The other day Allen and I exchanged a few emails, mainly because I thought
there was a typo in one of his submissions. Turns out what I thought was a
typo was not, and the conversation should have taken place on-list.
Unfortunately, I lost pieces of the conversation, but a summary follows.
You wrote:
>> How much US $ per hive you would spend -
> ... I would think up to $3 per year per hive.
Three dollars!? Did you drop a zero? I would be amazed if the electronics
that have been tossed around could be PRODUCED for $3, let alone sold for
that little. I imagine it would be more in the ballpark of twenty times
your figure, more like $60. And only that if mass production kicked in.
So, are you serious with your $3 figure? I witheld approval figuring it was
a typo.
/Aa
>> So, are you serious with your $3 figure?
> Yes, I think it is realistic, given what Jerry says if I understand him
> correctly. Note that I said per hive per year, not per hive.
Yes, the "per hive per year" did not pass me by. And you gave a hive figure
of "200 minimum, 3000 maximum" which gives quite a broad range in what
you're willing to shell out. I imagine one would need an absolute minimum
of two "units" per yard for comparison of data to get any sort of meaningful
indication of what's going on in that particular yard. One unit would be
sufficient for your rustler concerns (bears and/or thieves) but for
enviromental indications (flow evaluations) two units would be necessary to
rule out the possibility that you have your equipment on an exceptional hive
(either a gang buster or a dink). And even two units is a frugal estimate.
> I envision something really quick and a bit dirty. I think my concepts of
> differentiation against time are missed by everyone and instead people
> think that absolute values are important. I think not. A +/- 20%
> deviation from true would not matter at all -- if the offset were
> reasonably consistent.
Your description was clear. You don't envision a triple beam balance, a
bathroom scale will suffice. Solid as a hockey puck and long lasting
(lasting at least as long as it will take to ammortorize your costs down to
$3/yr/hive) may be a hard bill to foot. My 3 year old 27in TV is starting
to fritz out on me and it sits staticly in the comfort of my climate
controlled living room.
My SWAG of $60 per unit is what I imagine would be a price low enough for
enough units to sell to make production worth while for producers. The
spring balance hive stands that Dadant used to market got pulled because few
sold. I bought a few in the close out sales, found them terrible inacurate
but possibly within your +/- 20% deviation range and good indicators for
ballpark weight gain or loss. Close out price was $12, I do not know what
they sold for when they were being manufactured. But few beekeepers were
willing to buy them.
Electronics, with the possibility of cutting production costs provide a
market for the big boys. Honey production costs are of little concern for
those on the other end of the beekeeper scale. If the electronics price
into the range that require large outlays to be ammotorized over years and
balanced against honey production costs savings, few will sell to sideliners
and VERY few (if any) will sell to hobbiests. Commercial operations are the
top of the pyramid. Volume sales required for mass production costs
benefits will have to include sideliners and hobbiests. Go past the target
$60 price it's doubtful the bulk of beekeepers will buy. Frankly, I doubt
many will buy at that price.
And this just examines equipment costs, leaving out data collection
subscription fees.
I expect we will always have the economy of scale. A single unit able to
serve many hives at a low enough cost requiring beekeeper visits to beeyards
will appeal to the the bulk of the pyramid. Multiple units, networked for
data collection and delivery to a central location, at a higher price will
only appeal to the apex beekeepers. Perhaps there is or will be a
manufacturer who can/will server the entire pyramid with a line of products,
but there again, multiple products will compete with benefits of mass
producing a single line. I have problems envisioning this ever being less
than a luxury item and doubt we'll ever realize benefits of mass production.
It will be nice to proven wrong, this is a crow I'd love to eat!
/Aa
>>> At this point Jerry Bromenshenk added:
Hey guys, I agree. A question for you is how many at how many locations
would be needed to adequately support a several thousand hive operation.
1 per yard?
2 per yard?
Every yard?
Some yards?
I'd think that you would know where the critical locations are in a big
operation. Which ones are first to get a flow or undergo a shortage.
As per the backyard or hobbiest, some would buy the expensive brand just
for the fun of it (just like photographers).
As per those of you who make a living from bees, we have to be able to
produce the units at a recoverable cost (you couldn't afford not to have
it).
How much does it cost to drive a truck and crew to the wrong location, miss
the first days of a flow, get there after they have started down the
starvation path, got nailed by the spray plane (2 weeks earlier so that all
residues and evidence of the event other than piles of dead bees is gone).
>>>> End of summary <<<<
I apologize for the snippets here, but I didn't want this to pass BEE-L by.
It would be a personal thrill to see a product come to market with some help
from these discussions.
Sincerely,
Aaron
|
