And what exactly makes that difficult to replicate?
You don't seem to understand the problem. Fluke could do some of the things you suggest, but which markets would make the R&D worth it, much less worth it for a meter they intend to sell for many years?
I'm not sure what you're after.
Nothing the Fluke currently does is difficult to replicate. Unit-T already replicates the 289, Brymen already replicates the 87V, Aneng will give you all the measurement functions you'll ever need for $25, Fluke themselves will give you "Fluke build quality" for $100.
Yes, but what Fluke gives you for that $100 is something the other manufacturers give you for half that or less.
You already indicated that one of your major gripes is the price Fluke charges. Well, for the meter you're asking for here, would you buy it for a premium price or not?
Would you be willing to pay $200 for such a meter? $300? $400? $500? If you wouldn't be willing to pay an 87V price for a meter with better than 87V capability then you're not in Fluke's target market.
And if you would be willing to pay that kind of price, then just exactly how large do you think that market is, and to what degree do you think it overlaps their existing markets?
Fluke's reputation
by itself is an asset that enables them to charge a premium for their products. The way you take advantage of such an asset is by charging premium prices. So the premium price is essentially non-negotiable. In exchange for that reputation, and the price it commands, is the expectation that whatever they produce will be solid, reliable, safe, dependable, and supported to a degree that few other meters are. So whatever they design here would
have to meet that expectation.
If you're a company, you do
not destroy your existing markets in favor of new ones without a
really good reason. Fluke's primary existing market is industrial and professional field users. If those users were more price sensitive, then Fluke would lower their prices. If those users were more sensitive to the feature set, then Fluke would offer models with those new features, while doing their best to balance that against their customers who like things just as they are. Existing markets that you play in have a characteristic that new markets don't: they're a known quantity. That's worth
a lot in business, because every gamble you take is a gamble you could
lose. So the payoff of any given gamble has to be worth the risk.
See, part of the problem of this discussion is that you seem to presume that Fluke isn't doing the proper market research. They've been around long enough, and have been immensely successful long enough, that you should
know that to be false. I think it's more likely than not that Fluke understands their markets very,
very well. And it is that understanding that guides their actions.
The question isn't whether or not Fluke could come out with a meter that meets the specifications you have in mind. Fluke most certainly could. It's certainly within their technical capability. The question is
why should they? What's the business justification that outweighs the downsides?
Now factor in the fact that Fluke's parent company already owns a meter division that can
and does produce meters like what you're talking about: Amprobe. In particular, the AM-140-A and AM-160-A. Yeah, they're Brymens, and they're excellent. Why would Fluke produce a product that competes in the same space as their sister company's products on both capability and price?
As for "massive R&D"? They could easily put the Aneng chipset in a 15B+ body and create a $125 meter that sold millions. What individual/hobbyist wouldn't want one? Companies like Brymen and Uni-T would see their sales drop through the floor.
Really? Why would Brymen and Uni-T see their sales drop when their prices would be even lower than the $125 you're talking about? After all,
Aneng's price is certainly
much lower than that.
So again, it's a question of what market you're targeting. Why would people who are already price sensitive buy the Fluke? The only people who would are people who are looking for something that is a lot more robust than what Aneng, or even Brymen, produces (a condition that wouldn't last long, since Brymen, at least, would simply alter their design appropriately), or people who are willing to pay a premium for Fluke's reputation and support. That's a small subset of the overall market for a meter with the capabilities in question. And because
Fluke's market is people who want robustness, longevity, support, Fluke's reputation, etc., now Fluke can't just slap a new chip into their meter, they have to
characterize it, make sure it has the durability and other characteristics they need it to have. And that presumes they can just re-use an existing layout and design. The more things they need to change, the more R&D investment is involved.
And then there's the effort of going through all of the certifications that their customers demand, unless Fluke decides to forego their institutional customers entirely with the new meter.
And then, after doing all that in order to produce a $100 meter with better than 87V capability, what'll they have accomplished? I'll tell you what: they'll have managed to force themselves to reduce the price on all their other offerings just to stay price-consistent, since otherwise customers will be asking them why they charge so much for arguably
lesser meters. There's a reason Fluke's 15B+ is offered only in certain areas of the world, away from their traditional customer base.
Why do you keep talking about the 87V here?
Because:
a) It's the meter that's holing Fluke back. Everything they've done in the "high end" in the last 25 years do is based around not upsetting the 87V cash cow.
That doesn't make sense. Fluke's reputation is present for all their meters, not just the 87V. Why would you talk about what capabilities the 87V lacks when the question is whether or not
Fluke has a meter with the capabilities you're looking for?
But let's go with your above reason anyway. Why would Fluke want to upset their 87V cash cow? You acknowledge it's a cash cow, which means it's a massive revenue source for them. What sane company would kill such a thing?
b) It's the most deified meter, it's always held up as the gold standard even though it's really not that special any more.
Well, on that we agree, certainly, at least in terms of capability. But Fluke produces meters with even more capability than the 87V, so if it's sheer capability you're talking about, the 87V isn't the one to focus on.
That said, there's one thing the 87V brings to the table that a new meter wouldn't be able to: a well-understood and reliable history. People buy the 87V in part because it's a known-good quantity. It's a known quantity precisely because it's been around for a long time, and it's known-good because the meter has almost always performed very well. It has a certification history, too. The meter's history is
by itself an asset of the meter, one that can't be had with a new design. It's the history that makes it a "gold standard" as much as anything else.
Reputations take a long time to build. Fluke's reputation would obviously be behind whatever meter they produce. But the meters themselves
also have reputations, and the 87V's is very good. Fluke would be insane to not take advantage of that.
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
