From idea to market: how to sell your product or service

Bringing a product or service to market It is a process that starts with an idea and goes through analysis, development, testing, investment, and commercial activities. Traditionally, this process follows a series of fairly well-defined stages: value definition, prototyping, fundraising, production, and launch.

However, there is no single path from idea to market. An alternative route is the crowdfunding, which can take different forms depending on the objective and business model. 

Reward crowdfunding, for example, is perfect for those who develop a physical product and want to test interest in it before going into production.; equity crowdfunding, on the other hand, is particularly effective for those who offer scalable services or models and aim for deeper engagement with customers and potential customers.

In this article, we propose a comparison between the “standard” path for moving from idea to market and the “crowd” path”, to understand how they work, how they differ, and above all how they can be integrated with each other to reduce risks, speed up timescales, and improve launch performance.

From idea to market: the “standard” path”

The traditional path that a company follows to bring a product or service to market consists of recognizable stages, which over time have become established as a benchmark for all types of businesses. It is a linear process in theory, less linear in practice, but useful for understanding. the foundations of an effective go-to-market strategy.

From the idea to defining the problem to be solved

Every business project starts with an idea, but to become a valuable offering, it must address a real problem or a concrete need.

At this stage, the company:

• identify the target to whom it intends to address itself;
  
• analyzes the competitive environment to understand how others respond to the same need;
  
• defines the value proposition, or why that product or service should be chosen over alternatives.

It is a time for studying, listening, and observing, which is necessary to avoid creating something that has no place or interest in the market.

Prototyping, service development, and initial validation

Once the need has been defined, we move on to the phase of implementing the idea.

For products, a prototype, for services a MVP (Minimum Viable Product), i.e., a basic version capable of demonstrating key features.

This phase allows you to:

• transform the idea into something tangible or testable;
  
• collect initial feedback by a small group of users;
  
• correct any critical issues and refine the solution.

La initial validation, even if based on a small audience, helps to understand whether we are moving in the right direction.

Search for funding 

Once the prototyping phase is complete, the company must take the next step: finding the financial resources to produce on a large scale, market, or structure the delivery of the service.

Traditional options include:

• self-financing;
  
• bank loans or lines of credit;
  
• public tenders and incentives;
  
• private investors, as a business angel or venture capital.

These options are not necessarily mutually exclusive: depending on its needs and potential, a company can combine them to meet its capital requirements. This is only the first of the funding round that a company must go through to achieve consolidation, and it is useful to already have an overview of the options for the future at this stage.

Production, launch, and marketing activities

Once the resources have been obtained, the company can:

• start the production of the product in series or stabilize the provision of the service;
  
• plan the go-to-market, i.e., the strategy for reaching customers (commercial strategy, positioning, pricing, channels, and launch priorities);
  
• carry out activities marketing and communication to capture the interest of the target audience.
  

The launch is the moment when all the previous work is measured against reality: the market response determines the direction of the next steps.

Although described in a linear manner, this path is not the same for all companies. Depending on the sector, the stage of the business, the resources available, and the competitive environment, some steps may change order, be compressed, or require longer cycles.

For example:

• Highly innovative companies: they often have to invest more time in prototyping and technical validation before even thinking about production or raising capital. A product such as complex hardware requires a longer process than a digital service.
  
• SMEs already established: in the case of new products or services, established companies can skip some of the initial stages because they already know the market and have active customers. For them, the standard path often begins with reworking a product or seeking resources to expand its distribution.
  
• Regulated sectors (e.g., medical, food): require additional steps related to certifications, safety tests, or regulatory compliance. These activities fall between prototyping and launch, extending time-to-market.
  
• B2B companies: They can often begin validation directly with a small group of pilot customers without going through an “open” MVP, because commercial dynamics allow for a more structured direct comparison.
  
• Digital startups: they can alternate development and testing iteratively, reducing the burden of initial prototyping and focusing efforts on continuous refinement after launch.

These variables make the standard path a reference framework, not a rigid sequence. And it is precisely these differences that make it interesting to observe how an alternative model—crowdfunding—can be incorporated in different ways, offering more flexible and efficient solutions.

From idea to market with crowdfunding

Crowdfunding offers a different way to bring a product or service to market. It is not simply an alternative source of capital: it is a tool that combines financing, validation, and marketing in a single operation. It is therefore integrated across all stages of the process described above, starting with prototyping.

 Depending on the business model, the most suitable form changes: in general, reward crowdfunding for physical products and equity crowdfunding for services, scalable models, and companies that want to raise capital by involving investors in their growth. Lending crowdfunding, on the other hand, is suitable for later stages of business development, but not for the conception and market launch phase.

Reward crowdfunding: ideal for products

Reward crowdfunding works like a structured pre-sale. The company offers a product that is not yet on the market and seeks financial resources to produce and market it. In exchange for a financial contribution, supporters who participate in the campaign receive a reward, usually an early and exclusive version of the product itself, with additional features or an experiential component.

This model is particularly suitable for companies that work with physical products because it allows you to:

• test the actual demand before committing to production;
  
• finance the first print run thanks to contributions from supporters;
  
• gather useful feedback on features, design, and functionality;
  
• begin build a community by future customers even before the commercial launch.

For a product that is still in the prototype phase, reward crowdfunding becomes a real test bed: if the public responds, the company gathers concrete confirmation of the product's value for its target audience and reduces the risk of producing a good that will not find a market. If the public does not respond as expected, the company can correct or rethink the proposal before investing significant resources.

Equity crowdfunding: ideal for scalable services and models

In the case of services, software, platforms, or activities with high potential for scalable growth, the most effective form of crowdfunding is equity crowdfunding. In this model, supporters do not purchase a product: purchase shares in the company, becoming full members.

This model is useful when:

• A service or software product is offered, which is not as easily “packaged” as physical products in terms of rewards.;
  
• You need capital to scale up, hire staff, develop new features, or expand your sales structure.;
  
• investors with useful skills and experience are also sought;
  
• The aim is to build a customer base that is highly loyal and motivated to become ambassadors for the company.

The main advantage is the integration of capital raising and strategic involvement. Investors do not just finance the project: they become active supporters, bring visibility, spread the brand within their networks, and offer useful feedback, but in many cases also expertise, contacts, and collaborations.

Crowdfunding as a market test and marketing tool

Whether in the form of equity or rewards, crowdfunding is aimed at customers or potential customers of the product or service as the primary target. In equity, the target audience can also be expanded to other stakeholders, such as employees, suppliers, or distributors.

This makes crowdfunding a multifunction tool: it is a market test, it is a marketing activity, it is a source of funding.

A crowdfunding campaign covers the needs for validation and feedback collection, capital raising, marketing, and commercialization.

Including crowdfunding in the journey from idea to market can therefore streamline the process and make market entry more competitive.

Differences, advantages, and limitations of the two paths to sell your product or service

The traditional route and the crowdfunding route are not two competing paths. They are two different ways of achieving the same goal: bringing a product or service to market in a sustainable and effective way. Comparing them allows us to understand when to choose one, when to choose the other, and when to integrate them.

Structural differences: timing, risk, resources 

The traditional path follows an internal company logic: development, production, launch. Crowdfunding, on the other hand, anticipates interaction with the market and makes it an integral part of the process.

The main differences are as follows:

• Validation times and methods
  In the standard model, preliminary validation is limited, carried out with a small group of users, serves to verify technical, functional, or usability aspects, and is based mainly on qualitative tests, interviews, and observations. It does not measure actual demand under market conditions. With crowdfunding, validation becomes public and quantitative, because the campaign immediately measures public interest and willingness to spend money on that value proposition. This, on the other hand, implies greater exposure and a greater reputational risk.

The two things are not necessarily alternatives: before launching a crowdfunding campaign, it is advisable to structure a standard qualitative validation phase.

• Business risk
  In the standard process, if the product/service does not find a market, the initial investments are simply lost. With a reward campaign, on the other hand, production only starts if a fundraising target is reached. With equity, capital is obtained before investing in growth, reducing financial pressure. Business risk is not eliminated, but redistributed in a different way.
  
• Resource allocation
  The traditional route requires significant initial investment in development, production, marketing, and communication. Crowdfunding primarily requires investment in marketing and community building, but it allows other resources to be gathered before incurring the higher costs. In both cases, the resources required are substantial, but they are used in different ways.

Advantages and limitations

The traditional route

The traditional route has several strengths that continue to make it the main option for many companies.

1. Control and gradualism: allows you to proceed step by step, with cycles of development, testing, and adjustments that the company can manage internally, without the pressure of a public campaign with deadlines.
2. Adaptability: Some products or services, such as those that are regulated, highly technical, or have long development cycles, require structured laboratory processes, certifications, and industrial procedures. In these cases, the traditional approach is often more suitable.
3. Strengthening the company's foundationsProceeding sequentially helps build solid foundations: clear production processes, progressive definition of the service, more stable internal organization, and a focused approach. This can facilitate internal relationships and relationships with partners, distributors, and professional investors.
4. Consistency with B2B dynamics: In companies that work primarily with business customers, pilot tests and internal validations can be more effective than a campaign open to the public.

However, the traditional approach has aspects that can be limiting, especially for younger companies.

1. Greater cost anticipation: Production and initial commercial activities require significant initial investments, often before large-scale market confirmation.
2. Risk of proceeding with incomplete information: Although prototypes and MVPs provide useful insights, the real demand only becomes fully apparent at launch. This can lead to late adjustments or costly redesign cycles.
3. Longer timescales to obtain feedback from the market: validation with a limited number of users is useful, but not always sufficient to understand the reaction of the wider public. 
4. Difficulty accessing financing in certain phases: traditional banks and investors require metrics, historical data, and guarantees that not all companies have in the early stages. This can slow down or limit development plans.

The crowdfunding journey

Crowdfunding transforms the standard process by condensing some of its phases into a single operation.

This results in certain advantages, specific to the type of offer.

Reward crowdfunding:

• Pre-sale financing production, avoiding excessive inventory and upfront investments.
• Immediate feedback on design, price, functionality.
• Risk reduction: it is only produced if there is real demand.
• Community of early adopters, valuable for launching future versions or additional lines.

Equity crowdfunding:

• Access to capital for growth, without incurring debt.
• Ability to attract knowledgeable investors and useful contacts for business development.
• Construction of a customer-investor base, more loyal and more active in promoting the brand.
• Greater online and offline visibility thanks to the campaign.

For both:

• Increase in visibility and reputation.
• A more quick in understanding what works and what doesn't.
• The possibility of demonstrate real traction, to be presented to banks, partners, and future professional investors.

Crowdfunding is powerful, but it is not a shortcut or a complete substitute for the traditional route, and it has its own limitations.

1. Requires a strong communication strategyWithout the ability to reach the right audience in a persuasive way, even a valid idea struggles to emerge.
2. Not suitable for all business models without adaptation. Complex products, purely B2B services, or highly technical solutions may require more in-depth preliminary work.
3. It does not eliminate the need to build a solid product/service.: The campaign may validate interest, but the real value depends on the company's ability to deliver on its promises.
4. It does not replace financial and production planning.: even with a successful harvest, you need to know how to manage production, deliveries, and relationships with customers or investors.

Crowdfunding can accelerate and strengthen many stages, but it does not eliminate the need for expertise, organization, and strategic vision, nor does it eliminate the need for initial investments (remember, in fact, that Crowdfunding has a cost.!).

How to integrate traditional methods and crowdfunding to sell your product or service

Crowdfunding does not replace the traditional route, and the traditional route does not exclude crowdfunding. The two paths can coexist and reinforce each other. Indeed, from a certain point of view, they must: crowdfunding, as we have seen, overlaps with the traditional route, transforming some of its phases, but it cannot completely do without it.

The traditional route, on the other hand, can obviously do without crowdfunding.

But integrating the two models allows you to reduce risks, optimize investments, obtain more reliable market information, and build financing processes capable of supporting the company's growth in the medium and long term.

Some examples:

• Validating a product with reward-based crowdfunding before standard production and marketing
• Validating a product with reward-based crowdfunding before presenting the project to partners and institutional investors
• Reward-based crowdfunding campaign as part of marketing activities for the launch of a new product
• Equity crowdfunding to support hiring and product/service refinement to strengthen the structure prior to traditional commercial development
• Traditional design, prototyping, and validation + equity crowdfunding to launch the product/service with greater visibility and competitiveness than traditional marketing and create a useful network to support subsequent growth.

Finally, it is important to consider the opportunity to include crowdfunding among stable company assets, once you learn how to use it. Recurring cycles of crowdfunding campaigns can become a resource to be exploited whenever it may be useful: new product lines, market expansions, special projects. In these cases, crowdfunding works as an extension of the innovation, marketing, and financing processes already present in the company.