I tried to wade thru the archives to figure out what the original argument was about. Either I am dimwitted, or am simply too late to the game to understand the context.
I see the parts list on the DIY list adds up to $24.50 and the Parts kit on the Oz list is approximately $23.00.
I don't recall the price on the DIY list and cannot find a mention of it at the moment but I thought it was around $7.00 if you could get one. The Oz board is approximately $10.00/ Not having any idea what it costs to have a board made in Australia, I have to assume that at the kit level, the cost is about the same and therefore there is no profit being made.
As this debate goes back to last fall, I assume the real argument has nothing to do with profit. So does the U.S. DIY group claim sole right to distribute parts or is it over a contention that the Oz group has advanced the art but did not deliver the technology changes to the U.S. group at no cost?
I have noted that some have posted that Oz is charging a price for its time whereas it was given freely by members of the U.S. group. I have not noted this in the Oz pricing for kits.
I may be wrong, but I understand that the sale of completed boards and displays is a relatively new development which started about a month or month and a half ago. As the guy is charging a substantially higher price for completed and tested units, I think it is apparent that he is collecting for his time. I suspect that he is basically filling the need of those that cannot assemble a kit or gave up upon getting anything locally.
I would really like to know what the real debate is over....I cannot separate fact from hyperbole in the archives.
With regard to communication, Steve may be very busy but I am sure someone could follow the lead of Bryan Zubin and post a list of those that ordered and those that paid. It made it very easy to know what was going on along with a line group email saying, I am still here and we are progressing.
You made a lot of hoopla last fall over the wb O2, but the group was not prepared to handle the volume. I am sure it is a noble cause but I would really like to know what really happened to make the guys down there into bad guys last fall. I can see the contention now that they have responded to the market and are delivering built units. It's almost like they said, "Screw it, let's build them and sell them as we are being condemned anyway."
With regard to the many statements that we, the users, are not going to get all this good stuff that we would have been given for nothing because of those meanies down under, it kinda sounds like giving candy to a kid and then saying, "I won't be giving you anymore because someone is now selling candy...."
It seems to be more an ego clash than pure principle but as I clearly don't understand the whole deal from the beginning, I am probably way off base.
