Future of Electronics In Aviation

In rec.aviation.student Le Chaud Lapin wrote:
It's grating when the functionality is there but disabled because you
haven't paid for activation, but on the other hand if they couldn't get
extra money for the fancier features then they might not develop them at
all. If they did, then they would probably simply charge the full price
for the unit so you'd be out the same amount of money in the end, just
without the option to spend less for fewer capabilities.

I heard frrom a friend who worked a Certain Computer Corporation that
back in the 1980's? they cleverly achieved price stratification for
their new line of mini-computers. They were selling each machine for
about $42,000. ?They discovered, long after market planning and device
design and just before release that there was an unanticipated market,
customers who wanted the machine at $30,000, but not much more. ?But
there were already customers willing to pay $42,000, and to make a
seperate product would have taken too long. Instead of redesigning the
machine, they sold the same $42,000 machine, but just before it was
shipped, opened each and filled some of the expansion slots with an
insulating undissolvable glue to prevent expansion-card upgrades by
lower-paying customers. ?Not very pretty, but it worked.

Now imagine if this option had not been available to them for whatever
reason. What would happen? Would the $30,000 customers still get their
machine? Not likely! Instead they would have simply left that market be,
and the $30,000 customers would have had less choice.

As I said, it's annoying and crappy when it's done to you, but ultimately
it results in more choice. The stuff would be more expensive, not cheaper,
if it weren't done.

True.

I was just pointing out the highly desirable benefit of price
stratification from vendor's point of view, as even the marketing
people had not previously had any intention of addressing the newly-
sprung market, and at $30,000 they were still making a profit.

Sure, I just wanted to point out the highly desirable benefit of price
stratification from the *buyer's* point of view. With this kind of
"underhanded" technique, the $30,000 buyers suddenly had a product.
Without it, they would not have had the opportunity to purchase it at all.
Net win for them.

Also, "still making a profit" is extremely misleading. In electronics, and
especially software, design costs are enormous. Those engineers don't come
cheap, but they get paid the same amount no matter how many units you
sell. It is entirely possible to make a profit on each unit but still lose
money overall.

Incidentally, had dinner tonight with a friend who is salesman for
company that makes all kinds of electronic surveillance equipment. He
showed me a device that can be used to check if someone is spying on
you with a CCD camera.

He also showed me a miniature camera with 700+x400+ (forget exact
resolution). Cost was about $100. I asked him if such a device could
be mounted on GA aircraft, and it turns out that company has entire
line of cameras for aviation, including police surveillance. The
equipment is in excess of $1000, and in some several $1000's for what
was essentially the same $100-$200 unit. We got into discussion about
whether they were repackaging same equipment that they sell for cheap
(they are), and what justification for higher pricing, and in the end,
I said, "So basically, it's the same unit, same technology, made in
Taiwan, different case, different manual, and differnt power
connector, which probably costs less than $50 I'm guessing, and the
real reason that you are charging so much to pilots is because you
can."

And he says,

"Well..yeah, right, that's the idea, isn't it?"

If you don't want to pay the outrageous price, come up with your own
mounting!

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon