Shelly, I am going to do this for you; I went all in.” 

The other offers that the other “Sharks” made to Ehler on the show were now off the table, but she was under the impression, based on conversations with Greiner, that the ShowNo Towel was going to make them millions. When she looked at everything from this angle, Ehler felt like maybe she could live with a 30% deal. So, with a nod and a few famous last words, “Whatever you think,” she sealed the fate of her towel. And then things went even further downhill, and ultimately, her ShowNo Towel was a no-show in revenues and eventually, went out of business. 

The thing that a lot of people don’t realize is that those “Sharks” aren’t there to promote the entrepreneur and make the entrepreneur money. The “Sharks” are there to promote themselves, their businesses, their business acumen, and to solidify their business legacy. The guests on the show, the inventors and creators, are just part of that plan. I think viewers believe Shark Tank is the embodiment of the American Dream, but if we take a closer look, we can see that the show is more the embodiment of self-promotion, greed, and a “whatever it takes” type of attitude, no matter who gets hurt in the process basically, it’s entertainment at the inventor’s expense. 

Stories like Ehler’s make me cringe because the minute she took that deal, she was at the mercy of someone who was using her and her life’s work to self-promote, and at any cost. Just like with Ehler, it is very common for the deals made on the show to fall through. When you watch, you just assume that those deals that they air are the deals that actually happen, and oftentimes, that just isn’t the case, once the camera stops rolling. 

It’s so much easier to take innovation (as in EXPLOIT) than it is to innovate; which is one of the biggest reasons why I am weary of any reality show, or “opportunity” like Shark Tank, where 

innovators eager to grow their business expose their products (oftentimes without patent, trademark, or copyright protection) and end up as shark bait. 

Over the years, I’ve had several clients who were featured on Shark Tank, made a deal with a “Shark”, and then their deal fell through… not quite “As Seen on TV” as we might think. Sometimes, as a result of the airing of the show, viewers flock to the website to place orders. So, while customer demand was created, without funding from a “Shark”, they can’t source or fulfill the orders unless they are going to do so from their garage. It is a soul-crushing experience. I hate it! Business and entrepreneurship, and neither is for the faint of heart, but at the same time, can we go on condoning abuse, greed, and predatory behavior? 

Everything is so soft and lovely on television – even when the “Sharks” are ripping their prey apart, there’s a bit of humor and the entrepreneur seemingly leaves in one piece. Off the air, there’s no softness, there’s no editing, there’s no producer creating perfect dialogue, or heartfelt moments, or scenarios where participants leave with a check in their hand because the newest “Shark” on the show needs to appeal to a specific target audience to sell her current products and businesses. 

“I’m part of an exclusive and prestigious club,” Greiner tells a pair of female entrepreneurs. “I’m a woman” (as though she is going all out to join the sisterhood of the traveling pants). And, just like that, we can see how easily “Sharks” can manipulate the wide-eyed show participants with all the feelgood, hoorah type of attitude that TV allows. 

Off the air, businesses are crushed because, rather than putting an expert in their tank, they chose a “Shark.” Statistically, in the marketplace, you’re more likely to fail than you are to succeed, and that depends on your definition of success. 

• 14 out of 15 HSN and QVC products fail to make money and/ or fail in the marketplace.1 

• 7 out of 10 consumer products fail in the marketplace.2 

I have an 86% success rate, and when you look at statistics like this side-by-side, it’s easy to see why it makes more sense to seek out an expert in your product or service area, versus taking such massive risks to appear on reality television for your friends and family to see. It isn’t that Shark Tank is all bad. Plenty of businesses are still running, plenty of deals actually go through, plenty of entrepreneurs live to tell about their swim with the “Sharks”… but I can tell you this right now – it isn’t what you think, it isn’t what it looks like, it doesn’t happen overnight, and it isn’t all rainbows and unicorns. What you see on TV is one very minuscule piece of one very large puzzle. Some contestants get the writing on the wall much quicker in the process and are able to swim away before there is blood in the water. Kiersten Parsons Hathcock, TV network executive turned self-taught carpenter and furniture designer, won a deal on ABC’s Shark Tank in 2010. Her furniture company, Mod Mom, captured Robert Herjavec’s attention, and after her pitch, she patiently awaited his call. When the call finally came, like Shelly, it certainly wasn’t the one she was expecting either. Herjavec’s change of heart, citing her business still being too small, left her reeling. 

Luckily, Hathcock had family and friends who were able to invest; however, a lot of entrepreneurs are not in this fortunate position, and a lost opportunity, like the one Mod Mom 

suffered, is the end of the road. She was able to keep going on her own, and her furniture line was recently picked up by Little Colorado. 

Another entrepreneur who experienced a similar bait and switch scenario with Herjavec was Megan Cummins, who went in the tank to pitch You Smell, her luxury soap company. On the show, Herjavec offered Cummins investment in exchange for 20% of her company, but when he sent her the contract, he was asking for 50% of her business, for the same investment amount. Cummins, reeling from the bait and switch, turned the deal down, and was able to sell her business in 2014. After selling You Smell, Cummins launched Sparklepop and is on track to be one of the fastest growing small businesses in the States. 

As previous contestant Jordan Scott puts it, in his book, Shark Bites, “There is nothing else on Earth like being in the tank.” This is true for multiple reasons. First, the process of getting a fair and sensible valuation on the show is not in any way how valuations are done in the real world. Second, you would never sit in a room with potential investors and be devalued in the manner of which we see on the show. Oftentimes, investors aren’t looking for the check marks that the “Sharks” make sticking points about on the show, and in a lot of ways, this kind of false representation of how business actually works, is damaging, especially for new entrepreneurs who are learning it all as they go. Third, I’ve had a handful of clients who got deals on Shark Tank, and were in no way ready to make those deals, but nobody told them that. 

When you don’t have the experience to know what’s missing, and you don’t have the systems and processes in place to take advantage of the swell of growth that could potentially be coming your way, it’s easy to take missteps; creating unnecessary vulnerabilities and taking unnecessary risks. This might not seem like a big deal to a “Shark” with a portfolio that is bursting at the seams, but for these entrepreneurs, this is their livelihood, their baby, their everything… they’ve emptied bank accounts, they’ve taken loans, and they’ve borrowed from friends and family. When the dust settles, it isn’t the “Sharks” who look those people in the eye, it isn’t the “Sharks” who repay those loans at exorbitant interest rates, and it isn’t the “Sharks” who nurse the wounds. With all of that being said, let’s take a look at the top 5 signs that you are ready for the tank: 

❖ You have market proof and traction.

➢ Do you have a reachable market? 

➢ Can you show who your competition is and how you’re different? 

➢ Do you have quantifiable data? 

❖ You are profitable. Entrepreneurs don’t need to have a million dollars in sales to be ready for Shark Tank, but you do need to show solid profitability or the immediate potential for profit. 

❖ You know your hook. A perfect pitch is one that is clear, speaks to the unique elements of a business, and has a hook to really grab the attention of listeners. 

❖ You know your numbers. It is cringe worthy to watch episodes where entrepreneurs don’t know their numbers because, as an entrepreneur, you should know this information like the back of your hand, no excuses. If you don’t know your numbers, you are putting yourself in a very vulnerable position because, how can you ask for your value if you don’t know your numbers? And how can you realistically pitch a plan for profitability, if you don’t know your margins? 

❖ You have a plan. If you know your plan for the future, have a vision for the business, and can show long-term potential in an investment, this is a great indicator of preparedness and sustainability. 

If you can read through these readiness signs and know, without a doubt, that you can check each box, you might be in a position to join the other 45,000 annual applications for Shark Tank. But I have to ask, if you can check these boxes, why aren’t you protecting your business and going it alone? If you have a foundation to launch, why not launch where you are, build your business organically, and control the process each step of the way? 

So many entrepreneurs think the other entrepreneurs have more knowledge or more access, but I can tell you that (for the most part) everyone is just out there hustling and figuring it out, day in, and day out. When I go back and watch Ehler’s pitch to the “Sharks,” it kills me when she gets a check on the spot. I find myself talking to the screen, “Don’t take the check…don’t take the check.” “This is a huge red flag.” In Ehler’s mind, it proved out her worth; however, in hindsight, it’s clear that if someone is willing to hand you a check on the spot, your business is probably worth more. 192 sleepless nights, anxious energy, and not speaking to a soul about the fact that she might be on Shark Tank were torture for Ehler. But finally, her episode aired… and then nothing happened. Ehler and I talked about lessons learned, entrepreneurship, and how her vulnerability and excitement were used against her in an effort to take her business out from underneath her. “The last offer Greiner made me was a royalty deal. 

My attorney said it was one of the worst he’d ever seen and it would have left me with nothing. At that point, I knew it was time to walk away, and at least keep what was left of my pride. I couldn’t help but take it personally and I felt like the biggest failure. Now that I’ve had some time to heal and get a better perspective, I see a lot more. I don’t think [Lori] ever had any intention of letting me have that money. She was new on the show, wanted to make a splash, and I felt the check hand-off was a production-value stunt to help her make a name for herself. When the dust settled, I really had nothing left, and it took me 3-years to come back and start rebuilding with a renewed vision.” 

Of course, Ehler isn’t the only one. There are entire Facebook “support” groups, hiding in the shadows, dedicated solely to building some sort of common-ground comradery to help heal the wounds of those who suffered “Shark” bites. But too many victims don’t speak up because they haven’t even begun the healing process. When you go up against a “Shark” (or an entire tank full of them), nothing can prepare you, no matter how much you tell yourself otherwise, to be ripped to shreds, to have your creation ripped to shreds, to be manipulated, and preyed upon. Nothing is going to help ease the anxiety and the voice that questions your worthiness. No one is going to hold your hand, and help you navigate the murky waters… but hey, if things get really bad, there is a show therapist who might offer some couch time. 

There are two really common misconceptions about Shark Tank that I want to debunk as I close this out. One, you have to know that the show is not for the entrepreneur. The show is for the 

promotion of the “Sharks,” their portfolios, and their brands. I know I mentioned this, but I really want you to think about this the next time you find yourself settling in for an episode of Shark Tank. This perspective shift will change the way you watch, feel, and perceive the show, as well as the “Sharks”. 

Secondly, a “Shark” is not going to launch your product or business for you. Plenty of entrepreneurs, or even viewers, have this idea that being “seen” on TV is a magic bullet, but it isn’t. If any part of your potential success dream is resting on this misconception, you really should consider talking to a product launch expert to get a more realistic idea of how this process really works. Episode after episode, I’ve seen these points hammered home, and this just proves that the show isn’t a full story and totally honest depiction of the possibilities. The entrepreneurs and creators I meet oftentimes have this vision of quality and building something that feels like an extension of their values, world view, and passion for impact. I wish more entrepreneurs would commit to that vision and stay the course. Slow and steady really does win the race. I believe “Sharks” attempt to remove the entrepreneur (along with some integrity) from the process to force it into their brand or their system. Next time your best friend from college tells you that you should go on Shark Tank because you’d be totally perfect for that, ask her how she feels about swimming alone in murky water with a bunch of sharks while playing the movie, Jaws, in the background. 

* * * 

Tiffany Krumins, who refers to herself as an “accidental entrepreneur”, had an entirely different experience with Shark Tank and one that catapulted her into a successful entrepreneur with the help of a “Shark”, Barbara Corcoran. Tiffany worked as a caregiver for a boy with Downs Syndrome. He had a difficult time taking medication; so much so that he had to be restrained in order to take even the smallest of pills. She had a lightbulb moment. He loves stuffed animals so, why not incorporate that into the medicine-taking routine? That night she went home and took different materials and created an elephant out of sponges and fabrics and fitted the inside with a recordable greeting card. She recorded her voice on the card as a talking elephant. When she took it to work the next day, she said, “Gibby, this is your little buddy. She is going to help you take your medicine today.” At the moment, something just clicked with him; it was as if he was never fearful of medicine. He listened to this elephant’s soothing directions and took his medicine. With that aha-ha moment came the next thought: “What do I do to make this available to kids everywhere?” 

About six months later, Tiffany saw a casting call for Shark Tank. It was the pilot episode of the show and the casting read, “Do you have the next big million-dollar idea but you don’t have the funding to make it happen?” She submitted her idea and, one week later, she was accepted on the pilot episode of Shark Tank. After signing the deal with Barbara, Tiffany was thrust into the product launch world -everything from designing and filing her trademark and patent and designing packaging to negotiating with manufacturers. While Barbara was extremely supportive, her background was in real estate so, this was her first product launch, too. Although there were bumps and hiccups along the way, Barbara profited from her gamble on 

Ava the Elephant® and eight years from her ah-ha moment, Tiffany succeeded in obtaining a lucrative licensing deal. Most recently, Tiffany branched out and launched Mom Genius which aims to combine the excitement of Shark Tank with access to genius, kid-inspired products and to nurture other inventors. 

So, folks, there are always tales of woe and tales of success in product launching. Even though the success stories don’t happen overnight. Shark Tank has evolved quite a bit from the original pilot episode to the big hit reality show it is today and even those that walk off the show as a winner may still find themselves swimming the backstroke as the Sharks don’t always deliver on the promises they make on national TV. 

Shark Tank Said Yes – But What Happened Next? 

Guest Submission – Stefan Palios 

Many entrepreneurs dream of raising money from famous investors like Mark Cuban or Barbara Corcoran. It’s one of the reasons Shark Tank is so popular. But little do people know, a lot goes on after the Sharks say “yes”. There are even full blogs, like Sharkalytics and SharkTankBlog, dedicated to tracking these companies. It can be crazy to see how things go when the cameras turn off. 

From failed investments to businesses disappearing, we’ve rounded up some of the most interesting businesses based on data from Sharkalytics – and looked into what happened after the founders made a deal with the Sharks. 

A pie to tamper with 

Company: Mr. Tod’s Pie Factory 

Industry: Specialty Food 

What the company does: Retail and wholesale pie factory with two retail locations in New Jersey. 

Who Pitched the Sharks? Tod Wilson 

Season 1, Episode 1 

What the founders asked for: 

$460,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $4,600,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $460,000 in exchange for 50% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $920,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Barbara Corcoran and Daymond John 

Company status: MIXED. 

Note: The North Jersey Record reported that Tod Wilson was arrested in 2017 on charges of witness tampering. However, the company still seems to be in operation based on an active Twitter account and listing on Google Maps. 

Reinventing the wheel 

Company: Shark Wheel 

Industry: Outdoor Recreation 

What the company does: Shark Wheel’s wheel design is not circular, it’s Q-shaped, to put it as simply as possible. It goes on all sorts of things – skateboards, strollers, and more. 

Who pitched the Sharks? David Patrick and Zack Fleishman 

Season 6, Episode 29 

What the founders asked for: $100,000 in exchange for 5% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $2,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $225,000 in exchange for 7% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $3,000,000 

Other terms: Kevin, Nick and Mark also get a 10% royalty on sales until $500,000 are recouped. 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Kevin O’Leary, Mark Cuban, and Nick Woodman 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: According to Crunchbase, the company raised a further investor round of over $600,000. They are still in operation today and sell their wheels online. 

Disappearing broccoli 

Company: Broccoli Wad 

Industry: Novelties 

What the company does: A rubber band that works as a money clip. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Johnny Gennaro & Vinny Pastore 

Season 2, Episode 4 

What the founders asked for: $50,000 in exchange for 20% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $250,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $50,000 in exchange for 40% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $125,000 

Other terms: Closing conditions called for the product name to be changed to the Vinny Wad and for Vinny Pastore’s resemblance to be on the product. Barbara’s investment bought her a 40% stake; half went to Vinny for becoming the face of the product. 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Barbara Corcoran 

Company status: FAILED. 

Note: The company disappeared shortly after the deal was done, according to 2paragraphs.com, and the founders moved onto other projects. 

No pollution cars for cities 

Company: Zero Pollution Motors 

Industry: Automotive 

What the company does: Zero Pollution Motors is launching the AIRPod vehicle, a small zero-pollution vehicle designed for use in cramped urban centers. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Ethan Tucker and Pat Boone 

Season 6, Episode 27 

What the founders asked for: $5,000,000 in exchange for 50% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $10,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $5,000,000 in exchange for 50% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $10,000,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Robert Herjavec 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: The business seems to be in operation, with their website (zeropollutionmotors.us) offering people the chance to reserve their AIRPod vehicle. 

A face lift for your mouth 

Company AngelLift 

Industry: Cosmetics 

What the company does: Angellift Dermastrips are over-the-counter facial lifting strips that are worn inside the mouth, over the teeth for 10-30 minutes a day. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Aaron Bruce 

Season 5, Episode 27 

What the founders asked for: $500,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $5,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $500,000 in exchange for 15% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $3,333,333 

Other terms: Lori’s investment is to be used solely for the purpose of funding QVC purchase orders. The deal is also contingent on proof of patent, proof that $3,000,000 of retail sales have been done, and finally, review of the clinical trials. 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Lori Greiner 

Company status: MIXED. 

Note: The Shark Tank deal didn’t end up happening, according to Sharklytics.com. The business appears to be in operation, but their social media has been inactive since summer 2019. 

Lobster boys 

Company Cousins Maine Lobster 

Industry: Food 

What the company does: A lobster roll food truck run by two cousins originally from Maine, operating in Southern California. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Jim Tselikis and Sabin Lomac 

Season 4, Episode 6 

What the founders asked for: $55,000 in exchange for 5% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,100,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $55,000 in exchange for 15% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $366,667 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Barbara Corcoran 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: The business is operational and growing after the Shark Tank investment went through. 

Nutty for nut butter 

Company: Wild Squirrel Nut Butter 

Industry: Food 

What the company does: Homemade peanut butters. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Erika Welsh and Keeley Tillotson 

Season 3, Episode 14 

What the founders asked for: $50,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $500,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $50,000 in exchange for 40% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $125,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Barbara Corcoran 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: According to a Forbes interview, the company is thriving. The founders are looking to add more products to the line and are doing millions of dollars in nut butter sales. 

A deal for royalty 

Company: Gift Card Rescue 

Industry: Retail and E-Commerce 

What the company does: A web-based company that buys back and sells some of the 10% of all unused gift cards each year in the US. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Kwami Kuadey 

Season 1, Episode 4 

What the founders asked for: $150,000 in exchange for 30% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $500,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $200,000 in exchange for 50% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $400,000 

Other terms: Robert and Kevin O’Leary also get a 5% royalty with the deal. 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Kevin O’Leary and Robert Herjavec 

Company status: FAILED. 

Note: As reported by the Baltimore Sun, Gift Card Rescue shut down in 2016, not too long after their Shark Tank appearance. 

Baby cups for everyone 

Company: Lollacup 

Industry: Baby and Childcare 

What the company does: Lollacup is one well-engineered sippy cup. It comes with a valve-free, weighted straw that small children can easily learn to drink from, even when Lollacup is tilted. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Hanna Lim 

Season 3, Episode 12 

What the founders asked for: $100,000 in exchange for 15% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $666,667 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $100,000 in exchange for 40% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $250,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Mark Cuban and Robert Herjavec 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: The company expanded into other baby products like plates and utensils, and the business seems to be going well. 

Sweeping away the Sharks 

Company: Sweep Easy 

Industry: Home and Cleaning 

What the company does: A new kind of broom with a built-in scraper. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Shane Pannell 

Season 2, Episode 6 

What the founders asked for: $40,000 in exchange for 25% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $160,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $80,000 in exchange for 25% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $320,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Kevin Harrington and Daymond John 

Company status: MIXED. 

Note: The Shark Tank deal ended up falling through, but founder Shane Pannell continued working. The business is still operating and you can buy the sweep easy brooms on Amazon. 

STEM toys, ahoy 

Company: Qubits 

Industry: Toys 

What the company does: Qubits is a new construction toy for kids. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Mark Burginger 

Season 1, Episode 14 

What the founders asked for: $90,000 in exchange for 51% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $176,471 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $90,000 in exchange for 51% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $176,471 

Other terms: Contingent on Daymond being able to get a deal with a major toy company 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Daymond John 

Company status: MIXED. 

Note: The deal ultimately fell through, but Daymond John remained a mentor to the company. They secured their own growth partnerships and are still operating. 

They’re searching everyone 

Company: Postcard on the Run 

Industry: Online Services 

What the company does: An easy-to-use mobile app that allows you to take a photograph from your phone and instantly send it as a real printed postcard. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Josh Brooks 

Season 5, Episode 1 

What the founders asked for: $300,000 in exchange for 5% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $6,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $300,000 in exchange for 7% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $4,000,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Robert Herjavec 

Company status: FAILED. 

Note: The company shut down in an announcement from 2015 after competition pushed them out of business, as reported on SharkTankBlog.com. 

Greasy product, solid business 

Company: Grease Monkey Wipes 

Industry: Outdoor Recreation 

What the company does: Individually-packaged degreasing cleaning wipes formulated for cyclists to easily remove grease and grime from working on bicycles. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Tim Stansbury and Erin Whalen 

Season 1, Episode 12 

What the founders asked for: $40,000 in exchange for 40% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $100,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $40,000 in exchange for 40% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $100,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Barbara Corcoran and Robert Herjavec 

Company Status: SUCCESS. 

Note: The company is still in operations after a successful Shark Tank deal. 

Customers hear you! 

Company: Origaudio 

Industry: Electronics 

What the company does: The Rocket, the company’s flagship product, can turn anything into a speaker through its vibrations. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Jason Lucash and Michael Szymczak 

Season 2, Episode 8 

What the founders asked for: $150,000 in exchange for 15% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $150,000 in exchange for 15% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,000,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Robert Herjavec 

Company Status: SUCCESS. 

Note: Still operational, the company expanded into multiple different product lines and touts its high customer satisfaction on its website. 

Bottles on bottles 

Company: The Clean Bottle 

Industry: Water bottles 

What the company does: A water container that unscrews from the bottom as well as the top for ease of cleaning. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Dave Mayer 

Season 3, Episode 1 

What the founders asked for: $60,000 in exchange for 5% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,200,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $60,000 in exchange for 8% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $750,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Mark Cuban 

Company Status: MIXED. 

Note: BicycleRetailer.com reported that the company was looking to be acquired in 2018, but recent news suggests that whatever the outcome, the company is running successfully. 

Learn guitar quickly, apparently 

Company: Chord Buddy 

Industry: Music 

What the company does: A two-month learning system that teaches which chords to play on the guitar. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Travis Perry 

Season 3, Episode 3 

What the founders asked for: $125,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,250,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $175,000 in exchange for 20% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $875,000 

Other terms: The deal stipulates that $50,000 of the investment will be placed in escrow, set aside to be used to make an infomercial. 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Robert Herjavec 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: The company’s website suggests it’s still running and boasts media coverage in Forbes, CNBC, ABC, and The Today Show, among others. 

Sold it all to the Sharks 

Company: Classroom Jams 

Industry: Education 

What the company does: An educational record label and publishing house designed to get students into learning about classic works of literature. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Mark Furigay 

Season 1, Episode 2 

What the founders asked for: $250,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $2,500,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $250,000 in exchange for 100% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $250,000 

Other terms: The inventor agreed to sell his entire company (each of the 5 sharks having 20% equity) with the agreement of receiving 5% royalties from all future sales, and an option to buy 1/6 of the company back. 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Kevin Harrington, Kevin O’Leary, Barbara Corcoran, Daymond John, Robert Herjavec 

Company Status: FAILED. 

Note: Despite the backing of the Sharks, the company doesn’t seem to have taken off. 

A good barbecue time 

Company: Pork Barrel BBQ 

Industry: Specialty Food 

What the company does: The company sells award-winning BBQ rubs and spices. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Heath Hall and Brett Thompson 

Season 1, Episode 6 

What the founders asked for: $50,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $500,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $50,000 in exchange for 50% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $100,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Barbara Corcoran 

Company Status: SUCCESS. 

Note: Pork Barrel BBQ made the most of their Shark Tank appearance, and still advertise it today on their website. The company has since expanded and is doing well. 

Save the wine! 

Company: Wine Balloon (now Air Cork) 

Industry: Wine Accessories 

What the company does: The company sells a product that preserves wine inside any already-opened bottle. It works by inflating a balloon inside the bottle to crowd out the air and prevent it from being in contact with the wine. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Eric Corti 

Season 3, Episode 4 

What the founders asked for: $40,000 in exchange for 30% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $133,333 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $400,000 in exchange for 100% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $400,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Mark Cuban and Lori Greiner 

Company Status: MIXED. 

Note: Despite the deal with the Sharks falling through, the company is doing well. They rebranded from Wine Balloon to Air Cork and are continuing to grow. 

It’s pretzels AND candy 

Company: The Painted Pretzel 

Industry: Specialty Food 

What the company does: The Painted Pretzel sells creative, gourmet chocolate-covered pretzel confections in brick-and-mortar retail stores and online. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Raven Thomas 

Season 3, Episode 6 

What the founders asked for: $100,000 in exchange for 25% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $400,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $100,000 in exchange for 25% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $400,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Mark Cuban 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: After a successful Shark investment from Mark Cuban, the business has continued to grow. 

Flavors combine when you kiss 

Company: Kisstixx 

Industry: Cosmetics 

What the company does: Kisstixx is a fun lip balm that comes in pairs according to compatible flavors. Each Kisstixx lipstick packs a punch of flavor, and they’re paired to mix well when they come together in a kiss. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Dallas Robinson and Mike Buonomo 

Season 3, Episode 7 

What the founders asked for: $200,000 in exchange for 20% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $200,000 in exchange for 40% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $500,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Mark Cuban 

Company status: FAILED. 

Note: Shortly after their Shark Tank appearance, the founders moved on from KissTixx to other ventures. 

Paddle, paddle, paddle 

Company: Tower Paddle Boards 

Industry: Outdoor Recreation 

What the company does: Stand-up paddle boarding products. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Stephan Aarstol 

Season 3, Episode 9 

What the founders asked for: $150,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,500,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $150,000 in exchange for 30% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $500,000 

Other terms: Mark Cuban gets 1st right of refusal for future business ventures 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Mark Cuban 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: The company did well in the Shark Tank and continued to do well after making a deal. They even landed a juicy Forbes.com feature, giving them huge press. 

The vanishing nail kit 

Company: Nail Pak 

Industry: Cosmetics 

What the company does: An easy-to-use package that consolidates nail polish, pads, file and polish remover. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Barbara Lampugnale 

Season 3, Episode 12 

What the founders asked for: $50,000 in exchange for 20% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $250,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $50,000 in exchange for 40% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $125,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Lori Greiner 

Company status: FAILED. 

Note: Despite amazing success after Shark Tank, completely selling out of their inventory, Nail Pak seems to have disappeared. The founder even moved onto another cosmetics company. 

Safety AND convenience 

Company: Bev Buckle 

Industry: Accessories 

What the company does: A belt featuring a buckle that opens to make a beverage holder. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Jay Kriner 

Season 4, Episode 1 

What the founders asked for: $50,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $500,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $50,000 in exchange for 51% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $98,039 

Other terms: The owner can not take a salary from the $50,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Barbara Corcoran 

Company status: MIXED. 

Note: The business is still up and running, but it’s not certain that the original Shark Tank team is still behind it. According to 2paragraphs.com, the business went up for sale in 2015, but there’s no confirmation if someone bought it or the founders kept it running themselves. 

Dip dunk drop 

Company: Back 9 Dips 

Industry: Specialty Food 

What the company does: Back 9 Dips are buffalo chicken dips created with all white meat chicken breasts along with wing and dipping sauces. 

Who pitched the Sharks? David & Nique Mealy 

Season 4, Episode 4 

What the founders asked for: $150,000 in exchange for 15% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $150,000 in exchange for 25% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $600,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Lori Greiner and Robert Herjavec 

Company status: FAILED. 

Note: Unfortunately, the momentum from Shark Tank couldn’t save the business after a scandal involving using improper ingredients. They had to do a mass recall of their products and eventually went under. 

Brothers in vitamins 

Company: Marz Sprays 

Industry: Wellness 

What the company does: If you don’t like to swallow pills, you may feel like there aren’t any wellness supplements out there for you. Marz Sprays came up with a solution. Their supplements are designed and packaged as oral sprays. 

Who picked the Sharks? Brandon and Keith Marz 

Season 4, Episode 5 

What the founders asked for: $200,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $2,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $200,000 in exchange for 25% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $800,000 

Other terms: The entrepreneurs have the option to buy back half of Lori’s stake at 4X the price she paid for them. 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Lori Greiner 

Company status: MIXED. 

Note: Since the company was in the Shark Tank, they expanded their product lines into all kinds of sprays. Despite being sued by actress Jennifer Love Hewitt, the company still seems to be doing well. 

Uni-cycling all over town 

Company: SBU Unicycle by Focus Designs 

Industry: Cycling 

What the company does: Focus Designs is the maker of the self-balancing unicycle, or the SBU for short. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Daniel Wood and David Martschinske 

Season 4, Episode 7 

What the founders asked for: $300,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $3,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $300,000 in exchange for 33% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $909,091 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Kevin O’Leary and Robert Herjavec 

Company status: MIXED. 

Note: While the team behind Focus Designs (the maker of the Unicycle) all seem to still be involved, the Amazon product links are broken and the website returns an error. 

On your way to a better life 

Company: Better Life 

Industry: Cleaning Products 

What the company does: A line of plant-derived cleaning products. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Tim Barklage and Kevin Tibbs 

Season 5, Episode 7 

What the founders asked for: $400,000 in exchange for 7% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $5,714,286 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $400,000 in exchange for 17% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $2,352,941 

Other terms: Lori offers the $400,000 as a loan, with the equity stake dropping to 7% when the loan is paid back. 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Lori Greiner 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: The company still seems to be up and running, with more products on their site and updates to their blog. 

Block that sun 

Company: SwimZip 

Industry: Baby and Childcare 

What the company does: UV sun protection bathing suits designed for babies, toddlers, and children of all ages. A signature zipper down the front makes these suits easy to put on and take off. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Betsy Johnson (Wanless) 

Season 5, Episode 15 

What the founders asked for: $60,000 in exchange for 5% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,200,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $60,000 in exchange for 20% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $300,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Lori Greiner 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: The company is alive and thriving. Its social media channels are continually active and the website shows multiple products (even for adults now). 

The cookie monster approves 

Company: The Cookie Dough Cafe 

Industry: Specialty Food 

What the company does: Gourmet cookie dough made to be eaten and enjoyed without baking. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Julia Schmid and Joan Pacetti 

Season 5, Episode 16 

What the founders asked for: $50,000 in exchange for 20% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $250,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $100,000 in exchange for 30% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $333,333 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Lori Greiner and Steve Tisch 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: The company has done well since its Shark Tank deal. It’s grown well and even expanded into Canada. 

Supplement or construction material? 

Company: FiberFix 

Industry: Home Improvement 

What the company does: An ultra-strength repair tape that is easy to apply and cures rapidly. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Eric Child and Spencer Quinn 

Season 5, Episode 6 

What the founders asked for: $90,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $900,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $120,000 in exchange for 2% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,000,000 

Other terms: Lori will also fund purchase orders. 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Lori Greiner 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: The deal went through and the company continues to operate. Its products are even available on Amazon. 

Fashionable lunch? 

Company: Yubo 

Industry: Toys and Games 

What the company does: Yubo is a new kind of lunchbox featuring unique changeable faceplates that allow kids to update the look of their lunchbox as often as they’d like. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Cyndi Pedrazzi, Paul Pedrazzi, and Dan Harden 

Season 5, Episode 10 

What the founders asked for: $150,000 in exchange for 15% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $150,000 in exchange for 20% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $750,000 

Other terms: 20% stake drops to 10% if the investment is repaid in 18 months. 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Kevin O’Leary and Robert Herjavec 

Company status: FAILED. 

Note: After 10 years in the business, the company announced in early 2019 that it was closing down. 

What were they drinking?! 

Company: Tipsy Elves 

Industry: Holiday Cheer 

What the company does: A collection of quirky and humorous Christmas-themed sweaters, sweater dresses, jumpsuits and accessories. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Evan Mendelsohn and Nicklaus Morton 

Season 5, Episode 12 

What the founders asked for: $100,000 in exchange for 5% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $2,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $100,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,000,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Robert Herjavec 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: Business Insider reported in 2018 that the company has sold over $70 million worth of product since appearing on Shark Tank. 

Don’t get stuck on surge 

Company: Invisiplug 

Industry: Home Improvement 

What the company does: A patented line of power strips and surge protectors designed to blend in to hardwood floors. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Mike Barzman and Bryan O’Connell 

Season 5, Episode 14 

What the founders asked for: $125,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,250,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $125,000 in exchange for; 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,250,000 

Other terms: In addition to the 10% equity stake, Lori is to receive a royalty of $1.00 per unit sold until her initial investment is recovered, then $0.25 per unit in perpetuity. 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Lori Greiner 

Company status: FAILED. 

Note: While some media claim the business is operational, the products are not available on Amazon or QVC any longer. Founder Mike Barzman was also arrested for threatening someone with a gun. 

Sleep like a baby 

Company: Sleeping Baby 

Industry: Baby and Childcare 

What the company does: Creators of the Zipadee-Zip, a onesie that provides a cozy, womb-like sleeping environment that babies need, with the freedom to roll around safely and freely. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Brett and Stephanie Parker 

Season 6, Episode 1 

What the founders asked for: $200,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $2,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $200,000 in exchange for 20% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,000,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Daymond John 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: While the deal with Daymond John fell through, the company continues to operate – and even got a feature in Forbes. 

Roommate or building material? 

Company: Roominate 

Industry: Toys and Games 

What the company does: A line of toys that combines hands-on building, circuits, design, crafts, storytelling, and creativity. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Alice Brooks and Bettina Chen 

Season 6, Episode 2 

What the founders asked for: $500,000 in exchange for 5% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $10,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $500,000 in exchange for 5% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $10,000,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Mark Cuban and Lori Greiner 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: After success in the Shark Tank, Roominate was acquired in 2016 by toy company PlayMonster. 

Golf until the end of time 

Company: Kronos Golf 

Industry: Recreation and Leisure 

What the company does: An independent manufacturer of premium golf putters, Kronos undertakes a labor-intensive process that includes precision milling to within 1/1000 of an inch, delicate hand work, and a calculated approach to raw material selection. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Phillip Lapuz and Eric Williams 

Season 6, Episode 2 

What the founders asked for: $150,000 in exchange for 15% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $150,000 in exchange for 30% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $500,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Robert Herjavec 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: The deal with Robert Herjavec went through and the company is growing. It primarily sells to the Japanese market but hopes to expand into the US. 

Strong by nature 

Company: The Natural Grip 

Industry: Fitness 

What the company does: The Natural Grip is an innovative fitness product that provides comfortable and custom hand protection for fitness enthusiasts. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Ashley Drake 

Season 6, Episode 8 

What the founders asked for: $100,000 in exchange for 20% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $500,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $125,000 in exchange for 25% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $500,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Robert Herjavec 

Company status: FAILED. 

Note: Despite major early success, including being part of the Olympics, The Natural Grip has not updated Twitter since 2017 and the website fails to load. 

Remix your lips 

Company: Lipstick Remix 

Industry: Cosmetics 

What the company does: A way to save the lipstick that gets stuck at the bottom of the tube. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Jill Quilln 

Season 1, Episode 13 

What the founders asked for: $105,000 in exchange for 30% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $350,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $105,000 in exchange for 50% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $210,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Kevin Harrington, Barbara Corcoran, Daymond John 

Company status: FAILED. 

Note: After a successful run on Shark Tank, the company suddenly shut down in 2013 and has been defunct ever since. 

Dance like nobody’s watching 

Company: Tippi Toes 

Industry: Baby and Childcare 

What the company does: Dance education centers for children. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Megan Reilly and Sarah Nuse 

Season 2, Episode 1 

What the founders asked for: $30,000 in exchange for 5% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $600,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $100,000 in exchange for 30% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $333,333 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Mark Cuban 

Company status: MIXED. 

Note: The deal with Mark Cuban fell through, but the business itself didn’t fail. The due are still running the company. 

New toys all the time 

Company: Toygaroo 

Industry: Toys and Games 

What the company does: A subscription toy service. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Nikki Pope 

Season 2, Episode 2 

What the founders asked for: $100,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $200,000 in exchange for 40% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $500,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Kevin O’Leary and Mark Cuban 

Company status: FAILED. 

Note: Despite securing two Sharks, the company ultimately failed. O’Leary said in a Forbes interview it was due to the founder’s inability to execute. 

Get fit, will surf 

Company: SurfSet Fitness 

Industry: Fitness 

What the company does: Surf-inspired exercise equipment and group fitness classes. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Mike Hartwick and Sarah Ponn 

Season 4, Episode 2 

What the founders asked for: $150,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,500,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $300,000 in exchange for 30% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,000,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Mark Cuban 

Company status: MIXED. 

Note: The deal worked with Mark Cuban, but one of the co-founders left the company in 2018. It still operates. 

So much posture 

Company: Posture Now 

Industry: Wellness 

What the company does: A patent-pending strap that keeps the wearer’s posture perfect. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Mike Lane and Mark Franklin 

Season 4, Episode 3 

What the founders asked for: $100,000 in exchange for 15% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $666,667 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $100,000 in exchange for 30% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $333,333 

Other terms: Mark will get a $5 royalty on every unit sold until his investment is recovered. In addition, since the two entrepreneurs have full-time jobs outside of the company, Mark requires that one of them (Mike) quit his day job to fully dedicate himself to Posture Now. 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Mark Cuban 

Company status: MIXED. 

Note: While the website seems to still be up, the product is out of stock on Amazon and the company’s Twitter account has not been updated since 2017. 

Have a cool baby 

Company: Cool Wazoo 

Industry: Baby and Childcare 

What the company does: Cool Wazoo is a cover that redirects heat back to its source while serving five different functions. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Ginelle Mills 

Season 4, Episode 8 

What the founders asked for: $65,000 in exchange for 25% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $260,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $65,000 in exchange for 25% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $260,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Lori Greiner 

Company status: FAILED. 

Note: With the Amazon store shut down and products being labelled as “sold out,” it doesn’t look like Cool Wazoo is still operating. 

Fast ramen for the impatient 

Company: Rapid Ramen Cooker 

Industry: Food 

What the company does: A bowl designed to cook ramen more easily in the microwave. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Chris Johnson 

Season 5, Episode 3 

What the founders asked for: $300,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $3,000,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $150,000 in exchange for 15% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,000,000 

Other terms: In addition to the equity investment, the deal includes another $150,000 in the form of a loan. 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Mark Cuban 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: Despite the Shark Tank deal falling through, the company expanded its product offerings and is even sold through Walmart stores. 

Surf AND skateboard 

Company: Hamboards 

Industry: Recreation and Leisure 

What the company does: A surf-style skateboard company. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Pete Hamborg 

Season 5, Episode 4 

What the founders asked for: $100,000 in exchange for 15% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $666,667 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $300,000 in exchange for 30% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $1,000,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Robert Herjavec 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: The deal on Shark Tank helped the company grow and it still seems to be operating today, based on an active and professional business website. 

Carry your dogs 

Company: Heart Pup 

Industry: Pet Products 

What the company does: A sling and dog carrier tote hybrid, HeartPUP allows the user to carry pets handsfree. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Anastasia Heart 

Season 6, Episode 3 

What the founders asked for: $25,000 in exchange for 10% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $250,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $50,000 in exchange for 40% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $125,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Daymond John 

Company status: SUCCESS. 

Note: Since Shark Tank, Heart Pup has continued to operate and grow. She even models the product herself on the company’s social media pages. 

Kids love it! 

Company: Paper Box Pilots 

Industry: Toys and Games 

What the company does: Paper Box Pilots sells sticker kits that turn a plain old ordinary box into imaginative airplanes, fire engines and race cars. 

Who pitched the Sharks? Noah Cahoon 

Season 6, Episode 4 

What the founders asked for: $35,000 in exchange for 25% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $140,000 

Deal they got on Shark Tank: $35,000 in exchange for 50% equity stake 

Implied valuation: $70,000 

Shark(s) that went in on the deal: Kevin O’Leary 

Company status: MIXED. 

Note: While the deal worked on Shark Tank and the company still appears to be running, many items are out of stock and the company’s social media has not been updated since 2018. 

Title III of the ADA states that “[n]o individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation by any person who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation.”  Although there is no mention of websites in the Act, “public accommodation” has largely been interpreted, particularly in New York, to include websites and mobile apps.  As such, the practical implication of the ADA requires that commercial websites be navigable by all users, including the visually impaired.  

The plaintiffs who file these cases are typically serial filers – some with hundreds of lawsuits over the span of just a couple of years.  These plaintiffs can make decent money from these matters, and the attorneys are motivated to take the cases on a contingency basis because the ADA allows for the award of attorneys’ fees. Thus, quick settlements are almost guaranteed since it is usually less expensive for the defendant to settle than to fight the case in court.  

Given the exponential increase in the number of cases being filed out of New York, Georgia, Arizona, California, Florida, and Texas, it is highly recommended that website owners take immediate action to become ADA compliant (such as making websites compatible with screen-reading software).  Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) can be found here.  Making your website ADA compliant is of course the right thing to do in general, and could even result in increased revenues for your company.

If you have been served with an ADA lawsuit, immediately contact an attorney (as you will likely have only 21 days to respond to the suit) and get your site compliant prior to engaging in settlement discussions.

Just this month, pet medication supplier, Pet King Brands, discovered multiple counterfeit listings for its hydrocortisone ear solution, Zymox.   Upon notification, Amazon removed the listings and issued refunds to customers who purchased the bogus products.  In the past, refunds have been issued for some counterfeits, but usually only months after the listing was reported.  Pet King is currently testing the counterfeit items to determine their contents and offer consumers more information (i.e., about potential health concerns, etc.).

Other brand owners, however, have been fighting counterfeit trolls for years with only bare minimum support from Amazon; relying heavily on their own lawyers to exterminate these brand leeches.  For example, 71-year-old inventor Bonnie Tyler a/k/a “Granny Thug” has, with the help of her attorneys, removed about 800 counterfeit listings of her egg pealing product, the NEGG.  Tyler herself spends time every day on the platform sniffing out infringers, and when asked what advice she would give to new product owners, Tyler said “I would immediately get your trademark.”  Tyler’s battle has been ongoing for two years and predates Amazon’s new unit.  Given the sheer volume of products on the platform, like Tyler, many owners will have to scare off counterfeiters with limited assistance from Amazon’s new task force.

If you are a brand owner, it is imperative that you monitor Amazon daily for cheap knockoff products disguised as your own.  Contact an attorney who can offer a brand quality and safety enforcement program for your product to ensure that consumers are getting treated, not tricked, when they buy your product this holiday season.

The issue arose in December 2012 when Tiffany contacted Costco regarding Costco’s sale of diamond engagement rings that were identified by in-store signs containing the word “Tiffany.” Though Costco allegedly removed all use of the word upon receiving Tiffany’s letter, Tiffany filed suit just 2 months later; citing dilution, counterfeiting, unfair competition, false and deceptive business practices, and false advertising, in violation of the Lanham Act and New York law.

Tiffany claimed that Costco’s use of its trademarked word, “Tiffany,” in connection with the sale of engagement rings, caused confusion among consumers and violated the Lanham Act as a matter of law. However, Costco argued that its use of the word did not constitute infringement and instead qualified as “fair use,” alleging the word “Tiffany” has become a generic term widely recognized as a descriptor for a particular type of ring setting. As part of its counterclaim, Costco sought to have Tiffany’s federal trademark invalidated on the same basis.

In support of its case, Costco argued that it only used the word “Tiffany” on signs for rings that had the “Tiffany setting” (a diamond solitaire situated among six prongs). Costco went on to highlight that it sold many other styles of diamond engagement rings identified by similar point-of-sale signs, each of which displayed the name of the corresponding ring’s setting (such as Channel and Pave); none of which used the word “Tiffany.”

In 2017, the district dismissed Costco’s counterclaim and defenses and granted Tiffany’s summary judgment motion. The judge held that “no rational finder of fact could conclude that Costco acted in good faith in adopting the Tiffany mark,” that Costco’s fair use defense failed as a matter of law, and Costco was liable for trademark infringement and counterfeiting. Tiffany was awarded damages in an excess of $21M. Costco appealed.

On appeal, the circuit court found several errors with the lower court’s ruling and determined that, among other issues, “the district court overlooked substantial evidence that Costco did not attempt to sow confusion among its customers.” Since the circuit court determined that there was a genuine issue of material fact (specifically, whether actual confusion occurred among consumers), rather than being awarded summary judgment, the case should have proceeded to trial before a jury. As such, the case has been remanded; and, barring a settlement, should proceed to trial.

As always, stay tuned to this space for updates. For more information on the this case and what it means for intellectual property rights holders, please email us.

Patents
A 30-day extension has been granted for various action items with original due dates falling between March 27 – April 30.  To receive the extension, the late filing must include a statement that the delay in filing or payment was due to the COVID-19 breakout.  Applicable action items include, but are not limited to: 

• replies to Office notices issued during pre-examination processing buy a small or micro entity; 
• replies to Office notices or actions issued during examination or patent publication processing;
• issue fees;
• notices of appeal;
• appeal briefs;
• reply briefs; and
• maintenance fees filed by a small or micro entity. 

In addition to the foregoing, the USPTO issued a fee relief notice that pre-dates the extension notice.  Patent applicants who are unable to timely reply to a USPTO Office communication due to the effects of the Coronavirus outbreak, which resulted in the application being held abandoned or the reexamination prosecution terminated or limited, the USPTO will waive the petition to revive fee.  The following requirements apply to receive the waiver:

• the petition must include a statement that the delay in filing the reply required to the outstanding Office communication was because the practitioner, applicant, or at least one inventor, was personally affected by the Coronavirus outbreak such that they were unable to file a timely reply;
• the applicant/owner must include a copy of the USPTO Relief Notice with the reply; and
• the petition must be filed no later than two months of the issue date of the notice of abandonment or the notification that reexamination prosecution has been terminated.

Trademarks
A 30-day extension has been granted for various action items with original due dates falling between March 27 – April 30.  To receive the extension, the late filing must include a statement that the delay in filing or payment was due to the COVID-19 breakout.  Applicable action items include, but are not limited to the following: 

• responses to Office actions;
• statements of use or requests for extension of time to file same;
• notices of opposition or requests for extension for time to file same;
• affidavits of use or excusable nonuse; and
• renewal applications.

As with Patents, the USPTO issued a fee relief notice that predates extension notice. Trademark applications and registrations that are abandoned or canceled/expired due to inability to timely respond to a trademark-related Office communication as a result of the effects of the Coronavirus outbreak, the USPTO will waive the petition fee to revive the abandoned application or reinstate the canceled/expired registration.  However, a representative from the USPTO informed us that this is actually a fee reimbursement, rather than a waiver.  In order to receive the fee reimbursement, the following applies:

• the petition must include a statement explaining how the failure to respond to the Office communication was due to the effects of the Coronavirus outbreak; and
• the petition must be filed not later than two months of the issue date of the notice of abandonment or cancellation.

Nonetheless, it is strongly recommended that the requisite responses be timely filed, if possible, as a cancellation or abandonment could open the door for someone else to file your trademark.
The situation at the USPTO likely remains fluid, and further extensions/waivers may be granted as we move further into the month of April.  If you have any intellectual property matters currently pending with the USPTO, contact your attorney to determine how to best proceed during this time.   

On Friday, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released a report (Report) pursuant to President Trump’s April 3, 2019, Memorandum on Combatting Trafficking in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods. The Report – the first of its kind – outlines a series of recommendations and actions that should be taken by both the federal government and industry players in order to combat the counterfeit goods epidemic that has swept the US product industry. While Amazon is not directly named, it is clear from the practices and examples detailing how e-commerce sites have made it easy for counterfeit goods to reach the masses, that Amazon was most certainly the basis for much of the Report.

One of the critical determinations of the Report is that the US government needs to “ensure entities with financial interests in imports bear responsibility.” As such, companies such as Amazon will have to take steps to actively prevent counterfeits from reaching consumers, such as working more closely with US Customs and Border Patrol, as well as thoroughly vetting sellers on the platform.

The report provides the following list of “Best Practices” for e-commerce platforms and third-party marketplaces:

1. Comprehensive Terms of Service Agreements
2. Significantly Enhanced Vetting of Third-Party Sellers
3. Limitations on high risk products
4. Efficient Notice and Takedown Procedures
5. Enhanced Post-Discovery Actions
6. Indemnity Requirements for Foreign Sellers
7. Clear Transactions Through Banks that Comply with U.S. Enforcement Requests
8. Pre-Sale Identification of Third-Party Sellers
9. Establish Marketplace Seller IDs
10. Clearly Identifiable Country of Origin Disclosures

Additionally, and quite significantly, the Report recommends that the Department of Commerce consider changing contributory and/or vicarious infringement standards so that e-commerce platforms can be held liable for contributory trademark infringement. This would be a colossal change from the status quo, as numerous intellectual property owners have unsuccessfully sued Amazon for trademark infringement due to its role in counterfeit product distribution.

Moreover, the groundbreaking Report goes on to suggest the development of a national awareness campaign that “should involve platforms, rights holders, and the applicable government agencies to provide education for consumers regarding the risks of counterfeits as well as the various ways consumers can use to spot counterfeit products.”

While we may not see a decrease in counterfeits immediately, the DHS Report and subsequent actions to be taken are a major step in the right direction. For more information on the Report and what it means for intellectual property rights holders, please email us at DLG@DigitalLawGroup.com.

Over the past month, most everyone, whether a California resident or not, has received notices from numerous online companies encouraging users to review updates made to the companies’ terms of use and privacy policies. These seemingly synchronized updates are certainly not a coincidence, but rather last-minute efforts to wrap up compliance with the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), which is set to go in effect on New Year’s Day.

Coming on the heels of Europe’s GDPR, the CCPA is the most comprehensive set of online privacy regulations in the U.S. The new rights granted to consumers under the CCPA include:

• The right to know what personal information is collected, used, shared or sold, both as to the categories and specific pieces of personal information;

• The right to delete personal information held by businesses and by extension, a business’s service provider;

• The right to opt-out of sale of personal information. Children under the age of 16 must provide opt in consent, with a parent or guardian consenting for children under 13.

• The right to non-discrimination in terms of price or service when a consumer exercises a privacy right under CCPA.

Businesses are subject to the CCPA if one or more of the following are true:

• It has gross annual revenues in excess of $25 million;

• Buys, sells or receives the personal information of 50,000 or more consumers, households, or devices; or

• Derives 50 percent or more of annual revenues from selling consumers’ personal information.

The burden imposed by the CCPA is significant, as it not only requires companies to overhaul their websites to ensure that all notices and opt-out links are provided to users, but it also likely requires changes to company internal procedures and employee training in order to maintain compliance.

Violations of the CCPA create private causes of action for consumers, and also empowers the CA Attorney General (AG) to pursue cases against businesses for damages of up to $7,500 per violation for intentional, or willful violations. So, the countdown is on for companies to contact a privacy attorney and, at a minimum, take steps to reduce exposure to private suits. AG enforcement isn’t set to begin until mid-2020, so there is still time to get your reindeer in a row.

A recent investigation by the Wall Street Journal revealed that over 4000 items for sale on Amazon were mislabeled, declared unsafe by US agencies, or all-out banned by federal regulators.  Horrifically, over 2000 of those Amazon listings were medications and children’s toys that lacked proper health and safety warnings.  Specifically, the investigators ordered and tested 10 children’s products, many promoted as “Amazon’s Choice.” Four failed tests based on federal safety standards.  Moreover, 46% of the 4152 unsafe products were fulfilled by Amazon. 

Sadly, a mislabeled product sold on Amazon was involved in the death of one consumer.  In 2014, Albert Stokes purchased a motorcycle helmet on Amazon that was listed as certified by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). Subsequently, Mr. Stokes was involved in a fatal accident wherein his helmet came off. His mother sued Amazon claiming the helmet was defective, but ultimately settled for $5,000 with no admission of liability from Amazon. However, in July 2019 the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration stated that the helmet was not DOT compliant and that it had been recalled.  At that time, it was still listed as DOT compliant on Amazon.  The listing has since been removed (5 years after the accident). 

Whether you are selling lens wipes or motorcycle helmets, cheap counterfeits of your product can pose hidden dangers to consumers.  Not only does this erode your brand image, but it can also open you up to unwanted liability claims.  While Amazon is taking steps to make it easier to monitor and remove counterfeits from the platform, it is far from a perfect system. Product marketers should consult with an experienced attorney who can navigate Amazon’s platform and help ensure that their trademarks, copyrights and brand name do not appear on listings for potentially hazardous counterfeits.

The case involved a dispute over a trademark application filed back in 2011 for the clothing line “FUCT” (pronounced as the individual letters F-U-C-T).  The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) refused to register the trademark for the brand stating that the mark was a vulgar term and was banned from registration under section 2(a) of the Lanham Act.  The Act essentially allowed the government (in this case, the USPTO) to impose its views about what is moral and suppress those that it, in its sole discretion, deemed distasteful.   

Fortunately, the majority of the Court found that USPTO cannot exercise this discretion.  It held that the “immoral or scandalous” ban discriminates on the basis of viewpoint, and therefore runs afoul of the First Amendment.  The Court cited many examples of this discrimination, including the USPTO’s refusal to register Bong Hits 4 Jesus while granting trademark protection for a game called “Praise The Lord” and a line of clothing called “Jesus Died For You.” 

This ruling comes almost two years after a similar case involving Asian-American rock band, the Slants, wherein the Court held that clause of the Lanham Act that banned “disparaging” marks also violated the First Amendment.  

With the recent strike downs in the law, we are likely to see a slew of interesting trademarks being registered with the USPTO.  Additionally, it is also almost certain that the next test of the USPTO’s discretion will be on its handling of marks for cannabis products. 

Intellectual property, including trademarks, can be incredibly valuable assets and are key to protecting against infringement.  If you are launching a new brand or product, be sure to work with an experienced intellectual property attorney to ensure you don’t get FUCT by competitors.