Dear Sir Richard,
In response to your overly enthusiastic letter detailing your invention, and with the aid of several of the local youth we found wandering our grounds, we have completed several prototypes of your proposed design. We have begun the lab testing procedure, and are almost ready to release these into the market. There are, however, a few design choices I think you should reconsider.
In your design (which I have enclosed in case you had forgotten about it), you appear to have no padding on either of the rings that the penis is inserted into. Indeed, there appeared to be quite a bit of discomfort in the lab rats we tested, and a few of the lab humans as well. (Though one did seem to enjoy the feeling of cold metal.) Including a rubber or some softer fabric liner may help to sell more units.
Additionally, I do not believe the crank on the shaft works as you intended it to. We have proposed this alternative solution: with the crank on the end of the big ring, when turned it will force the smaller ring up and down the threaded shaft, rather than twisting the subject’s penis into a ‘U’ shape. While this did result in an overall increase in length over time, those who participated in this round of study were not pleased when they ended up urinating on themselves. The female assistant was similarly unsatisfied with the results.
We did create one prototype with the changes proposed, but it was stolen prior to testing. We suspect the group of circus folk who came and distracted us with a very lively song and dance routine, but we have no evidence.
In best regards,
The West Of The Mississippi But East Of Nevada No Not There Higher Up On The Map No That’s Too High How Haven’t You Heard Of Nebraska Innovation Group