I posted this here so I won't have to clutter the news forum.
I think it is unfair when OPT gets yelled off by the less informed people about the delays and the issues of which really, it isn't their fault. However, I think it's also unfair to them that they are still bound to the unreliable CC. I have to agree with those who say that whatever "good news" we get from CC ends up meaning more delays, it's true when you look at the bigger picture.
Now, I know we've heard it before; both the calls to ditch them and the responses from OPT regard number of reasons such as more upfront costs, more delays, etc. Still, I want this to highlight a more deeper concern I have for the OPT project: I think that you might be too conservative. That is, you guys aren't willing to take risks that might better the Pandora in the long run.
I've seen this all over the CC saga. First, the boards are post-paid without a contract. Why would anyone want to do this as stresses manufacturer less to really pull together (as we have seen)? Well, I've noticed how cancellations are gracefully accepted by OPT, which is kind, but this post-payment helps facilitate this that just in case it doesn't make it after all, the customers can get their money back.
Furthermore, there is unwillingness to switch to another board company because of the new upfront cost and greater delays. Well look at it this way. CC isn't keeping up with anything, they are creating probably the same delays if not more than if OPT had switched to a new producer. Moreover, when a lot of people joined for batch 2 (me included) not knowing the history of the project and thinking that indeed we'd receive a pandy come Christmas, when they had to wait, many of the impatient gave up and recashed their investments. So in the end, whether I guess OPT is willing to accept it or not, sticking with old CC cost both time and money (customers), and might probably be in the same deficits had they switched.
Before the rockets start flying, I want to bring to light this: so perhaps both options were equivalent after all had the OPT had some foresight (which honestly, they couldn't had unless they had seen the future. They must have at least considered the possibility). What appeal, therefore, had the former option of sticking with CircuitCo? Well, it involved less stepping into the unknown, some other company which could be worse and result in more payments and more delays and leading to the death of Pandora, probably with a little debt in the aftermath.
But what if that isn't it? What if the other company isn't worse but is better? What if that other company manages to produce 400 board a week without fail and does not fall side to "holidays" and such? What if it leads to constant Pandora production, probably seeing the success of Pandora, probably with a little profit in time?
That is a possibility, and it needs to be in the minds of the OPT. Stop worrying if it will fail, think about what will happen if it succeeds. Is your product good? You guys seem to really think so! If it indeed is may be the pandora is worth getting a loan or two. May be it is worth getting into trouble or getting into the unknown. You won't get there however if you stay on the dotted line without taking risks.
Being too risky is bad, but when heading up a project (not just a business, but any project that demands organization of people and resources), being too conservative keeps you from reaching the goal anyway.
I think it is unfair when OPT gets yelled off by the less informed people about the delays and the issues of which really, it isn't their fault. However, I think it's also unfair to them that they are still bound to the unreliable CC. I have to agree with those who say that whatever "good news" we get from CC ends up meaning more delays, it's true when you look at the bigger picture.
Now, I know we've heard it before; both the calls to ditch them and the responses from OPT regard number of reasons such as more upfront costs, more delays, etc. Still, I want this to highlight a more deeper concern I have for the OPT project: I think that you might be too conservative. That is, you guys aren't willing to take risks that might better the Pandora in the long run.
I've seen this all over the CC saga. First, the boards are post-paid without a contract. Why would anyone want to do this as stresses manufacturer less to really pull together (as we have seen)? Well, I've noticed how cancellations are gracefully accepted by OPT, which is kind, but this post-payment helps facilitate this that just in case it doesn't make it after all, the customers can get their money back.
Furthermore, there is unwillingness to switch to another board company because of the new upfront cost and greater delays. Well look at it this way. CC isn't keeping up with anything, they are creating probably the same delays if not more than if OPT had switched to a new producer. Moreover, when a lot of people joined for batch 2 (me included) not knowing the history of the project and thinking that indeed we'd receive a pandy come Christmas, when they had to wait, many of the impatient gave up and recashed their investments. So in the end, whether I guess OPT is willing to accept it or not, sticking with old CC cost both time and money (customers), and might probably be in the same deficits had they switched.
Before the rockets start flying, I want to bring to light this: so perhaps both options were equivalent after all had the OPT had some foresight (which honestly, they couldn't had unless they had seen the future. They must have at least considered the possibility). What appeal, therefore, had the former option of sticking with CircuitCo? Well, it involved less stepping into the unknown, some other company which could be worse and result in more payments and more delays and leading to the death of Pandora, probably with a little debt in the aftermath.
But what if that isn't it? What if the other company isn't worse but is better? What if that other company manages to produce 400 board a week without fail and does not fall side to "holidays" and such? What if it leads to constant Pandora production, probably seeing the success of Pandora, probably with a little profit in time?
That is a possibility, and it needs to be in the minds of the OPT. Stop worrying if it will fail, think about what will happen if it succeeds. Is your product good? You guys seem to really think so! If it indeed is may be the pandora is worth getting a loan or two. May be it is worth getting into trouble or getting into the unknown. You won't get there however if you stay on the dotted line without taking risks.
Being too risky is bad, but when heading up a project (not just a business, but any project that demands organization of people and resources), being too conservative keeps you from reaching the goal anyway.
Last edited by a moderator: