Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Hi all, This topic makes as much sense as painting flowers, there are those who dislike the rose but by any other name it is still a rose... Weg From: Kim Flint <kflint@loopers-delight.com> Reply-To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com Subject: Re: Looper development and production costs? Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 00:41:10 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from [207.228.238.9] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBD9681DB00A9400431A2CFE4EE090DB70; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 00:44:37 -0700 Received: (from looper@localhost)by hemlock.violacea.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id DAA27514;Wed, 17 Oct 2001 03:43:42 -0400 >From Loopers-Delight-request@loopers-delight.com Wed, 17 Oct 2001 >00:45:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 03:43:42 -0400 Old-Return-Path: <kflint@loopers-delight.com> Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20011016233400.04a234f8@loopers-delight.com> X-Sender: kflint@loopers-delight.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 In-Reply-To: <v04205518b7f2387b1cc9@[64.81.209.235]> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20011016105714.02602a50@loopers-delight.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20011015154813.01ecefb0@mail.mindspring.com> <v04205505b7f12df93c3f@[64.81.209.235]> <5.1.0.14.2.20011016105714.02602a50@loopers-delight.com> Resent-Message-ID: <dkMMaD.A.1tG.uaTz7@hemlock.violacea.com> Resent-From: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com X-Mailing-List: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com> archive/latest/12956 X-Loop: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Loopers-Delight-request@loopers-delight.com At 12:54 PM 10/16/2001, Tom Ritchford wrote: >>ok, so we take our tiny budget and devote a significant portion of it to >>pay for industrial designers, graphic artists, NRE on custom molded >>plastics, extrusions, fancy sales literature, etc. > >DON'T do that. But Electrix gets to! it's not fair! >this Great Divide here is a perfect example. > >there's a single stencil on it, three color, dark pink, dark purple and >white. >the lettering is oversized in pink on the purple and the controls are >white. > >really simple. and then later: >Now. You EDP folks, if you'd just "accept the note" >and admit that a few grand in design would add hundreds >of units to your sales, so let me get this straight, we change the font, paint it pink instead of cream, and our sales will go up by hundreds of units? wow, I had no idea. and here we've been wasting all this time trying to add new features and improve production efficiency. What is the magic font?? >>Sadly, we now don't have enough money after that to pay for another >>software engineer and software QA person that we desperately need. > >You have a dramatically exaggerated idea what the cost of design is, >particularly once amortized out over a lot of cases. well, I do this for a living, but maybe I'm full of crap. >I'm sure you could get a designer to do a really nice front >panel design in perhaps 50 hours of work at $100 an hour. it's funny how I go through this so often in my professional life. "It's simple!" "it only costs $x!" "it will only take a few days of work!" it always comes from somebody who's never actually done such a project. Then somebody experienced in the field who actually has to do the work says, "no it will take more than that, it is not so simple." That person gets shouted down because nobody wants to hear that doom and gloom story of reality. Fantasy project management is so much more fun! Of course, somehow you never get to say "I told you so" later when the project is a complete fucking disaster. but that's how it goes, my life is a dilbert cartoon. >That's a really good designer and a lot of time and that's only >$5000. That might get you one MONTH of a decent software >engineer and no QA person at all. and >If two programmers and two engineers worked on the unit for two years >and cost $60,000 each a year (including FICA, benefits and all -- this >is below market rates) then the whole thing cost 2*2*2*$60,000 >or $480,000 which means that each of these dozen features cost >$40,000 to make. uh, what decade are you talking about? You have to go to the third world to find good embedded real-time software engineers or good dsp engineers or good hardware engineers who work that cheap. Maybe you can get somebody who writes windows apps or java script for that price, but the salary paid for specialized skills and experience you need for developing something like the EDP are at least double that. Where I live it's even higher. for good contractors, you're talking $150 - $300/hour. >The EDP had to have SOME sort of front panel design made up >and something was printed on it. That had to cost you something. no, not really. I did it myself because I believed design was important, much as you and Mark have been saying, and other people didn't. Mostly I did it in my spare time, but I didn't get paid much anyway in those days so it probably wouldn't have made a difference. I used the copies of illustrator and quark and the large font library I had "borrowed" from the printing company I worked at during college. I used the typesetting and page layout skills I had acquired during that job as best I could. I think we spent about $25 to get films done at a service bureau for the silk screen. There ya go, do it on the cheap or don't do it at all. Hate to burst you guy's bubbles, but that's the way things get done in the little niches of the music industry. G-Wiz was a small new division then. There wasn't a big budget, there weren't many people working there, and the echoplex was the bottom odd-ball project of the pile. the FAR synth, ZIPI, Infinity controller - those were the glamor projects that got what there was of the attention, the budgets, the resources. The ugly duckling looper project seemed like a long shot. This was before the jamman even, so nobody really was sure what to think of the idea. I liked it though, so I worked on it. Or I was assigned to it because I was the lowest guy there. The Echoplex amazed us all by being one of the few things that actually made it to a real product, and continues to live long after g-wiz died. That is true because of determination and getting things done by any means you can find. >>yet another fiscal reality check: these are small companies doing this. >>Tiny companies really. Or maybe tiny divisions of small companies. >>Usually just 3 or 4 underpaid people tops, without sufficient budget. >>There is not a lot of capital available. There is not a large market >>available. There will not be a large return for your investment. You have >>to manage these issues to make money. In fact, you will be lucky not to >>lose money. You make choices. > >but it's an inferior choice to drop graphic design entirely, particularly >since you can get something really quite nice really quite cheaply. in my opinion, we did get something nice for cheap. Just some people are real picky is all. It could have been worse, we could have used Matthias' design. ;-) >you have a major opportunity on your hands! > >Why not take the opportunity NOW that you are coming out >with a new revision of the machine to call it "EDP 2"?! > >You can put a new coat of paint on the face, call it >version II, and everyone will look at it again, even >people who knew about it before. > >It'd boost flagging sales, it'd encourage people who >already had one to get another, it'd boost people who >are turned on to looping by the Repeater to look >at a very different alternative. in fact, that has been my plan for a long time. I love deceptive marketing and sales tricks. Probably all we need to add is a pointy read bubble with "New and Improved!" in the middle. Or maybe the Digital Pro Plus XL? >black and silver and white, that simple sort of thing, >real typesetting, and it'll be done in a flash. Not pink and purple? haha... I'm still waiting for an explanation of which parts of my typesetting are not real. did I get the kerning wrong somewhere? kim ______________________________________________________________________ Kim Flint | Looper's Delight kflint@loopers-delight.com | http://www.loopers-delight.com _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp