A lot of us, including the manufacturers will be the downfall of EUC market.

[RockyTop]

22 minutes ago, VikB said:

The costs to design, build tooling, find vendors, build prototypes, setup production lines, develop training materials, etc... for the V8/V8F have long been paid off so every new V8 model EUC is cheaper to build now than they were initially. 

Very true. 
Why do people buy wheels? 

Necessity- “ All I need is a wheel that can get me 3 miles twice a day ” (V8) 

Fun- been there did that time to move on to the next trend. (8V) 

Sport/ pleasures-  18XL

Sport / Adrenaline- Need better faster wheels ….., Every year!! 
 

Not to mention that few people are getting excited about the V8. …. If you have one or something close in specs you don’t need another one for 5+ years. ….But look at this new shinny toy. Yup!!! You need it!! Sell that V8 to your friend buy this wheel and you will be happier. Not to mention your friend is hooked now. He will buy a better wheel in a few months to keep up with you. 
 

Let’s be clear, that V8 won’t hall me around at 220-240 pounds with any joy. 
 

[RockyTop]

1 minute ago, AtlasP said:

That's.. not how any of this works. Component costs do not scale linearly with their performance--"twice the motor" does not and should not be assumed to maintain a ratio of twice the cost. The margins on the V8 line are almost certainly much, much lower than the Sherman, but which are made up for by how many more of them are sold.

I didn’t say it was or it would cost 4-5 time more. You still have to figure cost of materials in the price. 

[.....]

12 minutes ago, RockyTop said:

I didn’t say it was or it would cost 4-5 time more. You still have to figure cost of materials in the price. 

IN the bigger picture, materials is but part of it. You know all of this of course. A lot of companies operate in the red for the first few years or when launching new products. Once the product sells and they break even, it doesnt mean they can reduce the price. Sales/profits of the 'older' products, are required to keep investing in the next NEW product. If a company didnt maintain profits when they finally make some, they would have to operate in the red for EVERY new design idea or moment spent on R&D. Its normal for companies to try and maximize profits on their 'bread and butter' items. THIS is what enables them to invest in progress. Usually a company will 'update' a good selling idea, simply to find a cheaper way to manufacture it and try to capitolize on the profits. If a company can find a way to increase performance yet decrease manufacture/parts cost, why in the hell would they lower the sales price?  If something is already selling at a price point, it makes little sense to lower it, or upgrade the item w/o increasing the price.

I find it entertaining how so many people just can't see the larger picture. Not aimed at you at all @RockyTop. People try to explain why something should cost much less, but the obviously cant see the bigger picture of how ALL the bizz expenses add up. Most small business' fail in short order. There's a valid reason for it too.

"keeping up with the Jones'" is as real as the 'grass is greener'. Without those elements, we wouldnt see near the speed of innovation that we currently do. Hell, a lot of the products we see, are simply rehash of the same specs with brand new marketing. No matter how they do it, innovation takes $$, so I'm sure its a delicate dance of where to spend it. Even if you can offer a superior product, can you convince enough people to buy it? Most companies make $$ off the masses and not the 'top shelf' items.

Edited November 4, 2021 by ShanesPlanet

[RockyTop]

37 minutes ago, ShanesPlanet said:

IN the bigger picture, materials is but part of it. You know all of this of course. A lot of companies operate in the red for the first few years or when launching new products. Once the product sells and they break even, it doesnt mean they can reduce the price. Sales/profits of the 'older' products, are required to keep investing in the next NEW product. If a company didnt maintain profits when they finally make some, they would have to operate in the red for EVERY new design idea or moment spent on R&D. Its normal for companies to try and maximize profits on their 'bread and butter' items. THIS is what enables them to invest in progress. Usually a company will 'update' a good selling idea, simply to find a cheaper way to manufacture it and try to capitolize on the profits. If a company can find a way to increase performance yet decrease manufacture/parts cost, why in the hell would they lower the sales price?  If something is already selling at a price point, it makes little sense to lower it, or upgrade the item w/o increasing the price.

I find it entertaining how so many people just can't see the larger picture. Not aimed at you at all @RockyTop. People try to explain why something should cost much less, but the obviously cant see the bigger picture of how ALL the bizz expenses add up. Most small business' fail in short order. There's a valid reason for it too.

"keeping up with the Jones'" is as real as the 'grass is greener'. Without those elements, we wouldnt see near the speed of innovation that we currently do. Hell, a lot of the products we see, are simply rehash of the same specs with brand new marketing. No matter how they do it, innovation takes $$, so I'm sure its a delicate dance of where to spend it. Even if you can offer a superior product, can you convince enough people to buy it? Most companies make $$ off the masses and not the 'top shelf' items.

Exactly!! 
The truth is, you never know what is going to make the profit. New designs do sell better but only if they have a new feature. However if people are still buying the old design, why stop selling it. Sometimes you do make the most of the “top shelf” items. Other times,… most of the time. You make the most off stupid accessories that you almost didn’t bother designing. Like my Sherman kickstand. The MTen3  comes to mind. 

Edited November 4, 2021 by RockyTop

[InfiniteWheelie]

I’m not sure I understand the point made in the original post. You’re unhappy with the quality of some of the manufactures? Well these are Chinese designed, manufactured, and marketed products. It’s to be expected.

I don’t see how that means there’s going to be a so called downfall. The quality and capabilities of the wheels are clearly improving, in some companies more than others, but it is improving over time. If anything things are progressing, not headed for a downfall. Also keep in mind that ewheels are still in their early days, so naturally there will be experimentation and improvements over time.

Edited November 6, 2021 by InfiniteWheelie

[yoos]

On 11/4/2021 at 11:40 PM, RockyTop said:

New designs do sell better but only if they have a new feature. 

It appears this is not really true in the modern world. Smartphones have shown incremental improvements since iPhone 1 yet people are happy to spend lots of money on the newest model, upgrading rather often. Lots of people are also happy to change their car every few years. Marketing is pretty successful at presenting such consumer behavior as the norm rather than excessive spending. And since it has become the norm, planned obsolescence has become a thing (typically it's not a malevolent intent for things to self-destruct after warranty is out, but rather no incentive for manufacturers to spend extra on making products last longer. To me the most evil is how older smartphones stop receiving updates after just two-three years which makes their obsolescence inevitable). 

Anyway, there is so much modern wheels are still lacking (overall design, BMS, QC, lights, modularity, better sound, connectivity, app features, serviceability etc) that every new major wheel brings something new (the latest Begode wheels might be an exception since they release new iterations so often). With gasoline cars, on the other hand, I haven't seen any major improvements in the last 20 years, except, perhaps, AI safety systems and smart lights.

[RockyTop]

1 hour ago, yoos said:

It appears this is not really true in the modern world. Smartphones have shown incremental improvements since iPhone 1 yet people are happy to spend lots of money on the newest model, upgrading rather often. Lots of people are also happy to change their car every few years. Marketing is pretty successful at presenting such consumer behavior as the norm rather than excessive spending. And since it has become the norm, planned obsolescence has become a thing (typically it's not a malevolent intent for things to self-destruct after warranty is out, but rather no incentive for manufacturers to spend extra on making products last longer. To me the most evil is how older smartphones stop receiving updates after just two-three years which makes their obsolescence inevitable). 

I should have said perceived improvement or new feature.  Being new is a "new" feature.  I can't drive a 4 year old car! what will people think. ...

For me I go retro. I only drive cars 50 years old or older. " That never gets old"   ( 66' Chevy truck, ) 

1 hour ago, yoos said:

Anyway, there is so much modern wheels are still lacking (overall design, BMS, QC, lights, modularity, better sound, connectivity, app features, serviceability etc) that every new major wheel brings something new (the latest Begode wheels might be an exception since they release new iterations so often). 

  I agree, that would be nice. So why not go with a V12? Too expensive? Too heavy? You don't have to go the top speed. 

2 hours ago, yoos said:

With gasoline cars, on the other hand, I haven't seen any major improvements in the last 20 years, except, perhaps, AI safety systems and smart lights.

Not true. The did not have Bluetooth or hamster and dog endorsements 20 years ago. 

[mrelwood]

5 hours ago, yoos said:

Smartphones have shown incremental improvements since iPhone 1 yet people are happy to spend lots of money on the newest model, upgrading rather often.

There have been many steps along the way that I definitely wouldn’t call incremental. 3G capabilities being one.

 Anyway, I know very well to be an outlier myself, but for me the wish to upgrade slowed down significantly with the iPhone 6, and stopped completely with iPhone X.

 The main factor for pushing towards yearly smartphone upgrades has seemed to be the mobile phone ownership being sold as an attractive service instead. Paying a monthly fee in your phone bill for the latest iPhone while the service provider takes care of the “loan”, warranty services, upgrades etc, is a very attractive choice for anyone with a monthly income, compared to buying a new phone for $500-$1000 once even every 2-4 years.

Quote

Marketing is pretty successful at presenting such consumer behavior as the norm rather than excessive spending.

Exactly. Find out what is the easiest solution for the customer, and you’ve already made half a $1M.

Quote

And since it has become the norm, planned obsolescence has become a thing (typically it's not a malevolent intent for things to self-destruct after warranty is out, but rather no incentive for manufacturers to spend extra on making products last longer.

Exactly. When designing any product, determining the target durability of each component is an inevitable part of the design process. 15 years ago the target for mobile phone lifetime was very different than it is now. Applies to many other products as well.

Quote

To me the most evil is how older smartphones stop receiving updates after just two-three years which makes their obsolescence inevitable).

The lifetime of personal laptop computers has likewise shortened for the exact same reason.

 

Quote

With gasoline cars, on the other hand, I haven't seen any major improvements in the last 20 years, except, perhaps, AI safety systems and smart lights.

MPG values have increased by a huge amount though, along with decreasing CO2 pollutions. My car is made in 2006, just a few years before the market wide eco trend. My car’s MPG is significantly worse than from a comparable model just 4 years after.

 The amount of software controlled appliances and safety features is another example. The car knows very precisely what you are doing, where you are, what’s the speed of the car in front of you, etc. The amount of stuff to do when entering or exiting a car has decreased by a huge amount, especially with modern e-cars. So already the basic usage has changed enough for me to call it a significant change for the end user.