> You know Allen, I have been sort of following this remote sensing string.
> One thing that strikes me- you are saying $3 per hive which isn't to say you
> need 1 device per colony- you may be able to gather accurate and useful
> enough data by just having 1 or 2 devices per yard.  Some measures are
> certainly so variable between colonies that you need to sample a large subset
> of the colonies to be accurate- others, well, the sample could be very sample.

This is true, and a good point.  And it is typical of the responses I've been
getting.  everyone associates the cost on a per hive basis.  It's my fault, I
guess, because I started out thinking that way.  Everyone *except* the people
actually developing systems have howled at the costs I stipulated.  People said
I would have to compromise or pay more.  Or both.

What I said in that post with the wish list is what I would like, and what I
would buy outright without any second thought.  Today.  Now.  For cash.  And it
is also what I expect could get 50% market penetration among medium and
large-sized beekeepers in no time.  Anything less would require some head
scratching and have to fight for acceptance.

Having been a marketer of one sort or another for most of my life, I realise
that usually new systems come out at a high cost and get gradual acceptance,
then decline in price and increase in acceptance.  I also am aware that there
are very notable exceptions.  I am also noticing that recently there is a new
paradigm: products come out free and stay free or add premium services for which
the customer/members gladly pay.  What is to say that a sponsor might not want
to own such a service and provide it as a service to customers or members?

Anyhow, I'm not counting on that.  Having been in electronics and also having
been a consumer, I can see how little it takes to make things that are pretty
smart.  Not only that, having been around for a few years, I can see the rate at
which the price of every such thing is falling.  Not only does information want
to be free, but hardware and even services are headed that way too.  I doubt it
will get there in my lifetime, but the trend is obvious.

Sure, I could settle for a system that polls only a portion of the hives, but as
soon as one hive or one yard is not individually monitored, then I am riding two
horses.  either I am on the new system, or I am not.

Partial monitoring would mean no individual hive info, and thus would only give
a very gross indication, and be worth a fraction of what complete monitoring
would be worth. It would still be useful, but not nearly as attractive -- or
indispensable.

Seeing as the major cost, in my view, is the link from each yard to the central
collector and the processing, *not* the individual hive hook-up and transducers,
it would be folly to go to all that trouble to hook up a hive or two in a yard
and not finish the job.  The partial solution would cost over 90% of doing the
whole thing right -- and not be nearly as attractive.

I still stick to my predictions as to cost and function and expect to see some
large scale trial systems within three years.  I volunteer to be a guinea pig,
BTW.  Or invest.

Maybe I'm wrong.  Maybe it'll take $6U$ per hive per year, not $3.  Or maybe
even ten to start.  At ten, I'm definitely out.  I don't even need to think
about that.  Each increase in cost will reduce interest, make the project harder
and limit participation.

And since the major cost is more likely to be *per yard*, not per hive, due to
the fact that one uplink will be required whether there is one hive or a hundred
at a site, maybe I should amend my price to be $120US per year *per yard*.  That
comes to $1200US per yard per 10 year lifetime.

Am I way out of line, Jerry?

allen