Bolt, a hardware-focused venture firm, publishes product teardowns and guides on hardware development, manufacturing, and startup business practices.
Commenters recommend it for hardware product development summaries and praise its Juicero teardown, noting the machine's mechanical engineering was well done.
This non-apology announces no changes, and does nothing for Sonos owners worrying which product get cut off next. They're even still selling the Connect on their site - with no warnings! https://www.sonos.com/en-gb/shop/connect.html
It seems completely incompetent, but makes sense if you believe they're going to be acquired this year.
Ben Einstein said last in July 18 (https://blog.bolt.io/sonos-one/) Sonos are "a traditional speaker manufacturer incrementally adding technology in an attempt to keep up with a fast-moving race". Sonos probably still have the best multi-room speaker solution, but 1) their lead on that is slipping, and 2) I don't think new buyers care about multiroom as much as they do streaming services & features - i.e. the bits Sonos must be being squeezed on.
Their proposed solution for customers with old devices is a software-managed network split between old & new - that will kills multiroom playback for holdouts! That's the worst of both worlds - Sonos paying programmers to prop up old devices, while owners still prepare to see a fundamental degradation in their system.
Then the tie-in with IKEA seems like an enormous dilution of their brand. Now you can buy Sonos components from IKEA, and the IKEA home app can also control all of your Sonos speakers (not just the IKEA ones).
So that's that I think they have a deal in the works (IKEA?) - and they're massaging a few quarters to show briefly increased profitability while the long-term vision can…
Have you considered pricing the first batch at EUR 4000 each? :)
To quote myself[0] from too long ago:
"Very rarely will someone tell you that you're not charging as much for something as you should (perhaps with the exception of patio11 because he wants us all to make more money :) ) but generally there's always someone who will say something costs too much."
Due to a number of factors (including some past experience with hardware development & a recognition that most people purchasing low volume hardware do not have a realistic perspective on the costs involved) one of my hobbies is suggesting low volume hardware developers consider increasing their prices in order to potentially create a more financially sustainable business over the long term. (An outcome which is both better for the developer & their customers.)
Of course, such suggestions cost me nothing (as I don't currently have the disposable income either way) and their worth can be valued at the price you paid for them. :)
(And if @jacquesm advises you otherwise, I'd advise ignoring me. :D )
On the other hand if you decide to increase the price by even EUR 100 and you still sell out the batch, well, "it's free real estate" as they say...
Anyway, the prototype unit you demo in the SOS video looks really slick, so, nice work. :)
In case it's helpful here is a link dump[1] of various hardware-related manufacturing/pricing resources I've collected over the years, in rough suggested reading priority order:
*…
Instagram was able to scale due to FB. Of course it reduced the competition, but at the same time the other platforms that were not acquired just withered away (Kik? Snapchat apparently has 4B revenue, and ~20M USD net profit, which is basically 0 compared to IG).
And it's also telling that no other giant felt to enter this space (Google after G+ just started to focus on B2B cloud/workspaces, and their B2C is limited to Youtube (Premium) and Android (Pixel and AndroidOne)).
Basically the only real competition is TikTok, which is made possible by high resolution/definition smartphone cameras and displays, and a ~10 second attention span. (Which is still more than the doomscrolling on IG/FB.) But since their revenue share model is very hostile/unfair to creators, in its current form it'll eventually hit a ceiling. (Or not, predictions are just predictions.)
> ARM
SoftBank found a buyer for ARM, but authorities stepped in. Is this good or bad?
On one hand it would have created a lot of added value for Nvida, so it would have been a mergers success story. But on the other hand Nvidia would have extorted the market (allegedly!) so it would have created (yet another) success story for the "capitalism bad" ongoing highly acclaimed ideology series.
> Apple
People seem to love Apple (people buy their expensive gadgets, like there's no tomorrow), and their acquisitions (like the well known laser drilled holes, and CNC machined bodies for their laptops [0]) allowed them to…
It's also shocking to anybody who had studied Toyota's history. Toyota spent decades honing their processes, but are notoriously automation-averse [1], as automation locks in a (hoped-for) short-term productivity gain but prevents the human-driven continuous improvement that has made them highly productive. [2]
In some ways, I think the long software-is-eating-the-world boom has been bad for us as an industry. We have been so successful with "throw tech at it" solutions that we don't know when that isn't a good idea. E.g., the Silicon-Valley-reinvents-grilled-cheese flop The Melt [3], or the $120m clown show that was Juicero [4].
American car companies spent decades trying and failing to learn Toyota's approach. They even had enthusiastic help from Toyota, who even went so far as to take GM's worst plant and redo it as a joint venture. (Interestingly, it's the same plant that Tesla now uses. [5]) For those unfamiliar with the story, I strongly recommend This American Life's episode on it. [6] But my takeaway was that executive arrogance kept GM from learning that there was a much better way to make cars. That sounds more and more familiar these days.
[1] https://www.fastcompany.com/40461624/how-toyota-is-putting-humans-first-in-an-era-of-increasing-automation
[2] http://www.nbcnews.com/id/18960044/ns/business-autos/t/study-toyota-most-productive-automaker/
[3] https://www.wired.com/story/how-the-trendiest-grilled-cheese-venture-got-burnt/
[4]…
It reminds me of a less-extreme version of Juicero. They made a $700 WiFi-connected "juicer" that squeezed bags of juice using QR codes to scan the bags and then a custom power supply, custom machined gears, and a custom 15A 330V DC motor to actuate a press to squeeze the bags between two metal plates. Of course, a roller could have done it for a fraction of the price, or you could have just let gravity pour the juice and not even need a $700 machine.
https://blog.bolt.io/juicero/
Dyson's very into moving air in creative ways and blowing through holes. They definitely seem to be the best at it and are very good at it, but they're just playing with an artificial constraint. No one says you have to be able to see through your hair dryer or air purifier. You could make much more effective or cheaper products without those constraints. Just people think they look cool, so they're willing to pay a premium for the weird, "futuristic" Dyson product over the boring normal product. That does make it seem like largely marketing though.
The Vision Pro doesn't exactly seem to have reached what I would normally think of as mass production so I wouldn't be surprised if the scale doesn't really work for them yet.
That said, with raw numbers like this I always have to think of the teardown of the Juicero which revealed that it used numerous custom parts that certainly made it very expensive to manufacture: https://blog.bolt.io/juicero/
The catch with Juicero of course is that while the parts were very expensive, it could have been made much cheaper by using standard parts instead of the custom ones. I'm not saying that's the case here but it's worth taking these things with a grain of salt.