Archive of the former Yahoo!Groups mailing list: MOTM

Vanilla versus double pecan ripple fudgeI think that you have previously stated
that 95% of sales have been kits, so obviously this is what MOTM customers
prefer, due to the cost saving of being able to build the modules themselves, as
well as the enjoyment of being 'closer' to, and more involved with, their
equipment.
__________________________________

The irony is that over the 8 1/2 years the kits have been available, the rise in
parts cost, copper wire (copper is 485% more than 10 years ago), solder
(doubled), evil empire Tyco (knobs that were 68 cents are now $1.35) and the
sheer labor/logistics of keeping track/buying/stuffing into little plastic bags
for 1.1 million (not a typo) parts means that the kits are MORE EXPENSIVE than
assembled.

Yet, the ∗expectation∗ is that "kits are cheaper". Well, ∗not any more∗. Look
again at the SMT machince making MOTM-650 boards here:

www.synthtech.com/m650

and then try to convince me that paying 3 people $18/hr for weeks and weeks to
stuff resistors into bags is ∗cheaper∗. BWAHAHAHA!


You are justifying dropping the 510 and other 'esoteric' modules for financial
reasons. Therefore, is it wise to restrict your MOTM sales to 5% of your
previous market? Might you lose a lot of existing customers by trying to force
them into buying more expensive assembled modules?

_______________________________________

If Cynthia can sell 200 MOTM ZeroOscillators at $700ea, errr.....no. She made
more money from ∗my customer base∗ than I did selling all the
WaveWapers/Sub-Octave Muxes/MIDI-CVs/etc ∗combined∗. And, no kits, either. I
hate to use this .com-era phrase, but a paradigm shift is happening. The data
speaks for itself.


I would have thought that having some esoteric modules might make the MOTM
system/format seem more attractive to prospective customers than just a whole
load of vanilla modules.

________________________________________

Errrr....no. Because there is no point of reference for a Super-Whatzit. There
is for a Moog ladder filter. Case in point: I spent 14 months designing the
"Micro Modules" (190/390/490/890/310) ∗specifically to address∗ a lower entry
cost for MOTM to attract ∗new customers∗. I spent over $14,000 just going to
NAMM in 2001 to promote it (including 2 $1200 ads in Keyboard and EM). Guess
what? ZIP, Nada, zero new customers. Sure, all the ∗existing∗ customers bought
them. But as intended to draw new folks in....a dismal failure. Why is that? The
#1 "concern" was addressed: cost. So, where were the customers? See, the lesson
learned is: talk is cheap on the Internet. I was a ∗total idiot∗ to think that
market research is reading user groups, trying to get a feel for 'what people
are asking for'. Pfffttt.....

Market research is about listening to ∗customers first∗, exploring technology,
and innovation. But not going overboard :)


Of course it is your decision, you can and will do whatever you want, but I
can't imagine this sits well with your customer base that has invested in your
systems and supported your business up to where it is today. I would imagine
that they feel abandoned by you.

________________________________________

I'm sure some do. But I know for a fact (because they told me to my face) that I
also lost over $50,000 in assembled module orders due to delivery issues.

I think that with the sale, the ∗8 months∗ of lead time, and the fact that new
customers are buying more each day (4 new customers in the last 5 days). Look at
synthesizers.com: except for the 960 clone, what new stuff has Roger had in 3
years? What new stuff has Sege had in ...errr...22 years?

Since I outsold Moog 18 months ago, and MOTM is #2 all-time installed base
(behind Doepfer), I must be doing ∗something∗ right :)

Paul S.