| Sponsored By: | |
Subject: Re: [M]: paul's post
From: Bill Arnett
Reply To: mapug@shore.net
Date: Wed Oct 22 00:37:05 1997
At 10:44 PM -0700 10/21/97, maxx wrote:
>... The pressure will also increase to
>show larger returns for the investors. The product will probably suffer.
>That will open the door for a competitor to enter the fray...
There are already dozens of competitors. Some of them make really
remarkably wonderful telescopes. See for example
http://www.torusoptics.com/
Feel free to buy one if you like: you can get an 12.5" OTA for only
$6,495. Then go buy the nice new computer controlled mount from
Astro-Physics:
http://www.company7.com/astrop1.html
only $6300. Then you'll need a PC to control it; another $1000 if you go
low end but the nifty voice-control stuff might require a beefier CPU.
This setup will be the heck out of a 12" LX200 in every respect but one:
price.
Meade is not even trying to be a high-end supplier. (Of course, their
advertising is just plain lying, but that's another matter.) They are the
Chevy of the telescope world. Chevy does not try to compete with Ferrari
(and they make a lot more money for their investors than does Ferrari,
too). Meade probably only bothers with the LX200 as a sort of status
symbol, sort of like Chevy does with the Corvette.
A Chevy is a pretty good car. You certainly get more for your money than
with a Ferrari. An LX200 is a pretty good scope, too. The only problem is
that some people read Meade's fancy ads and think they're getting a Ferrari.
I don't know if it would make business sense for Meade to develop a much
more expensive scope. They could probably beat the Toruses and APs if
they wanted to. But could they do it profitably? Even considering the
increased sales of cheap scopes that might result? I doubt it (though I
hope I'm wrong).
The best we can hope for is that they decide to come out with an upgraded
status symbol (Chevy just redesigned the Corvette, too :-) But don't
expect it to beat the best from A-P, Torus, etc.
I think what we ought to be pushing for is not perfection but rather
incremental improvements that can be done without major effort. Better
gears and motors can't cost all that much more. A little more RAM would
help a lot. An upgrade to the software could make a big difference.
But most of all, they should be more honest in their advertising.
---
Bill Arnett billa@znet.com http://www.seds.org/billa/
"Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself." -- Richard Feynman