the great airsoft robbery, or how much would you pay?

[clumpyedge]

10 hours ago, Tackle said:

 

 

Bloody love that film.

[PureSilver]

On 26/02/2020 at 15:16, Musica said:

If they can clone it and spit out a copy for less than half the price (and still make a profit) they were asking for too much margin in the first place.

 

This is a profoundly stupid comment.

 

The cost of researching and developing any new product - airsoft or not - needs to be recouped. This is a fact of doing business - any business. You could apply what I am about to say to pharmaceuticals, software, clothes - anything - but let's stick with airsoft and take the NGRS as an example. Cost to Marui to develop: $1m. Cost Marui needs to add on top of production cost of rifles to amortise R&D costs: $1m/expected production run. Let's say Marui bets on selling 15,000 NGRS rifles - that adds $67 to the cost of every NGRS. That's not profit, it's recouping R&D. This is not "margin", it's money TM has already spent to bring a new product to market.

 

Cost to ARMY/BOLT/etc. of reverse-engineering NGRS system: half a Snickers bar. Cost ARMY/BOLT needs to add on top of production of rifles: $0. Net result: ARMY and BOLT almost immediately start making guns that steal technology from the NGRS. ARMY's R4x-series were indeed about half to two-thirds the price of a genuine SOPMOD. It's only the fact that between them ARMY and BOLT couldn't put together a Duplo set, let alone an AEG, that stopped them from stealing all of Marui's sales by undercutting their pricing by a minimum of $67 per rifle.

 

Where is the incentive for TM to spend the money it costs to innovate if they'll never see any return on that? If TM took the defeatist approach you're espousing and churned out guns at the arbitrary cost limit of twice what the absolute cheapest copy could cost, we wouldn't have the NGRS, the AES, the M870 series or half-a-dozen other market-leading products, and airsoft would be much poorer for it.

 

On 26/02/2020 at 15:56, Musica said:

The bigger company can always do it cheaper than the little company.

 

TM is a much bigger company than JG, but JG can make an inferior M870 far cheaper than TM can make a good one by making it in a developing nation with terrible QC, and stealing rather than developing their own TDP. Which is better for airsoft, a $250 good gun, or a $150 shit one that also undercuts one of the few large airsoft innovators?

 

I stress: if the JGs improved on the TMs - being made of better materials, like basically every AEG these days is made of better materials than a non-NGRS TM AEG, or being designed for higher muzzle energies, likewise - I'd be all in favour of that innovation. I'm all in favour of people improving on existing designs. What I don't like is people stealing other people's hard work, and other people pretending they're Jordan Belfort for buying the crap counterfeit instead of supporting the original manufacturer.

 

On 26/02/2020 at 15:56, Musica said:

If you don't have a business head don't try to start a business just be a inventory/creator.

 

Someone with "a business head" will understand the importance of IP rights and recouping R&D. Your arbitrary capitulation to IP theft massively disincentivises investment in R&D, and the fact that for two decades barely any airsoft companies were (are?) prepared to make actual investment in radical new products is a concrete demonstration of how harmful this is for airsoft.

 

If everyone with the creativity and drive to actually produce a working product were to do what you're saying and just meekly hand over their baby to the biggest bully on the block, airsoft would be crushed by the likes of Nuprol and Evike in a matter of weeks. I invite you to take this whole concept to the scores of tiny little Taiwanese manufacturers eking out a living making awesome products we'd otherwise literally never get and see what they think of it.

 

On 26/02/2020 at 18:37, Rogerborg said:

If (for example) Odin wants me to buy their stuff, it needs to be:

 

1) On the first page of sorted results

2) Make it clear in the title or summary why it's worth my time reading the details.

 

It's one thing for you to say "I won't buy your stuff unless", it's on another level of entitlement to say "I will buy illegal copies of your stuff and undercut your business unless you bow and scrape to my laundry list of random demands including things the manufacturer has no control over, like SEO", as if the one minute you spend scanning the first page of Google is in any way comparable to the two years they spent researching, designing, developing, licensing, manufacturing, negotiating, marketing and shipping the product.

 

If you want something but don't want to pay for it and are prepared to steal it or pay for an unlicensed copy of it (not functionally any different from the manufacturer's perspective), there is basically nothing stopping you from doing that. Just don't pretend you're some ruthless corporate Darwinist that manufacturers must genuflect to in the name of competition, rather than just cheap.

[Musica]

3 minutes ago, PureSilver said:

This is a profoundly stupid comment.

 

That is your opinion. 

 

In business people WILL make competition to your product if it's successful and if they can make something that  does 90% of what people wanted your product for in the first place for less than 50% of the original asking price your going to need to do something to stay competitive and not just throw your toys out of the pram. 

 

Should I only buy the most expensive car and phone? The cheaper brands like one plus ugh they are just ripping off xcompany they never came up with the idea of a device that can make calls and has a huge touch screen. 

 

I am a consumer I get the best product for me not for business'. If they want my money they need to deliver a product that is worth it. 

[PureSilver]

37 minutes ago, Musica said:

That is your opinion. 

 

It is my opinion but it is also objective fact. Ask literally any manufacturer you like - Richard at Eagle6 or Robert at LPE might already be on this forum.

 

Want a really obvious example of why you can't say 'if I can copy this for less than half the price you were asking for too much in the first place'? Try literally any software product, or digital good. I can produce copies of any blockbuster you like for the cost of a blank Blu-Ray and an internet connection. Are Warner Bros. "asking for too much margin" by not dropping the price of the newest John Wick to $1.00 to "compete" with me?

 

37 minutes ago, Musica said:

In business people WILL make competition to your product if it's successful

 

Cloning is not the same as competition. If someone improves on your product - makes it work it harder, better, stronger, faster, whatever - that's competitive. Cloning is anti-competitive, because it kills innovation. There is a reason that this sort of thing doesn't happen in industries where people can afford to protect their IP.

 

37 minutes ago, Musica said:

if they can make something that  does 90% of what people wanted your product for in the first place for less than 50% of the original asking price your going to need to do something to stay competitive and not just throw your toys out of the pram.

 

"This person picked your pocket and sold me your wallet and house keys? Why don't you compete with him rather than throwing your toys out of the pram?"

[Lozart]

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

1 hour ago, PureSilver said:

 

The cost of researching and developing any new product - airsoft or not - needs to be recouped. This is a fact of doing business - any business. You could apply what I am about to say to pharmaceuticals, software, clothes - anything - but let's stick with airsoft and take the NGRS as an example. Cost to Marui to develop: $1m. Cost Marui needs to add on top of production cost of rifles to amortise R&D costs: $1m/expected production run. Let's say Marui bets on selling 15,000 NGRS rifles - that adds $67 to the cost of every NGRS. That's not profit, it's recouping R&D. This is not "margin", it's money TM has already spent to bring a new product to market.

 

That's not how you pay for R&D, you sell your product (hopefully) make a profit and then plough a percentage of that profit back into the company as R&D budget. A company the size of Tokyo Marui will almost definitely work on that principle.

 

 

 

 

Quote

Cost to ARMY/BOLT/etc. of reverse-engineering NGRS system: half a Snickers bar. Cost ARMY/BOLT needs to add on top of production of rifles: $0. Net result: ARMY and BOLT almost immediately start making guns that steal technology from the NGRS. ARMY's R4x-series were indeed about half to two-thirds the price of a genuine SOPMOD. It's only the fact that between them ARMY and BOLT couldn't put together a Duplo set, let alone an AEG, that stopped them from stealing all of Marui's sales by undercutting their pricing by a minimum of $67 per rifle.

 

There have been recoil systems using stock mounted weights for ages, TM just did it in a different way.

 

Quote

Where is the incentive for TM to spend the money it costs to innovate if they'll never see any return on that? If TM took the defeatist approach you're espousing and churned out guns at the arbitrary cost limit of twice what the absolute cheapest copy could cost, we wouldn't have the NGRS, the AES, the M870 series or half-a-dozen other market-leading products, and airsoft would be much poorer for it.

 

The first rule of product sales - innovate or die. TM has an R&D budget because they know this, that's how product lifecycle works - you innovate, others copy you, the market floods with imitations, you invent something new and different that sets you apart again and so on.

[PureSilver]

28 minutes ago, Lozart said:

That's not how you pay for R&D, you sell your product (hopefully) make a profit and then plough a percentage of that profit back into the company as R&D budget. A company the size of Tokyo Marui will almost definitely work on that principle.

 

I'm not seeing the distinction you're drawing here. TM spent $1m of their R&D budget to develop NGRS, and recouped that by amortising the development cost over the NGRS it sold. They might not be saying "exactly $67 per rifle" but I assure you with absolute certainty that their budgeting includes amortising overheads in the cost of their products. Products that were more expensive to develop are sold at a higher price than ones that weren't. The price of every TM product will be part raw materials, part development budget, part operating costs, part worker salaries etc. just like the price of every other product from every other manufacturer.

 

Can you elaborate on what the difference you're seeing is?

 

28 minutes ago, Lozart said:

There have been recoil systems using stock mounted weights for ages, TM just did it in a different way.

 

As far as I know the only system even remotely comparable and contemporaneous to the first NGRS (the SOPMOD) were the earliest Modify Tremors, which were an unmitigated disaster because they didn't have the gearset TM developed, never mind the stop-on-empty, bolt-lock/release etc. The NGRS cost so much to develop because it was a complete system that actually worked, something that competitors are still struggling with 12 years later. The second someone starts making NGRS AKs with steel bodies and barrels, or NGRS ARs with steel gears and factory FCUs, I'll be all over those because I am more than happy to reward innovation.

 

It doesn't matter if a product isn't a radical innovation. I'm not ever going to claim VFC are dirty cheats because their AK construction system is mostly the same as TM's. VFC "just did it in a different way" - it's not a radical innovation but it's still vastly better than the Japanese style and VFC (or LCT, whichever of them originated it when making VFC's earliest AKs) deserve credit for it.

 

28 minutes ago, Lozart said:

The first rule of product sales - innovate or die. TM has an R&D budget because they know this, that's how product lifecycle works - you innovate, others copy you, the market floods with imitations, you invent something new and different that sets you apart again and so on.

 

The point I'm making is that that rule doesn't work if you can't protect your innovation at all. Odin innovated and died months later. Do you really think the rewards of their innovation went to the right people when it went to the cloners rather than the designers? Or were they (and we, the market) robbed of their next opportunity to innovate? How did cloners who never contribute new ideas winning help increase competition?

[Musica]

48 minutes ago, PureSilver said:

It is my opinion but it is also objective fact.

 

A fact is a statement that can be proven true or false. An opinion is an expression of a person's feelings that cannot be proven. I think  my stupid might be rubbing off on you.

 

What is your point anyway? We are all stealing money? Should we be in jail ? 

 

I buy products I don't subscribe to companies because it's their job to earn my money not my job to give it to them and if you think differently that is fine.

[PureSilver]

It’s definitely provable that the statement ‘if I can make a clone for ½ the price, you’re charging too much’ is false, but I have enough of the dumb dumb to take credit for my own stupid TBH.

 

Ultimately my point is I wish airsofters would prioritise rewarding the good rather than just the cheap. Spend the extra £10 to get a legitimate product, especially if it’s a product made especially for airsofters, and very especially if it’s a new and innovative product. Buy from a retailer with good customer service rather than the cheapest possible dropshipper you can find on AliExpress. People don’t have to agree but it would be polite not to tell people whose innovation was just ripped off that they’re to blame for being insufficiently innovative.

 

We are a tiny hobby and rewarding the companies that cater to us is the only way we’ll get good products. Rewarding the companies that rip them off is only going to lead to more shit clones of old guns and quite frankly we’ve got more than enough to choose from.

 

Anyway, enough said.

[Zarrin]

So.. there are some valid points on both sides here, we definitely got a snippet of the mindsets of both the consumer and the developer.

 

I don't really wanna delve too deeply into the last few posts, however, just a thought.. and that's all it is (and I could be wrong) (end of disclaimers) (Jesus Christ... 😭) 

 

If @PureSilver is correct about the 1m R&D budget (or overall project budget?) for the NGRS system, maybe TM made a mistake there, because it forced them to put a very high price tag on a system which imho is not that innovative. It's certainly not the vastly improved replacement to the V2 or V3 GB that is so revolutionary that everyone is now gonna base their designs around it, as was the case with TM and the Famas V1 engine and then all the other consequent gearbox versions. 

 

Honestly, 1mn.. what was that USD? Doesn't sound like much.. however this is a niche industry which cannot compare to anything mainstream. Maybe TM overshot the mark here, they poured a large amount of money into what is actually quite a polarizing project and as a result need to sell the NGRS at a price a majority of airsofters are unwilling to pay (especially for what you actually get).  Funds miss-managed, poor business decisions made, potentially dooming the commercial viability of the project - of course it wont be, because they are TM and have the biggest name and probably most loyal customer base in the industry.

[Rogerborg]

3 hours ago, PureSilver said:

The cost of researching and developing any new product - airsoft or not - needs to be recouped. This is a fact of doing business - any business.

 

This is 100% fact.

It's also 100% fact that some twat from that country that poisons babies for profit will just clone your invention, and flog it for a fraction of the price.  They will not give 10% of one half of one fraction of a fuck about patents, trademarks or copy rights.  They will do it because they can do it, then sleep a dreamless sleep.

 

Pragmatically, the only way to compete against that is to offer more value to your customers, all the way through the ownership process, soup to nuts.  That means better marketing, easier purchasing, ready parts supply, no-quibble support, and most of all backing your own brand by owning the entire supply chain.

 

And yet, "tokyomarui.co.uk" leads to a search-by-brand on ZeroOne.

 

I shake my head sadly, and rest my case.

[Zarrin]

34 minutes ago, Rogerborg said:

 

Pragmatically, the only way to compete against that is to offer more value to your customers, all the way through the ownership process, soup to nuts.  That means better marketing, easier purchasing, ready parts supply, no-quibble support, and most of all backing your own brand by owning the entire supply chain.

 

 

Agreed, and come to think of it I cannot think of a single big time manufacturer who has been easy to get in touch with.. and I've had to get in touch with quite a few of them over the years (KWA, G&G, CA, G&P); disservice to themselves as well as their customers.

[Lozart]

7 hours ago, PureSilver said:

 

I'm not seeing the distinction you're drawing here. TM spent $1m of their R&D budget to develop NGRS, and recouped that by amortising the development cost over the NGRS it sold. They might not be saying "exactly $67 per rifle" but I assure you with absolute certainty that their budgeting includes amortising overheads in the cost of their products. Products that were more expensive to develop are sold at a higher price than ones that weren't. The price of every TM product will be part raw materials, part development budget, part operating costs, part worker salaries etc. just like the price of every other product from every other manufacturer.

 

Can you elaborate on what the difference you're seeing is?

 

 

It's pretty simple really: 

Big company product cycle = make product A - sell product A at a profit - take 10% of overall profit and return it to R&D department - develop product B - sell products A and B at a profit - etc

Small company product cycle - develop product A - raise capital from external investment/remortgaging your life - calculate cost of product as total cost of development and investment payback and divide by the number your business plan says you can achieve - sell product A at that price - hopefully sell enough to turn a profit then plough as much of what's left after you pay the investors off back into product development. 

 

The difference is that a large company with an established product portfolio will make profit from its existing sales that can then be spent on developing new products, effectively the old stuff will subsidise the new stuff. A small startup company doesn't have that catalogue to draw on so either they sell at a realistic price that will provide turnover and cash flow or they try and recoup the entire project cost by jacking up the product price. The latter will always run the risk of alienating the customer base unless the product really is just THAT GOOD.

 

Personally I think that TM are taking the piss with the price of the NGRS but the market lets them get away with it because it's TM, just like Apple does.

 

As far as Odin go, they have continued to develop their product, to the best of my knowledge nobody else has copied the rubber silencer insert as yet, plus they have got more models at least to the prototype stage so they've not actually "died". By partnering/ licensing with Tippmann and EMG they have done exactly what I suggested earlier which is to get in bed with someone with an established product range that allows them to subsidise production and sell at a more sensible price point.

 

You are absolutely correct that we should support small companies and shop local and everything else but as with all things, budget restrictions (and in some cases ITAR restrictions) stop us doing that.

Full disclosure - I bought a cheap knock off Sidewinder and it was shit. The winder fell apart, the mag latch fell out but it still worked. At the time the original Odin was still in the £65-70 price bracket which for me (and clearly a lot of people) that was just too much. I have now caved and a genuine Odin M12 in (appropriately enough) "drama-free blue" is on it's way to me now.

[Rogerborg]

One could view the knock offs as being marketing for the genuine ones.

[Lozart]

14 minutes ago, Rogerborg said:

One could view the knock offs as being marketing for the genuine ones.

 

Imitation IS the sincerest form of flattery! 

 

Let's face it if the product was shit nobody would copy it!

[PureSilver]

17 hours ago, Lozart said:

Imitation IS the sincerest form of flattery!

I’ve only recently found out that there’s a second half to Wilde’s comment. It reads in full:

 

"Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery that mediocrity can pay to greatness."

[AlphaBear]

I'm about to order a bunch of upgrade parts from Japan! I can't believe how much gearbox parts have gone up since I last upgraded my gearbox. With EMS factored in I will still be saving 1/3 on UK dealer prices... unless that is customs get hold of the package! 

 

Going back to Odin's speeloader the cheapest I've seen it in the UK is about £50 but it was some god damn awful tan colour. None of my kit is tan! Actually I think that was on ebay I saw it... so it may have been a knock-off! I'll see if my mate in HK can find one and post one to me! 

[hitmanNo2]

20 minutes ago, AlphaBear said:

Going back to Odin's speeloader the cheapest I've seen it in the UK is about £50 but it was some god damn awful tan colour. None of my kit is tan!

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't wear my speedloader on me.  It stays in my bag.  It could be neon yellow for all I care as long as it does it's job.

[Zarrin]

1 hour ago, AlphaBear said:

I can't believe how much gearbox parts have gone up since I last upgraded my gearbox. 

 

Yeah I was pretty shocked when I started on my ongoing upgrade and repair projects to my current collection - I used to be able to build a decent V2 from scratch with new and old parts for around 50 quid, sometimes less...   Most V2 shells alone start at around the 30-40 quid mark now!  

[AlphaBear]

43 minutes ago, hitmanNo2 said:

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't wear my speedloader on me.  It stays in my bag.  It could be neon yellow for all I care as long as it does it's job.

 

LOL.... OCD mate!

13 minutes ago, mzjango said:

 

Yeah I was pretty shocked when I started on my ongoing upgrade and repair projects to my current collection - I used to be able to build a decent V2 from scratch with new and old parts for around 50 quid, sometimes less...   Most V2 shells alone start at around the 30-40 quid mark now!  

 

I agree, I remember buying a whole bundle of stuff from HK and thinking that was pretty cheap compared to the mainline UK stores (of which there were only 2 in those days)... ok the fx rate was so much better then especially with the USD but still you can't justify some of the prices...

 

I wonder what affect Corona will have once the global supply chain start suffering... 

[Lozart]

 

 

 

1

14 hours ago, AlphaBear said:

 

I wonder what affect Corona will have once the global supply chain start suffering... 

 

It's already happening. Lots of retailers are showing short or no stock, dropshippers aren't shipping either. It's not just airsoft either.

[Skara]

1 hour ago, Lozart said:

It's already happening. Lots of retailers are showing short or no stock, dropshippers aren't shipping either. It's not just airsoft either.

 

Can confirm.

A couple of eBay sellers already messaged me offering a return, because of the massive delays caused by the China Numba Wuhan flu.

General purpose stuff too.

[Lozart]

1 minute ago, Skara said:

 

Can confirm.

A couple of eBay sellers already messaged me offering a return, because of the massive delays caused by the China Numba Wuhan flu.

General purpose stuff too.

 

Just to bring the whole thread round on itself, Odin Innovations have now stated that COVID-19 is having a significant impact on production of the new Transformer loader!

[Musica]

3 minutes ago, Lozart said:

 

Just to bring the whole thread round on itself, Odin Innovations have now stated that COVID-19 is having a significant impact on production of the new Transformer loader!

god damn it I want it! Where you seeing this information? Last info I seen about the Transformer was back in early 2019. 

[Skara]

1 minute ago, Lozart said:

 

Just to bring the whole thread round on itself, Odin Innovations have now stated that COVID-19 is having a significant impact on production of the new Transformer loader!

 

Now, to be absolute memers, they should make a virus-shaped speedloader.

[Lozart]

1 minute ago, Musica said:

god damn it I want it! Where you seeing this information? Last info I seen about the Transformer was back in early 2019. 

 

On Odin's Facebook page...

1 minute ago, Skara said:

 

Now, to be absolute memers, they should make a virus-shaped speedloader.

 

Don't think it would fit in an M4 pouch then!