How much does an OEM bin cost? (1 Viewer)

Kevin Purcell said:

Oleaf, I don't disagree with most of what you say in that post (despite the claims that you say that I beleive a Zeiss or Sawro cost $100 to build ... I don't believe I said that as neither are building in China. Yet.).

Except perhaps the last bit. You manipulate the numbers to make a equal case. But whose to say these $500 bins won't last 5 years or 10 years? The biggest danger to replacement seems to be binocuholism and the quest for a better bin or ... what? Damage? Loss? The same problems that the Euro 3 could suffer. That brings their lifetime cost down to $100 per year over 5 years. That's a lot cheaper for not a lot worse view. And it's the view that counts.

I look through the Hawkes I have (from FrankD so my investment is pretty low) I see a great view. Better than any of the other bins I own (though surprisingly not by quite as much as I'd hoped but just better along a number of parameter). It's a bin that is incrementally is probably difficult to better by a great deal (perhaps by refinements by the Alpha bins for four times the cost).

The biggest problem right now is the rate of innovation in China for bin design and production. It's faster than the "normal" replacement rate of bins which defines "disruptive innovation". So buying the first of the "really good Chinese ED" bins now leaves you open the "really really good Chinese ED" in two or three years that's lighter and more ergonomic and perhaps has a fractionally better view. I guess I'll take that chance.

Click to expand...

Nod, nod...well said, KP.

Kevin has it correct when he says that the view in the Hawk is incrementally better in several parameters from his less expensive binoculars. The Promaster is the same deal. The major reason I have always stuck to the mid price glass, from the <$300 Monarch to the <$500 Viper is because the premium glass, to my eyes, was only incrementally better in several parameters from these. That small incremental difference was never worth it to me to fork out an extra $1,000.

Now we have, for the mid price level @$500, two binoculars in the Promaster/Hawke that show the same incremental improvement over the Monarch/Viper that the premier glass does. No, they do not yet have a solid product longievity/durability/customer service/warranty record. But on the other hand, the Monarchs have lasted without whimper for seven years, some $40 per year of use. The Promaster seems every bit a solid and well built as the Monarch, so unless one typically beats up theur binocular with extreme usage, I feel pretty confident that these new glass will hold up at least as well as the Monarch. Now that I have said that, it is likely an objective lens will fall out when I next remove them from the case .

What will interest me is what will happen with updated versions of the Promaster/Hawke by the time Swarovski gets off of top dead center with their new $4k new deal wonder. I really wonder what the new guys will be able to accomplish with an offering of a $1k improvement. Swarovski may be at the ultimate price tipping point. Swarovski will only be able to offer an incrementally better binocular than what the havw and for that price? Me, I doubt there is very many people now who would fork out that sort of $$$. Certainly I'm not one. I ntend to use my $500 Promaster and see what happens. There is likely some real change on the horizon. We just now see the first of it with the Promaster/Hawke.

Kevin Purcell said:

Oleaf, I don't disagree with most of what you say in that post (despite the claims that you say that I beleive a Zeiss or Sawro cost $100 to build ... I don't believe I said that as neither are building in China. Yet. And I suspect their QA to verify their components costs a fair amount).

You manipulate the numbers to make a equal case. But whose to say these $500 bins won't last 5 years or 10 years? The biggest danger to replacement seems to be binocuholism and the quest for a better bin or ... what? Damage? Loss? The same problems that the Euro 3 could suffer. That brings their lifetime cost down to $100 per year over 5 years. That's a lot cheaper for not a lot worse view. And it's the view that counts.

The biggest problem right now is the rate of innovation in China for bin design and production. It's faster than the "normal" replacement rate of bins which defines "disruptive innovation". So buying the first of the "really good Chinese ED" bins now leaves you open the "really really good Chinese ED" in two or three years that's lighter and more ergonomic and perhaps has a fractionally better view. I guess I'll take that chance.

Click to expand...

Hi Kevin,

Well I was commenting to some that believe $80-$100
OE bins are selling at $1000+ retail.

As for price performance... I just drew a comparison to someone buying 5 bins to get to a price over 10 years against buying a costly euro-bin. You can say it's not a fair comparison or manipulative... but it is a truthful and realistic comparison.

"rate of innovation in China for bin design and production"

OK... this really stopped me in my tracks and tells me you're missing and not placing value on a big part of the development of any product.
First... no Chinese OE is driving innovation. They rely on their R&D departments located in various parts of Europe and Japan (namely Austria, Germany, Czech) and other good brands that demand innovation. This takes nothing away from the hard working people who work for these OEM companies... but if you call the new Hawke/Promaster an "innovation" then you're truly missing something.

Please don't pin this as a nationality issue either. It's not. And sorry for what some will call a cheap shot at Chinese OEMs... it's not.

In a sentence you've totally devalued design innovation, elegant industrial design, scientific research, etc, etc. from companies that might or might not follow the lowest wage rate.

The direct rate of "innovation in China for bin design and production" is in direct proportion to the developments made by the market leaders. And... always seems to follow... funny how that is.

I'm not trying to make anyone mad but just trying to illustrate a point. Be careful of always trying to get the best for the cheapest. How would you like your living to depend on this? Could you work that hard?

Look at the states... seems we've backed ourselves into a pretty deep corner. How do we get our products cheaper still to keep on buying, buying, buying? Where do you go from here?

Sure, the Hawke/Promasters are cheap and good (maybe great) but tell me what is innovative about that? I've heard through the grapevine that the Promasters are sold through camera shops and not the biggest bin retailers. I wonder why? My guess is EagleOptics has a deal with their OEM to not compete directly with the Vortex brand. How come EO doesn't carry the Promaster wonderbin? I predict the new re-tooled Vipers and Razors will equal the Hawke/Promaster soon. Seems to me the OEM slipped it to other brands (maybe their own partners) before Vortex releases their new bins. Oh the pitfalls of not making your own stuff. I could be full of "stuff" for that matter! I'm looking at this from the outside as well!

We all have our own personal reasons for what we buy. Please don't discount the hard work of the people driving "innovation" no matter where it comes from (Europe, China, Japan, USA, and elsewhere).

Just trying to illustrate a point... correct me if I'm off base. But, I've worked for companies in Germany, USA, Taiwan, China and still do to this day.

Cheers

Steve C said:

What will interest me is what will happen with updated versions of the Promaster/Hawke by the time Swarovski gets off of top dead center with their new $4k new deal wonder. I really wonder what the new guys will be able to accomplish with an offering of a $1k improvement. Swarovski may be at the ultimate price tipping point. Swarovski will only be able to offer an incrementally better binocular than what the havw and for that price? Me, I doubt there is very many people now who would fork out that sort of $$$. Certainly I'm not one. I ntend to use my $500 Promaster and see what happens. There is likely some real change on the horizon. We just now see the first of it with the Promaster/Hawke.

Click to expand...

Hi Steve,

I'm curious you wonder what the new guys will come out with next. Like there's a new innovation that the big 3 or 4 are somehow missing. The new guys are really the same old guys that have been making OEM bins for Bushnell, Minox, Vortex and others on and on and on. The brands drive the innovation of what they need and the OE builder manufactures. In addition the OEM can also suggest other options gleaned from X competitor company to give to you for free. In the process your new innovation goes to someone else... give and take.

In any mature market the innovation is incremental. This is not new. Every year I'm surprised at the bins available at $250 - $400 or so. Cutting costs or dropping price is not the same as innovation.

Your new Promasters will serve you well I bet. If you're waiting for this non-brand (and I mean no disrespect so please don't flame me) to lead the market soon with their next big technology push... you'll have a while to wait.

I'm sure when I get a chance to handle a pair I'll be impressed. But, I'll also balance this against reality.

cheers

Not yet sufficiently familiar with the cost structure of binoculars, I would like to share a reliable figure from a technologically not so distant type of product. For the strong belief in brand names linked with prestige, the customer of quality luxury watches today pays a price in which the costs of manufacture amount about 15 -20 %.

oleaf said:

Your new Promasters will serve you well I bet. If you're waiting for this non-brand (and I mean no disrespect so please don't flame me) to lead the market soon with their next big technology push... you'll have a while to wait.

I'm sure when I get a chance to handle a pair I'll be impressed. But, I'll also balance this against reality.

cheers

Click to expand...

Oleaf

No flame from me. I suppose since we have discussed what the term "design" is or is not, maybe there is something to be said for the definition of "innovation". I agree that there is probably no real technical innovation ith the Promaster/Hawke. Pretty much a silver mirrored, broad band multicoated binocular with some sort of ED glass. There's lots of that going around.

However, what is new or "innovative" here is the sort of optics we now have in a $500 class binocular. It may well be that this is just a symptom of the mid-range binoculars getting ever better. But in point of fact we have a binocular that will hang optically with a Swarovski EL and it only costs $500.

What might be eventually "innovative" is how the big 3 or 4 respond to this. It would seem to follow that Vortex, Pentax, Bushnell and others who pretty well live in the mid price range will react fastest to the Promaster/Hawke. It seems to me the initial bite will come from their sales, not at the expense of the alpha class. But if this takes hold and we see in a few short years truly alpha class optics appearing at the Razor/Meostar price class at say $750, then the bite into the alpha sales may well begin in earnest.

Maybe Swarovski is already reacting with their new long delayed binocular. If it is a truly flat field, then there is perhaps some technical innovation there. If so Swarovskis' response is "we can still make it better". Maybe so but what sort of marketing innovation will they need to sell enough $4,000 binoculars? I'm not buying at the current level, let alone at $4k. Maybe they will use some of the improvements (whatever they might be) of the Promaster/Hawke and keep producing their current line with some cost reductions? Probably not at the expense of not selling enough of the $4k binocular to sink that deal. If the price keeps going down in the competetion and the quality of said competition keeps going up, at some point the alpha class will have to come up with a response.

How much further up in price can they go with the alpha reputation? Can they survive with the support of however large of a segment of optics buyers will buy based on traditional alpha class quality? Those last are more or less retorical, and I am not predicting downfall of tha alpha, but one can wonder.

Guys,

I am sorry but I do not have the time to comment as much as I would like right now but I will say that I have found this thread to be an excellent discussion of various binocular manufacturing points. The interesting point is that I have not gotten lost in technical jargon which often happens despite my high interest level of any binocular topic.

Please do continue. This is educational.

Hi Steve,

I didn't know Swaro was offering their new bin at $4k. Given the current economic developments maybe they should rethink this.

I don't think the big 3 are "reacting" to this new bin. Sure.. a few people will buy it and say they had their eye on an EL... but if they were considering an EL from the beginning the Promaster would not even be on their radar. What the big 3 will have to react to is a major economy down turn. This will drive down prices.

The only thing Vortex and others brands have to "react" to is that their OEM is cutting into their markets with their "own" brand. Which is what I think I'm seeing here. I believe this OEM partner slid a design out before the brands who use said OEM finished completing their own models (based on the same bin).

You seem to be placing Promaster as a stand alone brand like the big three.

Look across the bin brands and you see familiar models in Minox, Leupold, Bushnell, Opticron, RSBP (or something like this) Burris, Vortex, Eagle Optics, Stokes?, Alpen, etc, etc, etc and now Promaster / Hawke. And there is nothing wrong with these brands. But this is the sea of brands that use OEMs to make their stuff. And I think some of the bigger brands like Leupold, Bushnell, Vortex spend lots of time making their bins a little different from the rest.

Swarovski, Leica, Zeiss, Nikon, Meopta and Leupold GR) are the companies I know of that make and control their own product from start to finish. From idea to product. This is why these guys are always different from the OEM crowd. And this is why they command a premium in price.

Costs money to spend time on ergonomics, optical design, manufacturing, marketing, unique features and actually pay these people to make these innovations. That's the difference. In the modern world anyone can cut costs.

I love seeing prices drop. But the older I get... the reasons they drop leave me feeling a little sick and it's something I consider when I buy a product. Just cheaper has it's problems. You live in the states. How low can we go?

Low price is not an innovation. If it was, McDonalds would have the most innovative cuisine. They don't. But, they have their place. Do people still spend a couple hundred $$ on dinner? Still do (and maybe that's not even really expensive)

I still think if you spend a lot of time in the field the value of a premium bin will show over time. In a couple months or years the value will show itself.

That said... I can't wait to take a look at the hawke/Promaster bin!

Cheers

oleaf said:

Hi Steve,

I didn't know Swaro was offering their new bin at $4k. Given the current economic developments maybe they should rethink this.

You seem to be placing Promaster as a stand alone brand like the big three.

Cheers

Click to expand...

What the final US price is I really don't know. That is simply a price level I've seen posted at a couple of other forums. I really don't think anybody really knows. Now that I think about it, $3k is probably likely, but I don't know. I do happen to think that the asking price for the new glass may be hitting the critical point. Using myself as an example, if I thought the alphas were really enough better, I'd work to squirrel away maybe $2k. With the price $3-4k, no way.

I really don't know where to put the Promaster/Hawke quite frankly. They are optically better than a Big Mac Value Meal but they certainly don't have the pizzaz to command a 7 course Gourmet Meal price either. Kind of like the Steakhouse Burger Meal vs the Big Mac.

So I suppose I have them in the upper levels of the mid price quality. After all that is where they are priced. This glass would probably have fared better coming from an established brand, say if it were the Vortex Razor II. Who else will re brand it? Or is it an exclusive contract with Promaster/Hawke? Can Promaster/Hawke command enough pizzaz to move enough of these to make a difference?

Actually I can't disagree with much of your post.

oleaf said:

Low price is not an innovation. If it was, McDonalds would have the most innovative cuisine. They don't. But, they have their place. Do people still spend a couple hundred $$ on dinner? Still do (and maybe that's not even really expensive)

Click to expand...

I don't own Promaster Elite or Hawke binoculars. But I don't agree with your point that low price is not an innovation. If a company can consistently make a better product for lower cost. It is us, end consumers, benefitting. It does take a lot of innovation to lower the cost without lowering the quality. I'd rather keep the change in my pocket, than fork it out for Big 3 or 4 so they can have a lavish, all inclusive, everything paid for launch party. If Vortex does not come out with Razor, we still think open hinge should cost $2000. If Promaster does not come out with Elite, I almost believe I should pay $800. If Swarovski can make the same binoculars EL below $500, that's the innovation everyone should admire.

Steve C said:

So I suppose I have them in the upper levels of the mid price quality. After all that is where they are priced. This glass would probably have fared better coming from an established brand, say if it were the Vortex Razor II.

Click to expand...

I agree. Funny about the Razor II part. Since I first read about the Promaster and Hawke ED, I've thought that in some ways these were what the Razor could, and probably should, have been. The problems I had with that bin were, here it comes...the construction quality shortcomings of the eyecup and diopter adjustments. Had the Razor had the same features as these, I would have had no reason to return either the original, or its replacement. Now, there is little reason to buy a Razor for $750. At the same time, these $500 models have the slow focus, lack an established brand name, and well, "clunker" appearance(let's face it, they're ugly), that make them less appealing.
Someone said these are a hint of what tomorrow's standard mid-priced bins may offer, and that's probably true. Much like the R&D that went into say, a Swarovski EL, the initial efforts(that we will never see in the case of a company like Swarovski-and you absorb the cost when you buy one) may leave some things to be desired, but they're necessary steps toward a future product.

OK... I'll go out on a limb and suggest these are the Razor II. Only the OEM slipped it out as it's "own" brand before Vortex releases theirs. Can't do that for long. Naughty OEM!

Someone correct me

Innovation is not following the lowest labor cost, cutting excess margin or borrowing your design from a market leader.

Cheers

It all depends on the ODM/OEM agreement.

If Vortex have an exclusive license then the ODM/OEM can't reuse the design for others. If the license is not exclusive then the same or a similar (a derived design) can be made for other resellers. There's no "slipping out designs" without breaking the contract but they may have the same design family (with menu choices for features) for other companies.

I believe (from other info on the other thread) that the ODM/OEM in this case makes some Vortex (Diamondback, at least), Bushnell (Excursion, at least), Hawke (this Frontier ED) and, probably, Promaster ED too. So one might expect to see the related designs elsewhere.

You define innovation to mean what you want it to mean (why not "that which is done by a major brand name"). Cost reduction, manufacturing and production engineering innovations are just as much innovations as design innovations (which are in short supply in the optics world). The most recent innovations of the Alpha bins have been the use of very-low dispersion glass in the objectives and ergonomic design changes. Before that the major innovations were phase-compensation in 1988 and multi-layer AR coatings in late 1970s/early 1980s. The other are innovations in the same glass as design optimization, coatings refinement or production engineering.

In a previous post you said that Nikon and Leupold GR (Gold Ring) I presume don't use OEMs. They do. They don't maybe don't use ODMs (though even then I'm not so sure). But they both use Japanese OEMs to make their bins. Like a lot of big manufacturers they don't own their own factories: Apple is an example of this.

The next year or so should be very interesting.

Nikon... I was talking LX bins... not the lower stuff. Same with leupold. Sorry for the confusion. Those are not OEM (far as I can tell)

Look across the sea of brand name bins and you can tell who came from what father or mother. Lots of siblings.

I'm defining innovation as coming up with new stuff. Please Kevin... to say I make it fit my needs?

A Kia with ABS is an innovation how? It's just stuff moving to a lower price point.
When you see the same chassis used on the Vortex bin please let me know.
I will be genuinely interested to see where this chassis shows up in the near future.

OK... I just kicked the dead horse.

Cheers

Not real sure you can call these (the Promaster/Hawke) the Razor II. These are Chinese, the Razors Japanese (but I do take your point). I happen to agree with Kevin that it depends on the OEM/ODM agreement. Another thing to consider is the evolving state of the Chinese Optics ability. At some point one of the Chinese manufacturers is going to say that they will just do it all themselves and will begin marketing their own.

Right now there are all sorts of agreements. For instance Promaster says the binocular was designed by them to their specifications and manufactured in China. So what constitutes design? On one end the alphas do it all in house. Some labels are strictly an existing model with their name on it. In US companies like Leupold and Vortex have varying capabilities to really do more of the design. Leupold designed the GR, but how much they had to rely on OEM agreements to get the glass and coatings they needed is anybody’s guess. As far as I know the Gold Rings are assembled in the USA with parts made wherever. The Green Ring Wind Rivers are imported.

Vortex has some design/construction ability as well and pretty well does the design work on their glass at least from the Fury up. They don’t have the ability to assemble so they have the whole deal made in wherever the factory they dealt with is.

Who does how much OEM for whom? Who does how much of their own original design? Doubt we’ll ever know.

Guys... do you have first hand experience with any OEM / ODM? You seem to know a lot about this.

Let me give you an example about OEM / ODM. First hand.

I work for a German company that makes a product for the bicycle industry. We are the ODM. Complete design. World patent in a category. Agreement with Taiwan OEM.

First trade show all is good.

Second trade show the following year... not so good. Find a sample at a competitors booth that looks surprisingly like our product. Hmmm. Could they knock us off in the course of a year? Sure. Trade show rep comes over to tell me about their great new product... really.

Closer inspection. Exact knock off. Closer inspection... I even see our micro product
code numbers molded in the product! Our OEM didn't even bother to take those out of the mold when they "slipped" the design out to our competitor!

What to do?

Talk to the company president. "well, our company is so big one of our designers didn't know you have a patent and gave the design out" Yeah... sure.

But... in the end you have to work it out and pretend you didn't get screwed by your OEM, and that in reality, you need them to keep producing your product so you kiss and make up and have them tell the competitor they can't use "your" design anymore. And act like they did you a favor for it.

No this doesn't happen to everyone. But I have some experience since I work with ODM / OEM and am part of the process. Not just guessing about it.

So Kevin... give me a good bed time story of your experience as an ODM and your experience with an Asian OEM

I was just trying to give an idea of how the process works. Don't mean to come off as a jerk.

You know much more than I do about this subject so I'll bow out.

Cheers

I worked for Microsoft on Windows CE ... we worked with a number of OEMs and ODMs in Asia, America and Europe on a number of devices. We didn't have anyone rip off our designs

So yes I have worked with OEMs too. I do know how they work (though not directly in the optics industry).

I also have colleagues that worked with Apple and numerous other computer companies that make use of OEMs that I've shared expeiences with.

So I do have some first hand knowledge of this process.

Well Kevin... I think your OEM world is much, much different than what happens with much smaller companies like in the optics world. Thanks for the chuckle... I needed it!
Microsoft, Apple... really, you can't compare those type companies to $100-$500 optics OEMs.

Thanks for letting me understand your point of view.

Cheers