3 ms·

I have been in 3D printing for over three years now and it has been gut-wrenching to watch Makerbot's actions. Like watching a crash test dummy, you can see the

I have been in 3D printing for over three years now and it has been gut-wrenching to watch Makerbot's actions. Like watching a crash test dummy, you can see the moves coming and it's beautiful and destructive at the same time. Makerbot systematically SOLD their founding values. Open source, open community, independant, and made in america (new york). These values appealed to the early adopters. And by taking large amounts of venture capital, Bre effectively decided to accelerate crossing the chasm by incrementally tossing each of these values aside as they were potential liabilities for mainstream adoption. He was maximizing shareholder value rather than catering to the customers of his products. Their patent strategy was clearly to increase their value to acquirers (Stratasys or 3D Systems). And by aiming so high on the acquisition negotiations they tanked the stock of every single industrial 3D printing company, who have all operated for decades longer than Makerbot. I hope that Ultimaker and Printrbot stick to their values and gain significant market share. I'm not confident that Lulzbot's libre values will translate to a thriving marketshare and ecosystem. One note on the article though... There is no way that Zach and Adam walked away with $100M each, where did that come from? I'm sure they must have been diluted significantly. If not, I'm very interested how that happened if anyone knows!

Hondor 11y ago
Made in America isn't really an important scaleable value. For American customers it plays on their patriotism. For overseas customers it plays on the perceived quality of American products. In both cases, it's just marketing trickery to make people like them.
- conceit 11y ago
  The trickery is based on the apparent politics. The question is whether the incentive was honest or not. In reallity I'd guess that outsourcing is only really viable when the production volume is big enough and if the knowledge to select the right process is there. Homebrew is educative and saves a lot of money if the work hours can be deducted or counted as training, fun or early investment.
dredmorbius 11y ago
One nit: management weren't maximising shareholder value -- Makerbot seems to be tunneling into the ground. Rather they were actively strip-mining all possible value and cash flow from a rapidly decomposing corpse. The question remains whether or not 3D printing is itself a viable long-term business. Robert Gordon in The Rise and Fall of American Wealth points to it as among the few bright spots, and I'm reminded strongly of Cory Doctorow's Makers. But ultimately these devices are almost certain to be built by existing (or newly emerged) large toolmakers. I still see the primary value as being rapid prototyping. Once you've got the design you want, it's really hard to beat production-at-scale economics. As for shakeout -- the US auto industry ballooned then consolidated massively in its early days. Yes, if you'd bet on GM you would have won big (through the 1960s), but if you'd bet on any of numerous other firms, you'd have lost everything.

Hondor 11y ago

Made in America isn't really an important scaleable value. For American customers it plays on their patriotism. For overseas customers it plays on the perceived quality of American products. In both cases, it's just marketing trickery to make people like them.

conceit 11y ago
The trickery is based on the apparent politics. The question is whether the incentive was honest or not. In reallity I'd guess that outsourcing is only really viable when the production volume is big enough and if the knowledge to select the right process is there. Homebrew is educative and saves a lot of money if the work hours can be deducted or counted as training, fun or early investment.

dredmorbius 11y ago

One nit: management weren't maximising shareholder value -- Makerbot seems to be tunneling into the ground. Rather they were actively strip-mining all possible value and cash flow from a rapidly decomposing corpse. The question remains whether or not 3D printing is itself a viable long-term business. Robert Gordon in The Rise and Fall of American Wealth points to it as among the few bright spots, and I'm reminded strongly of Cory Doctorow's Makers. But ultimately these devices are almost certain to be built by existing (or newly emerged) large toolmakers. I still see the primary value as being rapid prototyping. Once you've got the design you want, it's really hard to beat production-at-scale economics. As for shakeout -- the US auto industry ballooned then consolidated massively in its early days. Yes, if you'd bet on GM you would have won big (through the 1960s), but if you'd bet on any of numerous other firms, you'd have lost everything.