[Elecraft] RE: Can Elecraft take over the global HF ham radiobusiness ?

[Craig Rairdin]

> As for the radio being in a kit form, that is actually a HUGE selling 
> point, regardless of the time and effort required to build it since 
> all hams that I have met so far would really love to be able to build 
> their radios instead of buying a ready made appliance, provided that 
> the result does not lack in any significant RF design respect vs the 
> commercially available units. And I am not talking about a million 
> gadgets that you rarely ever use in a rig, but basic ant time proven 
> options as the above mentioned.

> This is almost a universal definition of a Ham: "he who likes to 
> tinker"

> ...and by gaining widespread acceptance worldwide, profits can be 
> improved even with a smaller profit margin per unit.

I think you're taking your preconceived ideas and projecting them onto
everyone else. YOU may enjoy building kits, but I don't think that's a
majority opinion. YOU may be one who likes to tinker with everything you
build or buy, but that's far from a majority opinion.

If being a kit is a HUGE selling point then we wouldn't be having this
discussion about what Elecraft could do to improve its market share. This
has to be the best kit radio out there, so by your definition it should be
in the market share lead. I frankly don't know if it is or isn't but am
assuming from the topic of discussion that it's not. So it can't be the case
that simply being a good kit is enough.

If I might project MY opinions onto a majority of hams (most of whom aren't
on this list, by the way) then I would say the universal definition of a ham
is closer to "one who wants more radio than he or she can afford".
Everything I've "tinkered" with is because I was too cheap/poor to buy
something that was good out of the box or that wasn't used and in need of
repair. 

If I've learned anything in business it's that the best products don't
always win. The best *marketed* products win. This means things like
"brand", "price", "good looks", "consumer buzz" and "advertising budget" are
perhaps more important than "receiver sensitivity", "filter bandwidth" and
other measures of quality.

Craig
NZ0R
K1 #1966