4 ms·
Direct competition and under cutting. This space could use a lot more innovation before resorting to under cutting price.
by peppertree 14y ago
Direct competition and under cutting. This space could use a lot more innovation before resorting to under cutting price.
- kiba 14y agoFor some of us, price absolutely do matters.
- bri3d 14y agoUnless he's using some sort of unrelated investment or fortune to sell at a loss (which would be admittedly shady and anticompetitive), I fail to see how developing a similar product at a lower price point is stifling innovation or "resorting" to anything. If your argument is that lowering margins is a move that will slow the pace of innovation (i.e. that R+D money drives innovation in this space), won't the additional capital Makerbot have generated off of their presumably larger margins allow them to compete favorably in introducing superior models? A lot of innovation in this market is open-source and performed at no cost (i.e. the many RepRap community designs). I don't think this is something like "founder runs off with proprietary technology, undercuts product by stealing results of sunken R+D cost." I think it's just building a similar product at a lower price point, and hoping to drive volume. I'm really struggling to see anything wrong with that. I'd certainly love to have more people in the 3D printing community, especially because many seem to give back with new, open designs leading to better products.
- guynamedloren 14y ago> I fail to see how developing a similar product at a lower price point is stifling innovation or "resorting" to anything. Pretty sure there was no mention of 'stifling innovation'. I think you misinterpreted. I believe he's trying to say that these guys are doing the exact same thing as MakerBot (ie not innovating or building something new), but selling at a lower price. Very different than 'stifling innovation'.