The Cyndustries List

Also there's no other module in my system that even comes close to 
the massive build and complexity of the ZO. It's got to be very 
expensive to develop, manufacture, setup and test something in that 
class.

I bet it's probably more expensive for both Cynthia and AH to 
maintain one product in so many different fixed configurations. For 
example, AH can't just buy 5 ZOs from Cynthia and stock them. AH has 
to buy 5 of every different format and stock them until they can 
predict specific format sales. That's a HUGE investment. Cynthia's 
build-after-getting-orders approach actually makes a lot of sense 
for a complex niche product like the ZO.

Before there was only ONE party that had to make a profit. Now there 
are TWO. Of course the price is going to jump dramatically for 
double profits. Someone below suggested that now Cynthia doesn't 
have to worry about sales, marketing, customer support and shipping. 
Remember she is selling ZOs herself, she still has to ship them to 
AH and probably drop ship directly at AH request, still handle all 
the support requests that AH will pass along or can't deal with, 
etc. Not much savings there.


--- In The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com, John Mahoney 
<jmahoney@...> wrote:
>
> At 05:18 PM 11/1/2006, Alpha Ranger wrote:
> >Remember that they started at $650!  A $345 increase.  Over a 50%
> >increase on one of the (already) most expensive modules (Buchla,
> >ModuSonics and Cirocco not included) out there.
> >
> >I had the 2 ZOs on my wish list and they were next for purchase!!!
> >But I literally just crossed them off.  There are many more 
things I
> >want that I will get more value out of.  I am sure I am not the 
only
> >one crossing ZOs off of their wish lists today.
> >
> >The VALUE of this module just plummeted!
> 
> This discussion is probably already out of hand. I'll throw in my 
few 
> cents, anyway. :-/
> 
> Why are "Buchla, ModuSonics and Cirocco not included"? That's 
> arbitrary. (And you sort of forgot Modcan -- nothing cheap, 
there.) 
> Nobody else offers a VCO like the ZO, so how can you compare its 
> price to anything else? The ZO is a premium product.
> 
> Cynthia certainly didn't assign a random price to the ZO. If she 
> could make a profit by selling them for $300, don't you think that 
> she would do so? She'd be retarded not to realize that $1000 is an 
> obstacle to ownership for most synthesists. The new pricing likely 
> reflects some expensive lesson learned from making the first 
batches 
> of ZOs as well as some cost increases; though I could easily be 
> wrong, I doubt that Analogue Haven markup is the sole reason for 
it.
> 
> Affordability and value are not synonymous. The value of the ZO 
> remains what it was. I don't have the budget for them, either -- 
but 
> I didn't have $650 or $800 for them, either! I'd still love to 
have a pair.

> --
> john
>

Also there's no other module in my system that even comes close to 
the massive build and complexity of the ZO. It's got to be very 
expensive to develop, manufacture, setup and test something in that 
class.

I bet it's probably more expensive for both Cynthia and AH to 
maintain one product in so many different fixed configurations. For 
example, AH can't just buy 5 ZOs from Cynthia and stock them. AH has 
to buy 5 of every different format and stock them until they can 
predict specific format sales. That's a HUGE investment. Cynthia's 
build-after-getting-orders approach actually makes a lot of sense 
for a complex niche product like the ZO.

Before there was only ONE party that had to make a profit. Now there 
are TWO. Of course the price is going to jump dramatically for 
double profits. Someone below suggested that now Cynthia doesn't 
have to worry about sales, marketing, customer support and shipping. 
Remember she is selling ZOs herself, she still has to ship them to 
AH and probably drop ship directly at AH request, still handle all 
the support requests that AH will pass along or can't deal with, 
etc. Not much savings there.


--- In The_Cyndustries_List@yahoogroups.com, John Mahoney 
<jmahoney@...> wrote:
>
> At 05:18 PM 11/1/2006, Alpha Ranger wrote:
> >Remember that they started at $650!  A $345 increase.  Over a 50%
> >increase on one of the (already) most expensive modules (Buchla,
> >ModuSonics and Cirocco not included) out there.
> >
> >I had the 2 ZOs on my wish list and they were next for purchase!!!
> >But I literally just crossed them off.  There are many more 
things I
> >want that I will get more value out of.  I am sure I am not the 
only
> >one crossing ZOs off of their wish lists today.
> >
> >The VALUE of this module just plummeted!
> 
> This discussion is probably already out of hand. I'll throw in my 
few 
> cents, anyway. :-/
> 
> Why are "Buchla, ModuSonics and Cirocco not included"? That's 
> arbitrary. (And you sort of forgot Modcan -- nothing cheap, 
there.) 
> Nobody else offers a VCO like the ZO, so how can you compare its 
> price to anything else? The ZO is a premium product.
> 
> Cynthia certainly didn't assign a random price to the ZO. If she 
> could make a profit by selling them for $300, don't you think that 
> she would do so? She'd be retarded not to realize that $1000 is an 
> obstacle to ownership for most synthesists. The new pricing likely 
> reflects some expensive lesson learned from making the first 
batches 
> of ZOs as well as some cost increases; though I could easily be 
> wrong, I doubt that Analogue Haven markup is the sole reason for 
it.
> 
> Affordability and value are not synonymous. The value of the ZO 
> remains what it was. I don't have the budget for them, either -- 
but 
> I didn't have $650 or $800 for them, either! I'd still love to 
have a pair.

> --
> john
>

At 05:18 PM 11/1/2006, Alpha Ranger wrote:
>Remember that they started at $650!  A $345 increase.  Over a 50%
>increase on one of the (already) most expensive modules (Buchla,
>ModuSonics and Cirocco not included) out there.
>
>I had the 2 ZOs on my wish list and they were next for purchase!!!
>But I literally just crossed them off.  There are many more things I
>want that I will get more value out of.  I am sure I am not the only
>one crossing ZOs off of their wish lists today.
>
>The VALUE of this module just plummeted!

This discussion is probably already out of hand. I'll throw in my few 
cents, anyway. :-/

Why are "Buchla, ModuSonics and Cirocco not included"? That's 
arbitrary. (And you sort of forgot Modcan -- nothing cheap, there.) 
Nobody else offers a VCO like the ZO, so how can you compare its 
price to anything else? The ZO is a premium product.

Cynthia certainly didn't assign a random price to the ZO. If she 
could make a profit by selling them for $300, don't you think that 
she would do so? She'd be retarded not to realize that $1000 is an 
obstacle to ownership for most synthesists. The new pricing likely 
reflects some expensive lesson learned from making the first batches 
of ZOs as well as some cost increases; though I could easily be 
wrong, I doubt that Analogue Haven markup is the sole reason for it.

Affordability and value are not synonymous. The value of the ZO 
remains what it was. I don't have the budget for them, either -- but 
I didn't have $650 or $800 for them, either! I'd still love to have a pair.
--
john

The following sounds probably a bit stronger than I intended for it
too.  I tried to reread it several times.  Try and not got too hard on
me if I am way off base.

> >The VALUE of this module just plummeted!
>
> Why are "Buchla, ModuSonics and Cirocco not included"? That's
> arbitrary. (And you sort of forgot Modcan -- nothing cheap, there.)
> Nobody else offers a VCO like the ZO, so how can you compare its
> price to anything else? The ZO is a premium product.

Not arbitrary--although not very scientific either.  Look at their
sales and prices.  Modcan is definitely NOT in the same league
cost-wise (thank goodness!) and sales-wise as Buchla!  Compare the
price lists.  I know lots of folks with Modcans; I don't know any one
who has bought a new Buchla, ModuSonics or Cirocco (although I know
that people have).  I have never heard any one call Modcan expensive
before.  Interesting.

> Cynthia certainly didn't assign a random price to the ZO. If she
> could make a profit by selling them for $300, don't you think that
> she would do so? She'd be retarded not to realize that $1000 is an
> obstacle to ownership for most synthesists. The new pricing likely
> reflects some expensive lesson learned from making the first batches
> of ZOs as well as some cost increases; though I could easily be
> wrong, I doubt that Analogue Haven markup is the sole reason for it.

I never said anything about arbitrary.  I am sure she calculated, now
that the initial surge of orders has subsided and she realizes how
much work it is, that she can make about the same money (with less
frustration) by selling less modules at a higher price.  She is one of
the few who state selling modular synthesizers as being their primary
business.

> Affordability and value are not synonymous. The value of the ZO
> remains what it was. I don't have the budget for them, either -- but
> I didn't have $650 or $800 for them, either! I'd still love to have a pair.

I totally agree that affordability and value are not synonymous.
Value can be defined as the ratio of functionality (usefulness, etc.)
to cost (price).  While the functionality remains the same, the price
has increased significantly.  Thus the value is lower that a week ago.
 I am sure you can find another definition of value to contradict this
though.  Affordability and cost are also not synonymous.
Affordability is relative to an individual based on things like their
disposable income (assuming that this a hobby--the definition would be
different if something is used directly for a business purpose).  I
think that you would agree that for someone that has three kids and
makes $8.50 an hour, it is much less affordable than for someone like
Bill Gates.

Well, this is just debate.  The bottom line is that the ZO costs quite
a bit more than it did before and most of us here wouldn't be
considered rich by almost any definition.

peace out
nurbs

> > Why are "Buchla, ModuSonics and Cirocco not included"? 

 
> I have never heard any one call Modcan expensive before. Interesting.

I got into Banana and Cyndustries stuff almost by accident. I bought a 
med size used system with empty six paks and a large PS and was so 
overwhelmed by the creativity and ease of use of the modules (and 
banana format) I started buying and trading for pretty much any used 
modcan or Cyn module I found. 

In so doing I looked at a lot of options for modules and 
manufacturers. I have an extensize Euro and Frac system as well. 
anWhen I look at the big picture quite frankly Modcan IS expensive IMO

$350 for a single VCO
almost $500 for a dual envelope
$125 for a simple banana/1/4" convertor

A blacet miniwave is $239 (the kit is only $180) 
a Modcan format minwave is $396 

And while we're talking about $995 modules right now list price (with 
waiting) for a freq shifter is $853. 

Serge has quite a few modules in the $800-1000+ catagory. Freq shifter 
or wilson analog delay anyone? how about almost $3K for a TKB?

Personally banana is now my favorite modular system and I love Cyn and 
Modcan stuff and plan to buy more. but facts is facts Banana 
manufacturers (Modcan included) are expensive.