4 ms·

There's a very simple explanation for their behaviour, and the "yes you can/no you can't" approach. They already have a contract for similar with one of the re

There's a very simple explanation for their behaviour, and the "yes you can/no you can't" approach. They already have a contract for similar with one of the regulars - Northrop or Lockheed or whoever. The project isn't going too well but they're not about to concede defeat, although they came close a few years back. Once in production they'll want US allies to buy from the same supplier for interoperability and profitability reasons, so will block the sale of the "wrong" product. I mean, it's the only rational explanation - otherwise it'd be a no brainier to buy his boat.

hudibras 10y ago
In that case, it would be a no-brainer for the Big Defense Contractor to buy him out...which leads me to believe that the BDC has a better version already and doesn't need this guy's model. So he's in a tough situation where he's designed something that's better* than anyone else's in the world, except for his direct U.S. competition. *According to this one guy, who owns the company, by the way.
- etrevino 10y ago
  > In that case, it would be a no-brainer for the Big Defense Contractor to buy him out...which leads me to believe that the BDC has a better version already and doesn't need this guy's model. So he's in a tough situation where he's designed something that's better* than anyone else's in the world, except for his direct U.S. competition. This is very likely a big part of this guy's problem. Either the tech isn't as good as advertised or he's unwilling to sell. Maybe he doesn't think he'll get fair value, I don't know. Now, one could argue that it's unfair that we have a system that forces the little guy to sell out to the big guy, but that's a different argument.
usefulcat 10y ago
Or maybe they don't see a use for it?