Re: Cost justification of RP

From: Robert Crangle (rcltd@nckcn.com)
Date: Tue Feb 23 1999 - 18:51:54 EET


The real question, if in fact you or your client can gain from the "general
benefits" of time to market and new design, is this: what is the
reasonable cost for a company to incur in not at least gaining experience
with such a technology? To answer this question you need to understand the
competitive structure of your -- or your client's -- industry. If the
whole focus is on "specific measurements" to justify an expenditure you may
end up with an answer that is very precisely wrong instead of being
generally right, but you -- or your client -- may not discover this
unfortunate fact for a long time.

Bob Crangle
Rose & Crangle, Ltd.
102 E. Lincoln Street
Lincoln, KS 67455-0285
785 524 3130 (fax - 3436)
----------
From: Rice Cabiac <rcabiac@sric.sri.com>
To: rp-ml <rp-ml@bart.lpt.fi>
Subject: Cost justification of RP
Date: Thursday, February 18, 1999 7:35 PM

RP'ers:

I have no doubt that this topic has been discussed in great detail in the
past, but If I were considering the purchase of an RP machine, what
specific measurements beyond general benefits such as improved time to
market and increased innovative designs and understanding that every
company has unique requirements and uses of RP are suggested to determine
whether RP is a reasonable cost for a company to incur? For example,
Cubital said some time ago that a company that produces 200 to 300 models
per year could probably justify the cost of an industrial RP machine. Any
references to white papers and presentations on the topic of justifying the
cost of RP would be greatly appreciated in addition to your own thoughts
and experiences (and selling points).

Best wishes,
Rice Cabiac
SRI Consulting

For more information about the rp-ml, see http://ltk.hut.fi/rp-ml/
----------

For more information about the rp-ml, see http://ltk.hut.fi/rp-ml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 22:51:02 EEST