ATTN: Tom Kaye! No more Xmags?!?!

[crankydan]

If AGD puts the same quality and pride in their next marker line, then you know it is going to dominate. Good luck Mr. Kay in your endeavors and crack the whip on those R&D folks.

crankydan

[Rope a Dope]

Re: Clearance sale! Everything must go!

Originally posted by fallout11
2) The E-mag is an old design, as far as electronic guns go. As Tom says, 4 years old, and quite ready for revision. Who buys a 1999 Intimidator anymore? Dated design, big and clunky.

Big and clunky? Thats why mags got ULE bodies. So it's a different design. The internals remain the same. Such as the Intimidator.. the ram and every other part are interchangable from a classic timmy and a new timmy, I should know, a buddy of mine replaced every part on his Classic timmy that he ended up with two guns when he was finished, the only hard part to buy is the body. The E-Mag and Timmy are both capped at 20bps and have shot buffering. And what gun still dominates the tournament scene?

I am pretty sure this gun will remain just about the same but take care of all the gripes people nit pick about, mainly battery pack and lack of .45 frame.

Everyone is so happy that there will be a new gun from AGD, but am I the only one that read "MAYBE"?!?! Court dates and filing paperwork along with hearings will take more than 1 year, and SP hasn't even set their sights on AGD yet, they're gonna battle AKA first. So 1 year from now the SP issue will still be up in the air and from the sound of it Tom won't make a new electro until it is all over.

[shartley]

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=innovation

[Koosh]

Since when are they discontinuing classic valves? I think it would be a REALLY bad idea to do that... but hey, what do I know...

[Brophog]

What would you propose then?

As I and others have discussed in other threads, there isn't a lot of room in this sport for TRUE innovation. Constant Air, Force Feed Technology, and Electronics were true innovations.

Those all led principally to one thing; a speed increase. I have very successfully argued that we're at a stage, where mathematically, more speed is not necessary. We can get faster, but it will not gain us anything.

The place for TRUE innovation lies within the projectile at this point. However, we've also argued that without some serious work, both in design, and consequently in function afterwards, we're not going to improve much on the projectile we now shoot.

Sure, we can make it more aerodynamic, increasing breaking power, range, and accuracy. That will assuredly come with much slower feed rates. Now we're back to a pump style, accuracy and movement oriented game, where we shoot less paint, but the paint cost more. Is this what the average player wants? The average paint company?

I will say there is room for modification to all facets of equipment, from marker, to air, safety equipment, to the projectile. I don't believe there is room for TRUE innovation though. Atleast not the kind that will irrevocably change the way the sport is played like the 3 above mentioned have done.

[shartley]

Originally posted by Brophog
What would you propose then?

As I and others have discussed in other threads, there isn't a lot of room in this sport for TRUE innovation. Constant Air, Force Feed Technology, and Electronics were true innovations.

Those all led principally to one thing; a speed increase. I have very successfully argued that we're at a stage, where mathematically, more speed is not necessary. We can get faster, but it will not gain us anything.

The place for TRUE innovation lies within the projectile at this point. However, we've also argued that without some serious work, both in design, and consequently in function afterwards, we're not going to improve much on the projectile we now shoot.

Sure, we can make it more aerodynamic, increasing breaking power, range, and accuracy. That will assuredly come with much slower feed rates. Now we're back to a pump style, accuracy and movement oriented game, where we shoot less paint, but the paint cost more. Is this what the average player wants? The average paint company?

I will say there is room for modification to all facets of equipment, from marker, to air, safety equipment, to the projectile. I don't believe there is room for TRUE innovation though. Atleast not the kind that will irrevocably change the way the sport is played like the 3 above mentioned have done.

[logamus]

i am suprised the xmag lasted as long as it did. the phasing out of the emag is not all that shocking either. it is in need of a face lift. while part of me hates to see the emag go, i am really excited to think about whats on the horizon.

[Wes Janson]

Am I the only one who wonders why not produce the X-mag without body, possibly in conjunction with the Deadlywind or similar aftermarket bodies?

And how is it that AGDE is a seperate company with seperate ownership of the xmag body (Why can it not be transferred over/who is preventing it?)? It seems like this could've been worked around had Tom wanted to, but that this was a strategic move to ends we cannot see at this time. Could this be a move away from the speedball and tournament scene, in order to focus on scenario players?

[WenULiVeUdiE]

After reading some of the last posts I realized something. Whoever said SP may have jumpstarted the industry is correct. Companies need new products to get around these lawsuits. And by doing that we get innovations. If someone hadnt patented the originally revvi than somone probably wouldnt have come out with the better faster reloader. If something dies out, some thing new will grow. Look at the surrounding enviroment. You kill off a ton of spiders(not the gun), many more insects come and survive. And that new group of insects is a bad thing. So adopt this to the paintball world and you get a standard shocker or imp, but then you have a bunch of newer better innovations. You stop standard progress, you get newer faster better progress that is good for the industry as a whole.


Andrew

[Brophog]

I agree that while SP and companies are essentially holding all the cards, they're not by any means creating a monopoly here. I think the whole situation has been dramatized a great deal, as is the case these days.

Moreover, I think Tom's point isn't so much that SP has locked the system up, but rather, why rush to get a product out until you know how the legal issues will resolve. I think we're going to continue to see the game played competitively with electronic markers, and as such, I see a multitude of designs and companies competing for our business.

We have to respect the fact though, that we're still in the infancy of this entire patent issue. Of all the electronic markers used competitively, most of them haven't been approached by SP in regards to this patent. We're still a few years away from anyone knowing exactly what is and is not covered under whomevers patents, and consequently who will wind up paying royalties to whom.

I do think we're starting to get to that breaking point once again where either something changes, or companies lose the ability to separate themselves. It happened in the height of the pump days, and then semi autos came on the scene and jump started things. It happened in the height of the Mag/Cocker wars, and then electronics were introduced.

I'd be naive to say that it is impossible for something else to occur that would change the sport again, but in all honesty, I don't see that big of a change occuring again. We're not the only industry at this point. In the sports world, we can look at the various facets of motocross. They haven't seen a real technology change in quite some time, yet they are able to keep things "alive" by introducing new ways to use their existing equipment. They've gone beyond racing and expanded that into not only new, imaginitive forms of racing, but also into doing tricks and stunts. By doing so, they segmented their sport into several facets, allowing companies to stay active in the various facets.

We on the other hand, have been moving the other way. We're still technology driven, and as such, are constantly funneling our sport into narrower field types and formats. This will inevitably create a structure where companies are all vying for the same consumer base, and when technology and style avenues are exhausted, we'll undoubtedly see companies begin to merge or go bankrupt.

Furthering this, we, at this point, do not contain enough revenue streams to appropriately support our expenditures. All sports rely heavily on outside interests to fund their respective sport. Generally, this comes in promotional rights, gate fees, and media contracts. We're very, very limited at this point in time when it comes to revenue avenues. At this point, by and large, we're supported only by the companies making the products, within the industry itself. When you combine this, with the technology struggles noted earlier, you create further revenue problems, for both large and small companies.

We've survived so far due to the fact we are unique in the fact we use a consumable product. For several years now, the sport has been driven principally through this one revenue channel. However, as more and more revenue channels close up, we will be more and more dependent on this consumable, and prices will need to be adjusted.

Its a very fine line. If paint prices need to be adjusted in order to further support other segments of the sport, then it'll lead to a revolution of sorts in how we play and style and function of the sport will change.

[Brophog]

Originally posted by WenULiVeUdiE
After reading some of the last posts I realized something. Whoever said SP may have jumpstarted the industry is correct. Companies need new products to get around these lawsuits. And by doing that we get innovations. If someone hadnt patented the originally revvi than somone probably wouldnt have come out with the better faster reloader. If something dies out, some thing new will grow. Look at the surrounding enviroment. You kill off a ton of spiders(not the gun), many more insects come and survive. And that new group of insects is a bad thing. So adopt this to the paintball world and you get a standard shocker or imp, but then you have a bunch of newer better innovations. You stop standard progress, you get newer faster better progress that is good for the industry as a whole.
Andrew

This is what we talked about in another thread. It is a question of need.

We got to the point our stick feeds were 3 feet long. So, we invented the hopper. But then, we noticed that the hopper didn't feed correctly, so we invented the agitated hopper. Then, we noticed that due to HPA and electronics, that we could shoot faster than the agitated hopper could feed, so we invented force feed technology.

Now, in order to innovate, you must NEED something. Throughout paintball, we've seen this not only with hoppers, but with air sources, and cocking systems. 12 grams didn't last long enough; constant air in the form of CO2. CO2 froze up; HPA. Pumps didn't shoot fast enough; autotriggers. Autotriggers made the pumps inaccurage; semi autos. Semi Autos were too slow due to trigger weight; electronic markers.

The question is, once again, what do you absolutely NEED. Not little modifications, but a real innovation.

[shartley]

[Vendetta]

We only really NEED food, water and shelter. We WANT everything else in life

[Brophog]

Exactly. I think that's just semantics there. Whether you want to call it "want" or "need" its still the point that we made hoppers feed faster because there was a general consensus that speed could be improved and that hopper technology was a culprit.

We're now at the stage though that, regardless of how you choose to say it, more and more people are agreeing that further speed (20+ bps..) is neither needed nor in some cases wanted.

With every threshold, it becomes more and more of a burden to maintain that level. You go from hoppers, to ACE systems, to circuit board buffers, all in the name of cranking out a few more balls. When those few balls don't result in further eliminations and increased success, then they become a burden.

I'm not intending to make this a speed debate, but illustrating the point that techonology thresholds can be met. We're at the point now, where technology isn't separating teams on the podium, but their own abilities and decisions. If marker X played that big of a factor in a team's success, wouldn't it seem logical that they wouldn't be so inclined to jump ship when a new sponsorship came up. Its a bit of an overexaggeration, but markers at the highest levels have become in essence, what shoes are to NBA players. It doesn't matter what shoe you wear, it matters who pays you the most to wear that shoe.

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by Vendetta
We only really NEED food, water and shelter. We WANT everything else in life

Too true.

But what innovation is needed in Paintball? Football, Hockey, Baseball, and most other established sports have been pretty stable for years apart from improvements in safety equipment.

Why does the technology need to innovate? From an industry perspective, they'd love for markers to throw even more paint I suppose. But from a players perspective we've outpricing much of the market when you look at paint consumption.

It's probably time for the industry and sport to mature. THere are only so many ways to get a paintball out of the end of a barrel at 300fps.