Most of the changes to my products have been market-driven
Charles Riddel Sep 23, 2012
?
Let's review a little Hitch History:
?
The original Half Hitch was conceived as a high-end, grab 'n go mount for 90 to 105 mm APO refractors.
?
The Mark I Half Hitch had a couple of points of flexure that made it slightly less rigid than I originally intended when used with somewhat longer or heavier than average 4-inch APOs.? Thus, I quickly made an upgrade to the Mark II version and retrofitted all but six of the Mark I mounts to Mark II status.? The Mark II kit completely solved the flexure problem -- and I also used the upgrade to switch from 2160-step encoders to 4000-step encoders.
?
The Mark II version was also short-lived in terms of production numbers.? While there was no specific deficiency with the Mark II, several worthwhile enhancements were identified.? So, for the second time, I made a model upgrade based upon technical issues.
?
The upgrades from Mark I to Mark II and Mark II to Mark III represent the refinement of a fundamentally sound and innovative design.? The overall size and configuration of the Half Hitch did NOT change during this maturation process.? Instead, improvements were made to a few specific details based upon actual experience with the new design.
?
The Quarter Hitch is essentially a slightly simplified Mark III Half Hitch.? Together, these two mounts represent the bulk of the Half Hitch mounts that I built.? I consider the Mark III Half Hitch and Quarter Hitch to be very successful designs from a technical perspective -- and they did pretty well in the market, too.? Their success and desirability is evidenced by the very small number of them which have been resold -- and the high prices they fetch in the used market.
?
But there was a nagging thorn in the market aspect for Mark III (and QH) -- the relentless apple-to-orange comparisons to vastly inferior mounts.? Although some very fine 4-inch APOs are popular in the market, the discerning analysis that leads many to spend for an exquisite 4-inch OTA does not seem to carry over to the selection of an equally exquisite mount in this size range.
?
I have to say that this was NOT a behavior that I expected -- not at all!? If it were not for this quirk in the market, then I would still be manufacturing Mark III Half Hitches and Quarter Hitches.
?
With some inquiry, research, and logical extrapolation, it became evident that a shift from targeting 4-inch APO owners to focusing on 5-inch APO owners would produce a much more discriminating clientele for my high-end mounts.? And thus, the Super Half Hitch was born!
?
The strong market for the Super was quickly verified.? But a second reality quickly overtook the Super:? The climate (especially costs) for manufacturing in the United States started skyrocketing at completely unprecedented rates!
?
For example, the cost for anodizing parts essentially quadrupled in less than a year!? Moreover, reliable sources for quality anodizing became very difficult to find.? Additionally, machining costs almost doubled -- and the number of shops capable of doing the high-precision, high-finish production needed for my mounts has diminished to the point of near-extinction!? The costs of aluminum and stainless steel materials have more or less risen in parallel to the rise in oil prices (for many of the same reasons).? In the past three years, the production of quality bearings has virtually ceased in the US -- and most quality bearings are now imported from Japan at prices affected by the short supply and weak dollar.
?
I could go on about the specifics, but take note that the largest one-month drop in US manufacturing activity since WWII (not coinciding with a strike at GM or Ford) occurred last month!? Seven of the eight manufacturing indices thus far reported for 2012 have been negative -- including three of the largest monthly drops in US history!
?
From a technical standpoint, the Super Half Hitch is a jewel.? And the SHH also address a sweet-spot in the market for high-end alt-az mounts.? So, if external forces were not at work, I would continue to manufacture the SHH and change little or nothing in its design.? But the manufacturing context has rapidly changed AROUND the SHH.? Caught in the rising tide of manufacturing costs in the US, the costs for building the first batch of Supers greatly exceeded the price which customers paid the mount.? Were I to set the price for the SHH today, it would have to be about $4500 for units without tracking and almost $6000 for units with tracking.
?
In my opinion, a market saddled with tough economic times would not be able to absorb these prices.? And thus, the Nova Hitch is born.
?
A realistic look at the manufacturing environment and the economic burdens looming over the market told me that a creative new approach would be needed -- preserving as much as possible of the goodness of the previous Hitches, but boldly addressing the new circumstances.
?
The Nova Hitch is a bold mount.? It is designed to cope with the harsh circumstances of today's manufacturing and market climates.? Other manufacturers can poke fun at what they see as a departure from stodgy norms -- but I believe that I will have the last laugh.
?
The Mark III and Super were great mount designs.? I'm very proud of them.? But climatic changes forced a bold rethinking of the problem -- and the Nova is positioned to devour the competition in the same way that climate change always favor the adaptable over the static.
?
Charles
Howard Gao