craigix
Mega GP Mania
Can I ask everyone to stop feeding the troll, and for a Picard?
The Real Business Case For Openpandora
- Thread starter grobi
- Start date
craigix
Mega GP Mania
The dream.
darkborn
Member
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 455
IT WAS IRONY! I tried to explain you from the other side... It has nothing with amount of money. Or you think that $100000 are just a peanuts for rich Chinese people?WizardStan said:
When you get a deal, it is supposed to be done in :reasonable: amount of time. It is not secret that mould & cases could (and should) be done in few months, up to ...let's say 5. Cool, you sign contract. It has to be written that it has to be done in 7 months, or else (...). So, where is the mystery? If they don't want to sign, then, you don't do business with them. Because, there is no proper reason for them not to sign - if you have money.
I'm tired of this, it was business mistake, so what? UPS is wrong, Chinese are wrong, volcano is wrong, wifi is wrong... OK then, take it like this. I just hope that Pandora will start delivering worldwide.
Last edited by a moderator:
WizardStan
Mega GP Mania
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 16,731
Or else what? Do you think they can sue them to get their money back or something? Even if they win, such a lawsuit could be a multi-year endeavor, and the whole time they're just pumping money into the legal battle instead of the Pandora and nothing is getting done. They have to play nice, their only other choice is to abandon the moulds, abandon their investment, and start over with another company.darkborn said:
It doesn't matter whether $100000 is a lot or a little to the Chinese, $100000 is a lot to OPT, and they couldn't afford to do it twice. They took a risk with a company they had previously worked with. It didn't pay off, the factory could not deliver in the timeframe they wanted, but there is no way they can go back now. Even after just a few months, it was always "just around the corner" to completion. OPT has been lead by a carrot just a little bit ahead of them just as we have with the Pandora. It's only obvious now, after all these months, that things were going screwy, but hindsight is 20/20. You can't look back and say "you should have done X" based on information that you can only know now.
Last edited by a moderator:
kagato
Member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2008
- Messages
- 303
Aww, I had this nice big reply all written up too.craigix said:
If I stick it in a spoiler tag, is that okay?
If you're suggesting the opposite -- that most companies have multiple vendors lined up in advance for each major component -- then I can only say I very much doubt that, and would like to see some examples or citations.darkborn said:
That would be the normal course of operation: choose a supplier for your part(s) and run with them; if/when you encounter a supply problem, change to another vendor.
You don't line up 2 or 3 suppliers ahead of time and have all of them ready to roll for production at once. That would be a logistical and quality-control nightmare (ensuring all 3 suppliers are producing indistinguishable parts), aside from being massively more expensive.
Yes, it is wise to make sure there are others suppliers for the various components ahead of time, but the OP team have already encountered that once with the analog nubs. The original supply dried up so they immediately sourced another supplier who provided an equivalent (but, you'll note, not identical) part.
As far as the case is concerned, there are hundreds of plastics moulding companies in China; if this one fails to deliver (and so far they have, but slow and unresponsive), they can find another. If they were unable to obtain or reuse the current mould, however, I expect the upfront cost of retooling from scratch would kill the project outright. Pandora does not have the cash reserves of the major players, and they simply can't afford to switch horses during one of the most expensive steps.
If the mould is good, and this batch of cases come out well, then based on Craigix's comments they probably will take their now-finished mould to another (more expensive, but local) manufacturer for logistical reasons. Which seems to be exactly what you're demanding anyway... so what's the problem?
Last edited by a moderator:
elwing
Rabbit Addict
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2009
- Messages
- 3,118
looks like its my time to feed the troll...
having multiple source work only for lowtech and off the shelf component. for anything specialized and custom as every pandora part and specially with the low number of item needed having multiple source would be pointless and REALLY costly...
having multiple source work only for lowtech and off the shelf component. for anything specialized and custom as every pandora part and specially with the low number of item needed having multiple source would be pointless and REALLY costly...
gruso
thunderbox
My thoughts exactly.WombleGoneBad said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Monk
Caveman Ninja
@darkborn, WizardStan is actually kinda bright. If he - or others - aren't getting your point, then IMHO you need to look at what you're saying. Look at both the content and the presentation, and see if you can find where you might be going astray. From where I sit it looks like (IMHO) you're earnest but still in education (or have only recently escaped) and don't yet have any grounding in how stuff is done "in the real world", just "ideal business practices" as spouted by people in education. Well - even from secondary school I recall the phrase "if you can't do, teach"!
It also looks like your arguments are getting a little skewed/contorted, which isn't helping. Let me try - TRY - to lay out the substantive portions of what has been said, using A: and B: so that I don't have to check EXACTLY who said what. This is a kind of summary.
A: OpenPandora should have used multiple suppliers.
B: The cases have not been the holdup, the case mould has - and OPT cannot afford to have two sets made up.
A: I never said they had to make two moulds.
B: Up to now, that is the only thing that could have made a difference - the mould design and manufacture. I don't understand how having multiple sources for something that wasn't being made (the cases) could have helped before, and having multiple sources NOW would not help without having multiple moulds because each possible source could let us down whilst holding the only mould. OPT are going with "the devil they know" for the time being. Switching the mould location at this juncture would be dangerous.
You probably have a good basic point to make, but your combatative style isn't helping you to converse with WizardStan of anybody else in a way that will make ALL involved wiser. As for the case mould, OPT went with a company who were cheaper - incredibly cheaper, supposedly - than anyone else in the world. Literally. I believe that a few people have already said things along the lines of "if the deal looks too good to be true, it probably is" but they looked at the options and costs of a better contract with a Western company and compared that to the cost savings of going with this specific Chinese factory with a looser contract and far less control, and the cost saving was tremendous. So they took it. This is how some companies work - they offer incredible deals, take the money, and then fail to deliver.
The question is - was this a mistake? From the point of view of "good business practices" it absolutely was. OPT were dickheads, no doubt about it. But there is another perspective. Probably several, in fact, but the one I'm talking about is the one that WizardStan and EvilDragon keep putting forward - which is that if they had to go with the second cheapest solution that they found, the Pandora would probably never get made. Because the cost was/is too high, so the project would have stalled before it got started, over the production of a case mould.
If we get to understanding and agreeing on that, then there are other things to argue and shout about. Why could they not find better/cheaper than their second cheapest option, or... and so on. But the "fact" of the matter is, as presented by OPT and WizardStan, if OPT had NOT made the bad choice of going with this Chinese plastics factory, the Pandora would be less real than it is right now. It would, we are told, not have been developed. It is often the case in the real world - far, far too often the case - that people and businesses have to eschew some safeguards in the name of getting things done.
We don't know the details of OPT's contract with the Chinese Plastics Factory, but we have been told things like OPT have paid them befor ethe mold was finished. Months ago. Forum users noted then that this seemed foolish, as - being on the other side of the world - payment seemed, to us, like the only reasonable leverage to getting the company to actually DELIVER. However, we don't know what would have happened if OPT had not paid - and nor did they, then. I remember gnashing my teeth about the plastics factory last year, when they looked like the wrong people to be doing business with. Pointing it out now seems a little... futile
Let me try and put a different slant on it, turn it around the other way in a search for clarity (and hope that this approach isn't too provovative for you). So, to turn the argument on its head, how many suppliers have you got orders for a Pandora in with? Have you got one on order with OpenPandora and a second and third with...ah. Even though there are different "shops" around the world that are pre-selling Pandora, they are all OpenPandora. So you have just one source for the product. That's not perfect - ideally you'd have multiple sources - but it's "just the way it is". You have no significant choice, so you "break the rules" because the alternative is to do without completely (at least, for now). If you ordered one from Craig's shop, one from ED's shop, one from Fatih's shop then you would be out of pocket for quite some time toi the tune of at least 2 Pandoras plus accessories. If you got an email from all 3 shops on the same day saying "Your Pandora has now shipped" you'd have no money and 3 Pandoras. You've broken the same rule that you accuse OPT of, and for a similar reason - practicalities, finances, lack of (viable) choice.
So ends the "Pro Pandora" segment of this post.
It'd be nice to know who "Some Guy" was - all the people I've noticed working in the industray have tended to say that they think the mold should have been turned around quicker, job done betetr, from their experience (usually not in China).
A whole month is a bit of a wide target, but I'd make that January/February myself. The Pandora design was finished in August 2009? Interesting.
Important fact.
All of that is very interesting. Especially the bit about them still being painted, so NOT, in fact, finsihed and waiting to be shipped, regardless of the first volcanic eruption.
It also looks like your arguments are getting a little skewed/contorted, which isn't helping. Let me try - TRY - to lay out the substantive portions of what has been said, using A: and B: so that I don't have to check EXACTLY who said what. This is a kind of summary.
A: OpenPandora should have used multiple suppliers.
B: The cases have not been the holdup, the case mould has - and OPT cannot afford to have two sets made up.
A: I never said they had to make two moulds.
B: Up to now, that is the only thing that could have made a difference - the mould design and manufacture. I don't understand how having multiple sources for something that wasn't being made (the cases) could have helped before, and having multiple sources NOW would not help without having multiple moulds because each possible source could let us down whilst holding the only mould. OPT are going with "the devil they know" for the time being. Switching the mould location at this juncture would be dangerous.
You probably have a good basic point to make, but your combatative style isn't helping you to converse with WizardStan of anybody else in a way that will make ALL involved wiser. As for the case mould, OPT went with a company who were cheaper - incredibly cheaper, supposedly - than anyone else in the world. Literally. I believe that a few people have already said things along the lines of "if the deal looks too good to be true, it probably is" but they looked at the options and costs of a better contract with a Western company and compared that to the cost savings of going with this specific Chinese factory with a looser contract and far less control, and the cost saving was tremendous. So they took it. This is how some companies work - they offer incredible deals, take the money, and then fail to deliver.
The question is - was this a mistake? From the point of view of "good business practices" it absolutely was. OPT were dickheads, no doubt about it. But there is another perspective. Probably several, in fact, but the one I'm talking about is the one that WizardStan and EvilDragon keep putting forward - which is that if they had to go with the second cheapest solution that they found, the Pandora would probably never get made. Because the cost was/is too high, so the project would have stalled before it got started, over the production of a case mould.
If we get to understanding and agreeing on that, then there are other things to argue and shout about. Why could they not find better/cheaper than their second cheapest option, or... and so on. But the "fact" of the matter is, as presented by OPT and WizardStan, if OPT had NOT made the bad choice of going with this Chinese plastics factory, the Pandora would be less real than it is right now. It would, we are told, not have been developed. It is often the case in the real world - far, far too often the case - that people and businesses have to eschew some safeguards in the name of getting things done.
We don't know the details of OPT's contract with the Chinese Plastics Factory, but we have been told things like OPT have paid them befor ethe mold was finished. Months ago. Forum users noted then that this seemed foolish, as - being on the other side of the world - payment seemed, to us, like the only reasonable leverage to getting the company to actually DELIVER. However, we don't know what would have happened if OPT had not paid - and nor did they, then. I remember gnashing my teeth about the plastics factory last year, when they looked like the wrong people to be doing business with. Pointing it out now seems a little... futile
Let me try and put a different slant on it, turn it around the other way in a search for clarity (and hope that this approach isn't too provovative for you). So, to turn the argument on its head, how many suppliers have you got orders for a Pandora in with? Have you got one on order with OpenPandora and a second and third with...ah. Even though there are different "shops" around the world that are pre-selling Pandora, they are all OpenPandora. So you have just one source for the product. That's not perfect - ideally you'd have multiple sources - but it's "just the way it is". You have no significant choice, so you "break the rules" because the alternative is to do without completely (at least, for now). If you ordered one from Craig's shop, one from ED's shop, one from Fatih's shop then you would be out of pocket for quite some time toi the tune of at least 2 Pandoras plus accessories. If you got an email from all 3 shops on the same day saying "Your Pandora has now shipped" you'd have no money and 3 Pandoras. You've broken the same rule that you accuse OPT of, and for a similar reason - practicalities, finances, lack of (viable) choice.
So ends the "Pro Pandora" segment of this post.
EvilDragon said:
It'd be nice to know who "Some Guy" was - all the people I've noticed working in the industray have tended to say that they think the mold should have been turned around quicker, job done betetr, from their experience (usually not in China).
EvilDragon said:
A whole month is a bit of a wide target, but I'd make that January/February myself. The Pandora design was finished in August 2009? Interesting.
EvilDragon said:
Important fact.
EvilDragon said:
All of that is very interesting. Especially the bit about them still being painted, so NOT, in fact, finsihed and waiting to be shipped, regardless of the first volcanic eruption.
Last edited by a moderator:
Monk
Caveman Ninja
Gruso said:My thoughts exactly.WombleGoneBad said:
Grobi's initial post was brilliantly amusing
Thread Drift - it's like the shifting sands of the desert. One minute you have a shiny sparkling palacial city, the next you have a bunch of dunes and some cattle skeletons
Last edited by a moderator:
It was a pleasure to make some of you smile - that's all what I intended to achieve.
As for the fab discussion, I think we should drop the term "it was chosen for cost saving" in favour of "...for making it possible". The cheapest offer was not deliberately chosen to maximize the bonus pool of OPT but to allow openpandora to come to existance at all.
If OPT opted against this offer, and the next in line would be out of reach by far, the initial order size would have been something like 20.000 pandoras in batch one, which would mean a five fold business risk for OPT, whose members finally could have decided that pandora was a very clever concept but not doable on enthusiasm only.
So lets face it and stop whining: It was a choice between the cheapest chinese plastic fab including lots of potential issues with bullshitting (which all happened in any imaginable variety) or no pandora at all.
Those of you who wouldn't have ordered at all if they knew that the chinese fab was a bunch of pretenders that will have to learn a lot during this project should ask for a refund. The rest of us (hopefully the huge majority) accepts that the learning curve for every part in this project was way steeper and longer than anyone could have projected in September 2008.
I really like the story about the WLAN error and solution. Such problem is never drafted at the chalkboard, but that doesn't mean it would not take time to tackle. I think the chinese fab could tell us many stories like this for OpenPandoras moulding process only - if they had reason to be honest with us. But their culture forces them to deny faults on their side, so all we hear is bullshit.
For all who keep blaiming the OPT being naive in business terms, don't forget: A completely rational and realistic person would never tried building the pandora. It needs tons of enthuiasm, multiplied by naivety, to start this project.
So: if you think you had been able to win warren buffet as a financial backer of this project in 2008, try your best to convince him or his peers now. Without financial backing, there is no alternative but to stick with the cheapest offer wherever possible.
grobi
As for the fab discussion, I think we should drop the term "it was chosen for cost saving" in favour of "...for making it possible". The cheapest offer was not deliberately chosen to maximize the bonus pool of OPT but to allow openpandora to come to existance at all.
If OPT opted against this offer, and the next in line would be out of reach by far, the initial order size would have been something like 20.000 pandoras in batch one, which would mean a five fold business risk for OPT, whose members finally could have decided that pandora was a very clever concept but not doable on enthusiasm only.
So lets face it and stop whining: It was a choice between the cheapest chinese plastic fab including lots of potential issues with bullshitting (which all happened in any imaginable variety) or no pandora at all.
Those of you who wouldn't have ordered at all if they knew that the chinese fab was a bunch of pretenders that will have to learn a lot during this project should ask for a refund. The rest of us (hopefully the huge majority) accepts that the learning curve for every part in this project was way steeper and longer than anyone could have projected in September 2008.
I really like the story about the WLAN error and solution. Such problem is never drafted at the chalkboard, but that doesn't mean it would not take time to tackle. I think the chinese fab could tell us many stories like this for OpenPandoras moulding process only - if they had reason to be honest with us. But their culture forces them to deny faults on their side, so all we hear is bullshit.
For all who keep blaiming the OPT being naive in business terms, don't forget: A completely rational and realistic person would never tried building the pandora. It needs tons of enthuiasm, multiplied by naivety, to start this project.
So: if you think you had been able to win warren buffet as a financial backer of this project in 2008, try your best to convince him or his peers now. Without financial backing, there is no alternative but to stick with the cheapest offer wherever possible.
grobi
benji_stein
Member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
- Messages
- 278
Monk said:
Yes, very interesting. I'll step up and ask the question that no one else has asked yet, but that I'm guessing others are wondering - if the case design (that's the "design you're referring to, right) wasn't done until August 2009, that means it wasn't close to being completed back in September 2008. Given that it wasn't finished, and you probably hadn't started negotiations with a case manufacturer yet, how could you have reasonably thought it would only take two months?
Last edited by a moderator:
WizardStan
Mega GP Mania
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 16,731
Pfft, I've asked that question at least 3 times. I'm sure others have as well. Get some new questions, ya troll.benji_stein said:
anywho, for serious, it has been asked, but never fully answered. I'll give the clues I've been able to piece together. It was "finished" a year ago, they were going to go with it, but it wasn't as good as they had hoped.
When the bank problem happened, they took that time as an excuse to tweak a little bit more. Things got a little better. And then it was "hey, we've taken this long, why don't we just take another month to make it absolutely perfect?!"
3 months later, it was the way they wanted it.
Then the factory spent a lot of time doing nothing, it seems. And continues to spend time doing nothing, for all anyone can tell.
Long story short, they were in way over their heads, but are quickly learning to swim rather than drown. I really hope they don't drown.
Last edited by a moderator:
benji_stein said:
Well, the case did exist in a VERY early version (there are some old videos with an old case sample).
We didn't think that designing would take that long.
And we asked some companies - and they told us it takes about 4 weeks. Those companies were in Europe, and they are more technically advanced than Chinese factories - we just didn't know that back then.
Yes, we had to learn A LOT. I wish we would've done better, but you can't change the past and we can only continue trying to do our best and learn from it
I can hold my breath for 10min
Last edited:
benji_stein
Member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
- Messages
- 278
WizardStan said:Pfft, I've asked that question at least 3 times. I'm sure others have as well. Get some new questions, ya troll.
Definitely no troll. I may have a low post count, but I lurk a lot, and try to ask questions that don't come up often, or that no one else is asking. I'm pretty up-to-date on most of what's going on, and like to think I have pretty good old-quote-fu. Then again, you may have known some of that.
But yes, you're right. Others have asked it, and I've even asked it before, as well. I'd really meant in this thread, with reference to ED's date, which I'd never seen specified before.
You're probably right about your "let's take some more time to make it perfect" theory - it's exactly what they did with the case factory, when the wireless issue was happening "sure, we're having some delays, take a bit of extra time to play with your new machine".
On the other hand, I'd still like to hear any of your theory admitted by OPT. They're always so quick to lay the blame somewhere else (not always incorrectly), that I'd like to hear them say that at least *some* of the delay might, just maybe, have been their fault.
Last edited by a moderator:
WizardStan
Mega GP Mania
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 16,731
I know you're no troll, I'm usually a pretty good judge. I was just making a joke, hence the tongue smiley and why I went on to answer the question as best I can; I didn't expect ED to be around to answer as well. I'm consistently unfunny, but it doesn't stop me from trying.benji_stein said:WizardStan said:Pfft, I've asked that question at least 3 times. I'm sure others have as well. Get some new questions, ya troll.
Definitely no troll. I may have a low post count, but I lurk a lot, and try to ask questions that don't come up often, or that no one else is asking. I'm pretty up-to-date on most of what's going on, and like to think I have pretty good old-quote-fu. Then again, you may have known some of that.
\Oh yeah, they've definitely made a lot of mistakes along the way. Thing is, I don't think I wouldn't have made the same mistakes. That's part of what is making this so interesting for me: I had once had similar ideas and watching someone else make the mistakes first hand is really, really enlightening.benji_stein said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
