| General > General Technical Chat |
| Why do so many people here go nuts over very low quality gear from China? |
| << < (9/35) > >> |
| blacksheeplogic:
--- Quote from: jadew on December 19, 2019, 08:01:04 pm ---what I claim is that you can only produce garbage for $40. .... I'm inclined to disagree here. This is not the reason I started this thread, but the reason I mentioned NanoVNA specifically is because it has actually killed a tiny market segment I was targeting with one of my products. NanoVNA was launched about one month before my product was 100% ready, but by the time I was ready to hit the production button, it was too late and I realized it would have been a tremendous waste of money. This is not the only time this has happened, and I'm sure I'm not the only small time manufacturer who faces this, so I would argue that not only it affects MANY segments negatively, but it completely kills competition in some areas and hinders innovation. --- End quote --- Couple of points: 1. If the $40 widget does all that is needed (meets the user requirements), it's useful and money well spent. 2. So they killed your yet to be released product because they came out with a widget for the same market you wanted to sell your widget in. It's not their fault your widget failed and in a free market they are not obliged to consider the impact of their product on your business. You developed a product that got crushed by the competition and staring a thread to blame the Chinese for your products failure archives what? Perhaps you could have added value, or differentiated your widget, perhaps priced it differently, thought about an expanded market, I don't know you've not made your case why your product should have been given special consideration or even why it's better than the $40 widget. It's tough when you misjudged the opportunity and price point but you seem to be implying the need for protectionism in the market because in this case it woulds suite you and shifting the blame away from where it really belongs. |
| jadew:
--- Quote from: blacksheeplogic on December 19, 2019, 09:32:58 pm ---Couple of points: 1. If the $40 widget does all that is needed (meets the user requirements), it's useful and money well spent. --- End quote --- I see, so if I tell you I'm selling you a Ferrari, but instead you get a moped, it's ok, because it turns out you only wanted to get to work? --- Quote from: blacksheeplogic on December 19, 2019, 09:32:58 pm ---2. So they killed your yet to be released product because they came out with a widget for the same market you wanted to sell your widget in. It's not their fault your widget failed and in a free market they are not obliged to consider the impact of their product on your business. You developed a product that got crushed by the competition and staring a thread to blame the Chinese for your products failure archives what? --- End quote --- I'm not blaming anyone (maybe the lawmakers a little), I'm trying to find a solution. --- Quote from: blacksheeplogic on December 19, 2019, 09:32:58 pm ---Perhaps you could have added value, or differentiated your widget, perhaps priced it differently, thought about an expanded market, I don't know you've not made your case why your product should have been given special consideration or even why it's better than the $40 widget. It's tough when you misjudged the opportunity and price point but you seem to be implying the need for protectionism in the market because in this case it woulds suite you and shifting the blame away from where it really belongs. --- End quote --- Pretty sure I made that point several times already. Anyway, I invite you to re-read the thread and formulate a rebuttal for my points before attacking whatever you think I'm doing, because your answer implies that this is a level playing field, which I have already proven that it is not. |
| langwadt:
--- Quote from: jadew on December 19, 2019, 09:58:43 pm --- --- Quote from: blacksheeplogic on December 19, 2019, 09:32:58 pm ---Couple of points: 1. If the $40 widget does all that is needed (meets the user requirements), it's useful and money well spent. --- End quote --- I see, so if I tell you I'm selling you a Ferrari, but instead you get a moped, it's ok, because it turns out you only wanted to get to work? --- End quote --- none expects to get a Ferrari for the price of a moped, so if they get a moped for the price of a moped and all they needed was a moped everyone is happy except the Ferrari dealer who was never in contention anyway |
| CatalinaWOW:
I don't understand the complaint. Apparently you (almost) have a product which does something similar to the nanoVNA, which you would have brought to market at some price higher than the nanoVNA. If your assertions are true, that your product is far superior to the nanoVNA, your product should compete well. As long as it is priced to be in the range of the target market. Traditional VNAs are targeted towards companies with large measurement budgets and will never be purchased new by hams and other hobby people (with the occasional exception of a very wealthy dilettante). Broken VNAs require luck and skill and time to be brought into operation. I, for example, have a very good VNA that was acquired for virtually nothing. But it will require a few hundred dollars of cables and other parts to even reach the point of turning on and finding out if it works. Thus this path to very low cost will be viable only to a very few fortunate people such as yourself. But it does indicate a general price range that might generate quite a few sales. So why haven't you tried marketing your magic widget? Even as a test by posting a thread here with the specifications of your device, some pictures of your prototype and some test results and then asking how much interest there is in buying at the proposed price point. You seem to have given up on your product without really trying, and are blaming the Chinese for your retreat. Your complaint is only partially legitimate. At worst they have only taken a portion of the bottom end out of your market. Of course you have been warned in this thread that V3 is on the way, and it may take a much bigger chunk. If you wait long enough your market opportunity could disappear completely. Your assertion that the nanoVNA claims to be more than it is has some merit, but the market usually sorts these things out very quickly. Your marketing could very easily show the areas of superiority of your widget, and your claims of superiority will be quickly tested by several on this forum and in other venues. Those who need the added performance will pay more to get it. The only question is whether they will pay as much more as you think they should, and more importantly, enough more to let you profit on your device. There are markets for all kinds of measuring instruments. I own and use rulers, steel rules, cheap calipers, good calipers, cheap micrometers and good micrometers. All measure distance. All do a useful job even though the best ones have accuracy roughly three orders of magnitude better than the worst. Your device per your description fits in this range of measurement quality, and could well have a market. |
| jadew:
@CatalinaWOW, your analysis is correct, with one exception, and I agree with the rest (hopefully you don't edit it to something silly :) ). The exception is that I have tested the waters. And the answer was clear, and so was the reason. To remove all ambiguity, and hopefully switch the discussion back on topic (finding a solution for this situation), the device in question was a simple 2.9 GHz tracking generator that met the linearity and spectral purity specifications of the 85640A. So it was targeted at a subsection of the market the NanoVNA is targeting. Regarding pricing... let's just say that single components in that device are more expensive than the shipped NanoVNA. You simply can't do RF on the cheap - I tried. That said, I'm not blaming anyone, contrary to what it was suggested by some posters here. I think everyone does what feels normal to them and this is the situation we're in. This includes local manufacturers, chinese manufactures, buyers and even law makers. Also, while I do get pissed off occasionally when things don't pan out, I don't hold grudges and if tomorrow it would make sense for me to, for example, work for NanoVNA or any product that inconveniences me, I would. So to clarify, the "complaint", or better yet, the problem that I'd like to find a solution for, is that manufacturers from this side of the pond, are competing against some practices against which it's very difficult to compete, while being held back by laws (that I honestly find normal to a degree). I think that finding the answer to this puzzle, of how to compete in this situation, is key to a success story in today's economy. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |