Dave Wright
Enlightened
Peter,
At first I was in support of the output-based Arc4 approach. All Arc4 lights have the same output. All that varies is the runtime and how soon they thermally cycle at the higher settings.
Now I'm having second thoughts, particularly after contemplating the Arc4x (the sale of which I think you handled well). Part of the charm of the Arc4 is that the user decides whether to go for runtime & longevity or go supernova. The way it's been set up, though, the only people who really have that choice is Arc4 owners. They can pop their lights to Level 1 and thermally trip in 20 seconds. Can't ask for more than that! Maximum performance of the emitter/heatsink/battery assembly. Arc4+ owners, on the other hand, pay $30 more to get a light that loafs around governed to the same maximum output – a task for which it is overqualified. Here's my concept:
-- Arc tests each light and sets Level 1 so that the light will thermally trip after 20 seconds of operation when operated at 90F without being held in a hand. Arc may not have the procedures and equipment in place to do this easily, but I think they could be developed. Pack each light with test results and a statement that the customer's thermal trip points may differ from Arc's based on operational conditions.
-- After testing and setting, the output of each light at Level 1 is engraved or stamped on the light.
-- Lights are priced "by the lumen". Start at $5 per lumen. You might have to set up lumen categories to simplify matters. An emitter that barely snuck into Lumileds P line might put out 25 lumens and go for $125. An exceptional R might push the meter to 50 lumens and go for $250.
This pricing approach might help you at both low and high ends of the market. You would pick up sales at the low end from people who want the light's features but don't need the greatest output. Top performing lights, on the other hand, would get fair dollar for their performance. The width and depth of Arc's market share would increase.
Just a thought. Maybe a wacky one. It would be neat to see the price per lumen drop over the years as emitters become more efficient and your production process matures.
At first I was in support of the output-based Arc4 approach. All Arc4 lights have the same output. All that varies is the runtime and how soon they thermally cycle at the higher settings.
Now I'm having second thoughts, particularly after contemplating the Arc4x (the sale of which I think you handled well). Part of the charm of the Arc4 is that the user decides whether to go for runtime & longevity or go supernova. The way it's been set up, though, the only people who really have that choice is Arc4 owners. They can pop their lights to Level 1 and thermally trip in 20 seconds. Can't ask for more than that! Maximum performance of the emitter/heatsink/battery assembly. Arc4+ owners, on the other hand, pay $30 more to get a light that loafs around governed to the same maximum output – a task for which it is overqualified. Here's my concept:
-- Arc tests each light and sets Level 1 so that the light will thermally trip after 20 seconds of operation when operated at 90F without being held in a hand. Arc may not have the procedures and equipment in place to do this easily, but I think they could be developed. Pack each light with test results and a statement that the customer's thermal trip points may differ from Arc's based on operational conditions.
-- After testing and setting, the output of each light at Level 1 is engraved or stamped on the light.
-- Lights are priced "by the lumen". Start at $5 per lumen. You might have to set up lumen categories to simplify matters. An emitter that barely snuck into Lumileds P line might put out 25 lumens and go for $125. An exceptional R might push the meter to 50 lumens and go for $250.
This pricing approach might help you at both low and high ends of the market. You would pick up sales at the low end from people who want the light's features but don't need the greatest output. Top performing lights, on the other hand, would get fair dollar for their performance. The width and depth of Arc's market share would increase.
Just a thought. Maybe a wacky one. It would be neat to see the price per lumen drop over the years as emitters become more efficient and your production process matures.