BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chosun Juan" data-source="post: 3475243" data-attributes="member: 92780">Bob,That's a good question!  :cat:The short answer is that I think there is room to (and I would) keep the RRP under $3K, say $2888 (which should be a big lucky hit with the emerging Chinese bourgeois class). I wouldn't necessarily go for full immediate cost recovery (absorbing some through the profit margin) , but rather really set it up to be the clear cut premier bin on the market. This would place pressure on competitors.  :king:Without having access to private company financials, I would hazard a guess that the binocular top dogs are making quite handsome profits .... certainly much more than the brutal world of global electronics companies (where 10% or less can sometimes be considered a rip roaring success! <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />  . The marketing budgets seem fairly luxurious considering the base, and I would again guess that development (design and manufacturing processes /supply) amortization, and processing transformation is a fair chunk given the relatively low quantities.Alpha pricing seems to have as much to do with competitive pressures, positioning, and game theory, as it does with cost recovery and target profit margins. There doesn't seem to be the expected cost reductions due to scale economies and the experience curve, for something that has been around so long.  :h?:They'd definitely have to be "halo" models with the highest spec glass - Ultra FL in every applicable position (not just the objectives), HT prisms and other matching glass (a quick look at the catalogue shows it available as most types), and all in the highest grade = least amount and smallest inclusions. This is as much to increase the 'cleanliness' and contrast of the view as it is for the small increases in transmission, and reduction of distortions. Material variable costs would take a slight increase, but I'd expect they could use the 42mm optical design 'template' with a few tweaks here and there.  :t:The weight target will be key, with the segment growing for each additional gram dropped (provided they stay within the Alpha ballpark price wise). To that end, I would bite the bullet and go CFRP for the chassis (or at the very least GRP as in the FL). Just as Ferrari does with it's Formula One program, the cost of developing this headline phase can be recouped over a family of ensuing formats and model cycles.Also, just as the Korean Hyundai did in the automotive world, the 2nd tier (think Vortex Razor HD, Maven A-K's, Conquest HD's, etc, and now apparently the Tract Torics with dennis as recent convert for what that's worth) is making inroads in classical binoworld. It's hard to make optical gains at the top end since we are into incremental territory (having said that, I think the next 3-5% will show gains in practice that outweigh what their small numerical value would indicate). There is a big opportunity to differentiate with lightweight materials, so that's where I would expect the next lot of big gains to come from.Well, at least before the inevitable disruption and unpalatable assault of our eyeballs by digital jiggerypoo .....Ps.  AFAIK, kangaroo leather is the lightest and strongest available - much beloved by Moto GP riders   :t:Chosun   :gh:</blockquote>

Verification