4 ms·

The sawstop story is interesting. They basically tried to license it to the other saw companies. The other companies said hell no. We have the market. So saw

The sawstop story is interesting. They basically tried to license it to the other saw companies. The other companies said hell no. We have the market. So sawstop started building their own (great) saws. They really are pretty to very high quality. The saw stop feature is also very effective. It's so effective that if you are running a woodworking shop in a school, or ever want to let your kids use your saw, or have staff using your saw, you really owe it to them to ALWAYS buy a sawstop. I've worked with a few owners who took the approach you did. Inevitably someone loses a finger - and after the dust settles and folks ask why they didn't put this VERY simple and not that expense solution in place - they usually regret it. Either they feel guilty for chisling on some $ and having someone lose function in their hand or if they are here in CA they pay out BIG TIME for their stupidity.

slownews45 5y ago
A series of meetings followed, in which Gass "negotiated with major players such as Ryobi, Delta, Black & Decker, Emerson, and Craftsman" in an attempt to license his invention; he followed those negotiations with a February 2001 presentation to the Defense Research Industry, a trade group for attorneys representing the power-tool industry.[7] That presentation immediately preceded one from Dan Lanier, Black & Decker's national coordinating counsel; Lanier's presentation gave Gass the impression he was unlikely to succeed in convincing major power tool manufacturers to license SawStop technology.[7] The license fee was going to be around 3% of wholesale (so about $3 on a $100 wholesale saw that goes for $200 retail). I think he came very close to licensing to ryobi? Anyways, if you think $3 for potentially incredibly QOL saving tech is too much for an inventor that actually invented something (and tested on his own finger) then I don't know what to tell you. That said, once someone's parents (if you run a woodshop in a school) or employee sues you - you may start valuing this invention a bit more.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- WalterBright 5y ago
  On the other hand (!), maybe the onus for the lost fingers is on SawStop for demanding those licensing fees.
  - Danieru 5y ago
    Congratulations! You are today's 10,000th person to learn of: <Perverse Incentives>
    - snet0 5y ago
      How is it an example of a perverse incentive? If we don't reward inventors who make genuinely useful things, there's no incentive.
      - Danieru 5y ago
        I was replying to a comment which suggested the investor should be punished for not offering their invention for free. The poster wanted to punish inventors for inventing. If that isn't a perverse incentive I don't know what is.
        WalterBright 5y ago
        > The poster wanted to punish inventors for inventing. Please try reading what I wrote again.
        Danieru 5y ago
        > On the other hand (!), maybe the onus for the lost fingers is on SawStop for demanding those licensing fees. Done. Do you disagree that your writing says "the onus for lost finger is on SawStop"? Your writing seems very clear to me. I do not know why you are confused.
        WalterBright 5y ago
        I said "maybe", as in who is the unfair party here? Nowhere did I say anyone should be punished.
- erik_seaberg 5y ago
  It's good that the license was only $3, but the end user also has to buy at least one disposable $80 cartridge (probably more, apparently false alarms happen) for a problem that can be solved with a push stick.
  - whoknowswhat11 5y ago
    Good point. You can send in your activated cartridge to sawstop - if it was skin activated then they may replace it for free. If you are concerned about a trip you can touch blade to piece with saw off and it'll tell you if would have tripped. Or do a first cut with system off. Or if you have a wet piece turn it off. That said if you have a nail or something in piece there are situations that could trip it for sure.
    - kens 5y ago
      I was at a shop that had a "wall of shame" with sawstop cartridges that had tripped when people tried to saw wet wood, metallized plastic, and other conductive materials.
      - jjav 5y ago
        The detection can be disabled for the case of cutting conductive materials.
        slownews45 5y ago
        It can also be used to sense if the wood is too wet - go to bypass, then do a cut in wettest part and you'll get an indication.
  - AmVess 5y ago
    Push sticks have been turned into formidable projectiles, even by the most experienced and careful of user.
- hamburgerwah 5y ago
  $3 was at least 100, if not 1000 times more than these manufacturers would have ever been willing to pay in license. That was just the license, the technology itself added significant cost, weight and complexity. It's no surprise that sawstop can make a nice saw for 4 to 17x the price of competitors.
HumblyTossed 5y ago
> The other companies said hell no. We have the market. The other manufacturers would have had to immediately stop selling and possible have pulled all the other saws off the market. For liability reasons, you can't sell a line of saws that chop off fingers next to a line that doesn't. You're basically admitting the former is defective.
- epistasis 5y ago
  What is the basis for this claim? It doesn't sound particularly plausible compared to other safety features, such as car airbags, which are not offered across all products in a brand.
- imglorp 5y ago
  I'm not convinced about that legal theory. There's another precedent in motorcycle ABS: unlike cars, not all bikes have it yet, so you can buy a Ninja both with and without ABS. The feature is even more decisively important for bikes than cars because it keeps them upright and stable under hard braking, so it's not just stopping distance. It adds several hundred to the price. Or maybe you're right and we'll see an "admission of defect" suit sometime soon.
- cbozeman 5y ago
  This is nonsense. Saws that chop off fingers aren't defective - the user is. It's a simple argument to make. Saw Y doesn't have safety features and you use it at your own risk of injury. Saw X will stop cutting the moment it detects a body part. You also use it at your own risk of injury.
- Johnny555 5y ago
  For liability reasons, you can't sell a line of saws that chop off fingers next to a line that doesn't. You're basically admitting the former is defective. I'd think the opposite is true - you can't sell a $250 saw that won't cut someone's finger off next to a $200 saw and expect it to sell. No one thinks it'll happen to them... otherwise Saw-stop's own line of saws would dominate the market. Some people will pay the premium, but I'd bet that most will not.

slownews45 5y ago

A series of meetings followed, in which Gass "negotiated with major players such as Ryobi, Delta, Black & Decker, Emerson, and Craftsman" in an attempt to license his invention; he followed those negotiations with a February 2001 presentation to the Defense Research Industry, a trade group for attorneys representing the power-tool industry.[7] That presentation immediately preceded one from Dan Lanier, Black & Decker's national coordinating counsel; Lanier's presentation gave Gass the impression he was unlikely to succeed in convincing major power tool manufacturers to license SawStop technology.[7] The license fee was going to be around 3% of wholesale (so about $3 on a $100 wholesale saw that goes for $200 retail). I think he came very close to licensing to ryobi? Anyways, if you think $3 for potentially incredibly QOL saving tech is too much for an inventor that actually invented something (and tested on his own finger) then I don't know what to tell you. That said, once someone's parents (if you run a woodshop in a school) or employee sues you - you may start valuing this invention a bit more.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
WalterBright 5y ago
On the other hand (!), maybe the onus for the lost fingers is on SawStop for demanding those licensing fees.
- Danieru 5y ago
  Congratulations! You are today's 10,000th person to learn of: <Perverse Incentives>
  - snet0 5y ago
    How is it an example of a perverse incentive? If we don't reward inventors who make genuinely useful things, there's no incentive.
    - Danieru 5y ago
      I was replying to a comment which suggested the investor should be punished for not offering their invention for free. The poster wanted to punish inventors for inventing. If that isn't a perverse incentive I don't know what is.
      - WalterBright 5y ago
        > The poster wanted to punish inventors for inventing. Please try reading what I wrote again.
        Danieru 5y ago
        > On the other hand (!), maybe the onus for the lost fingers is on SawStop for demanding those licensing fees. Done. Do you disagree that your writing says "the onus for lost finger is on SawStop"? Your writing seems very clear to me. I do not know why you are confused.
        WalterBright 5y ago
        I said "maybe", as in who is the unfair party here? Nowhere did I say anyone should be punished.
erik_seaberg 5y ago
It's good that the license was only $3, but the end user also has to buy at least one disposable $80 cartridge (probably more, apparently false alarms happen) for a problem that can be solved with a push stick.
- whoknowswhat11 5y ago
  Good point. You can send in your activated cartridge to sawstop - if it was skin activated then they may replace it for free. If you are concerned about a trip you can touch blade to piece with saw off and it'll tell you if would have tripped. Or do a first cut with system off. Or if you have a wet piece turn it off. That said if you have a nail or something in piece there are situations that could trip it for sure.
  - kens 5y ago
    I was at a shop that had a "wall of shame" with sawstop cartridges that had tripped when people tried to saw wet wood, metallized plastic, and other conductive materials.
    - jjav 5y ago
      The detection can be disabled for the case of cutting conductive materials.
      - slownews45 5y ago
        It can also be used to sense if the wood is too wet - go to bypass, then do a cut in wettest part and you'll get an indication.
- AmVess 5y ago
  Push sticks have been turned into formidable projectiles, even by the most experienced and careful of user.
hamburgerwah 5y ago
$3 was at least 100, if not 1000 times more than these manufacturers would have ever been willing to pay in license. That was just the license, the technology itself added significant cost, weight and complexity. It's no surprise that sawstop can make a nice saw for 4 to 17x the price of competitors.

HumblyTossed 5y ago

> The other companies said hell no. We have the market. The other manufacturers would have had to immediately stop selling and possible have pulled all the other saws off the market. For liability reasons, you can't sell a line of saws that chop off fingers next to a line that doesn't. You're basically admitting the former is defective.

epistasis 5y ago
What is the basis for this claim? It doesn't sound particularly plausible compared to other safety features, such as car airbags, which are not offered across all products in a brand.
imglorp 5y ago
I'm not convinced about that legal theory. There's another precedent in motorcycle ABS: unlike cars, not all bikes have it yet, so you can buy a Ninja both with and without ABS. The feature is even more decisively important for bikes than cars because it keeps them upright and stable under hard braking, so it's not just stopping distance. It adds several hundred to the price. Or maybe you're right and we'll see an "admission of defect" suit sometime soon.
cbozeman 5y ago
This is nonsense. Saws that chop off fingers aren't defective - the user is. It's a simple argument to make. Saw Y doesn't have safety features and you use it at your own risk of injury. Saw X will stop cutting the moment it detects a body part. You also use it at your own risk of injury.
Johnny555 5y ago
For liability reasons, you can't sell a line of saws that chop off fingers next to a line that doesn't. You're basically admitting the former is defective. I'd think the opposite is true - you can't sell a $250 saw that won't cut someone's finger off next to a $200 saw and expect it to sell. No one thinks it'll happen to them... otherwise Saw-stop's own line of saws would dominate the market. Some people will pay the premium, but I'd bet that most will not.