![]() |
I can see this like Toyota and Lexus. One focusing on the "entry level" equipment with the other on the more "advanced" level equipment. These are two different markets and trying to cover both with one line of equipment can be like having a jack of all trades become the master of neither.
I for one am an avid Dynon user and wish them good luck with this. Only time will tell how good a decision this was. :cool: |
Quote:
|
Best Wishes!
I am not an expert in business administration, but are we at the dawn of a new business model?
Is it possible that small competing companies, collaborate between them, not to become big large corporations, but just to maintain their feasibility and capacity of being innovative and keep serving a market? If that?s true, we are living very interesting times, were in place of big corporations becoming increasingly fat and slow, we?ll see thriving smaller companies producing very innovative and good products as the Dynon and AFS EFIS and other stuff. Personally, I would like to add, that these two companies run with excellence, innovation and passion to serve a small market market made of we equally passionate aviation amateurs, deserve the best wishes for they success! Guido Spaini |
The way I look at it, competition is good for consumers. This type of deals inherently reduces competition, hence not good for consumers.
|
I don't think Dynon/AFS will be disclosing their strategy on this forum!
Here's my thinking: Dynon needs to invest more in developing avionics products that will compete with Garmin (and others). In the past, they have licensed products (Trig Transponders) or used 3rd parties for development (VHF Com, intercom). They need more resources to invest in owning critical technology (IFR Certified GPS, Certified Avionics?) AFS represents a skilled group of engineers who can help the combined company develop these important products moving forward. Not only that, the existing AFS product revenue will help pay for these added resources. The bottom line is that the combined company has additional financial and engineering resources to reinvest in a competitive market. This is all about eliminating redundant capability and investing in new products to compete head to head with Garmin. |
To add some weight to what Lucas is saying, I would like to chime in here.
Lucas's problem is reality. As avionics manufacturers we have the exact same issue. Most critical electronic components are now single sourced. If the manufacturer of a chip decides to dump it you can't do anything about it other than redesign with something else. Your quantities do not warrant the chip maker from making the chip if you are one of the few using it. In the past you could be fairly certain that a chip would be available for a long time. This is no more. A chip can now be discontinued 1 or 2 years after it was released to big fanfare, We have had to stop our V10 radio because of this. We are only now putting it back into production after an expensive redesign. Almost all our avionics is being periodically redesigned in some way or another to cater for components we can no longer get. There is a whole new industry around obsolete components. Component traders buy remaining stocks the moment something gets discontinued and then try and screw every last $$$ out of every manufacturer that desperately is looking for that component. Chinese are stepping in producing fake chips to make a quick buck (the chips look right but there is nothing in them at all). It's terrible and is the bane of any small electronics manufacturer anywhere in the World. But it does not help complaining. We just get on with it. Regarding one posters comment related to experimental aviation being the only growth segment in aviation. Unfortunately that is not true. A quick glance at aircraft registration numbers over the years shows the real picture. Increased costs and bureaucratic hurdles (especially in parts of the World outside the U.S.) do not bode well for the future. Is experimental aviation niche ? Yes, of course it is. I wager most of us do not do this because we want to make lots of money (there are much easier ways I guess) but we do this because we love aviation and this is something we can do. Because of this, those that love building avionics will not go away until the last plane has been built... Rainier CEO MGL Avionics Quote:
|
I must have missed Stein's comments about the differential focus/purpose of the Dynon and AFS avionics lines: "...they are for two different purposes..." (?) or something to that effect. Can some one fill me in?
Thanks, Lee... |
Mixed feelings.
Mixed feelings. But I have been worried about all the EFIS manufacturers lately(except big g).
I own Garmin a little Garmin stock. (AFS in my panel) But... I do not want Garmin to be the overwhelmingly dominant(only?) supplier of EFISs. We will be the big loser in that equation. Have you paid your 430 subscription to Jeppeson lately? I believe their current G3 prices are all about domination of the market. If that happens I have very little faith that the current reasonable map subscription cost will remain reasonable. And how boring will it be for the only question about the panel: "How many G3s do you have?". If chip availability is the issue; hopefully this merger and maybe even some agreements between Dynon/AFS, GRT, MGL etc to all use the same chip would bump up the volume to keep it in production longer. Maybe it is viable for all of these guys to get together and make their own chip such that they will not have to redesign as often. |
Quote:
Dynon is a solid VFR platform that targets most of the experimental community on a tight budget. AFS has more bells and whistles at the moment that provide more functionality to the IFR crowd and to those wanting the additional features. I made the decision to choose AFS from my RV-10 due to it being a solid IFR platform and the rate of innovation and the responsiveness of addressing issues when they arose. Once Rob starts shipping the 5000 series/touch screen upgrades for the 4500s, I'll be a happy camper. I think Rob's engineering team and Robert's manufacturing sourcing should yield some great synergy. Like the Honda/Acura and Toyota/Lexus analagies, I suspect it will allow AFS to concentrate on the high end market and Dynon more of the entry to mid level market. But that's just my opinion. |
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:30 AM. |