Paintball and Economic Terrorism

[shartley]

I will clarify,

There is a current round of lawsuits over the Pulse, there is an ongoing different suit between NPS and Diablo over their original paint distribution deal. There is another round of lawsuits over the Tippman look alikes. There is ANOTHER round of lawsuits getting ready to go, over other patent issues. Besides that there is a 24 million dollar lawsuit going on over the woman who was killed by the tank.

So ask yourself, for the size of this industry and the number of players, does this sound like a normal amount of legal activity? Ask yourself again how much does all this cost and where does the money come from? Has anyone ever told you its a good idea to sue people to make money? Or is it most likely a fight until you run out of cash?

You all as the player base only see what comes to the surface and all these comments are based on only that. There is a whole deep ocean of drown products that sank to the bottom never to see the light of day. They are there because its not a good business move to develop them in the current environment. I have seen BRILLIANT gun designs in prototype that disappeared out of fear. I have seen people come into this industry with money to spend but when they see the situation, they back out quietly. You all NEVER see this and don't see the loss to the industry that I do. The only one you ARE familiar with is me and while I get a continuous stream of requests to be involved, it is just not worth my time and effort.

Of all the paintball companies with financial horsepower, none are run by an engineering type. When you work with lawyers you get lawsuits, marketing guys market, financial guys make a return on investment. These are the people running paintball today. You can argue that there are a ton of new products on the market but if you look inside, its the same stuff under the hood. If it wasn't, you would not see lawsuits like the Pulse.

So it is my belief, that innovation is not a motivating factor in the paintball industry today. There may be a desire on the part of many, but the opportunity to do it without potential legal problems is small. As long as you see the 07 version of the 06 product, you can be pretty sure its the same product with a new look. Truly new products get a new name and a patent applied for tag. I haven't seen many of those lately.

AGD

[craltal]

I'm officially done with this thread. Nothing we are saying is getting through. I love playing the devil's advocate myself, but even you have to realize that your position is tenuous at best, especially when compared to how the real world operates. There is nothing that you can say that will help sway anyone's opinion. Tom's comments didn't even help your cause because you are having trouble seeing beyond the vision you have in your mind.

[Lohman446]

But protecting ones established intellectual property is exactly what companies like AGD AKA, and others now are doing, it is the the other companies that are using dirty but legal tactics to make money. Plus it is a quote, in other words I'm saying, if you sit back and just are like "oh its been like this for a while oh well what can we do", you are ultimately helping the problem.

How is AGD or AKA protecting any intellectual properties?

[BigEvil]

How is AGD or AKA protecting any intellectual properties?

If I recall, AGD does have a number of patents.. I dont know about AKA.

[teufelhunden]

I will clarify,

There is a current round of lawsuits over the Pulse, there is an ongoing different suit between NPS and Diablo over their original paint distribution deal. There is another round of lawsuits over the Tippman look alikes. There is ANOTHER round of lawsuits getting ready to go, over other patent issues. Besides that there is a 24 million dollar lawsuit going on over the woman who was killed by the tank.

So ask yourself, for the size of this industry and the number of players, does this sound like a normal amount of legal activity? Ask yourself again how much does all this cost and where does the money come from? Has anyone ever told you its a good idea to sue people to make money? Or is it most likely a fight until you run out of cash?

You all as the player base only see what comes to the surface and all these comments are based on only that. There is a whole deep ocean of drown products that sank to the bottom never to see the light of day. They are there because its not a good business move to develop them in the current environment. I have seen BRILLIANT gun designs in prototype that disappeared out of fear. I have seen people come into this industry with money to spend but when they see the situation, they back out quietly. You all NEVER see this and don't see the loss to the industry that I do. The only one you ARE familiar with is me and while I get a continuous stream of requests to be involved, it is just not worth my time and effort.

Of all the paintball companies with financial horsepower, none are run by an engineering type. When you work with lawyers you get lawsuits, marketing guys market, financial guys make a return on investment. These are the people running paintball today. You can argue that there are a ton of new products on the market but if you look inside, its the same stuff under the hood. If it wasn't, you would not see lawsuits like the Pulse.

So it is my belief, that innovation is not a motivating factor in the paintball industry today. There may be a desire on the part of many, but the opportunity to do it without potential legal problems is small. As long as you see the 07 version of the 06 product, you can be pretty sure its the same product with a new look. Truly new products get a new name and a patent applied for tag. I haven't seen many of those lately.

AGD

I can't speak to much regarding this post except the part about who's running businesses in this little game called paintball...

Is there a problem with businessmen running businesses? You imply that the lack of "engineering type" people at the top of the bigtime companies is what's causing what you perceive to be a lack of technological progress in the industry. As a result, this question arises in my mind: What do you see paintball as, to what extent, and what do you base it on?

Now, I'm one of those financial guys, however that was not always the case. I don't play anymore, but I still troll the forums from time to time and my tattoo place is right by a paintball place, so I stay kinda up to date. I see things about guns like the Mini and etc. and really don't think "wow this is a stagnant industry." I see the paintball section in Wal-Mart and Dick's expanding. I remember flipping through the channels quite recently and seeing some SP sponsored event with a bunch of pro teams playing Xball on ESPN at times like 5PM. Is this all wrong? Would this have been accomplished without the marketing people getting the product that is the game into the public eye? Or how about the legal guys making paintball into a legitimate industry? Or even us dorky money guys counting the beans and sending the money to R&D and legal?

It's kind of funny-- business is one of the only things that people without a business background regularly try to succeed in. I'm an accountant; I'm not about to jump into the shop and start designing paintball guns or claim I can make a weather prediction. But the reverse seems to happen a lot-- sorry, Tom, you're not a businessman. I agree with Fireblade; I wouldn't have invested in your company any time after the mid/late nineties. However, a company like Smart Parts, with some suits at the helm, that's something that might've been worth a shot.

I can't think of too many big name companies where someone is at the helm that doesn't have a business background [bear in mind the "helm" is corporate management; being a board member, even chairman, doesn't mean you're running the company]. Google, I think, but they've a sizable group of businessmen watching their back. Does Toyota have an engineer making the calls? Starbucks? Microsoft? Nah. Neither should anybody wanting to compete in paintball.

[Lohman446]

If I recall, AGD does have a number of patents.. I dont know about AKA.

They do, or at least TK does. But are they protecting them?

[snoopay700]

Of all the paintball companies with financial horsepower, none are run by an engineering type. When you work with lawyers you get lawsuits, marketing guys market, financial guys make a return on investment. These are the people running paintball today. You can argue that there are a ton of new products on the market but if you look inside, its the same stuff under the hood. If it wasn't, you would not see lawsuits like the Pulse.

So it is my belief, that innovation is not a motivating factor in the paintball industry today. There may be a desire on the part of many, but the opportunity to do it without potential legal problems is small. As long as you see the 07 version of the 06 product, you can be pretty sure its the same product with a new look. Truly new products get a new name and a patent applied for tag. I haven't seen many of those lately.

AGD

This is what i've been saying, the current state of the industry is stopping new markers from coming out. What is the difference between the 05 angel and the 06 angel? Nothing, except a few new bells and whistles that do ulitmately nothing. They aren't the only company to do this, but if i were to list teh ones that do that would be almost every company that is putting out "new" markers. The mini is new, has some new ideas, but is ultimately not all that much of an innovation.

I also fail to see your reasoning of how "well other businesses sue, so it's not a big deal that it happens here." It is true that bad things can spread if you do nothing. I'm not saying that it's bad to market, but just make it truthful (again, ideally, i know this will still probably never happen) but it is horrible when lawyers run the business.

Oh, and Lohman, they aren't "protecting" them because they don't need to and also it's just not worth the money to them to make a big stink about it. They are the remains of truly noble companies, and unfortunately they are fading.

[Lohman446]

This is what i've been saying, the current state of the industry is stopping new markers from coming out. What is the difference between the 05 angel and the 06 angel? Nothing, except a few new bells and whistles that do ulitmately nothing. They aren't the only company to do this, but if i were to list teh ones that do that would be almost every company that is putting out "new" markers. The mini is new, has some new ideas, but is ultimately not all that much of an innovation.

I also fail to see your reasoning of how "well other businesses sue, so it's not a big deal that it happens here." It is true that bad things can spread if you do nothing. I'm not saying that it's bad to market, but just make it truthful (again, ideally, i know this will still probably never happen) but it is horrible when lawyers run the business.

Oh, and Lohman, they aren't "protecting" them because they don't need to and also it's just not worth the money to them to make a big stink about it. They are the remains of truly noble companies, and unfortunately they are fading.

They are the remains of companies of an old era in paintball, and again you can see that in most industries.

What would a new marker bring to the table?

[BigEvil]

They do, or at least TK does. But are they protecting them?

I am not sure... if they do or if they even want to.

[snoopay700]

They are the remains of companies of an old era in paintball, and again you can see that in most industries.

What would a new marker bring to the table?

What wouldn't a new marker bring? Hell, a new marker that is actually innovative (like the rt valve was over the classic valve, or the cocker was over the pump, etc etc) could bring a lot to the table. More efficiency, better quality, faster recharge, better consistency, things i can't even begin to imagine (hell, we might even see a mech that has a tirgger as light and short as an electric that isn't pnuematic). But then again, you know, i mean i guess there's no point to further innovation. I mean i'm sure you'd be satisfied if we still had cars that got 15 miles to the gallon (which was supposed to be the top and we ad reached the peak of innovation at that point) that were throwing more toxins into the air and worsening globabl warming. I mean i don't see any problem with that either.

[Lohman446]

What wouldn't a new marker bring? Hell, a new marker that is actually innovative (like the rt valve was over the classic valve, or the cocker was over the pump, etc etc) could bring a lot to the table. More efficiency, better quality, faster recharge, better consistency, things i can't even begin to imagine (hell, we might even see a mech that has a tirgger as light and short as an electric that isn't pnuematic). But then again, you know, i mean i guess there's no point to further innovation. I mean i'm sure you'd be satisfied if we still had cars that got 15 miles to the gallon (which was supposed to be the top and we ad reached the peak of innovation at that point) that were throwing more toxins into the air and worsening globabl warming. I mean i don't see any problem with that either.

Right now we have markers that far exceed the cap imposed either by rules or human limitations.

We have markers that last for years.

We have markers that can get through incredible amounts of paint on a 45/45 (more than the vast majority carry).

What are you going to gain with a new marker that players will care about? Innovation without marketability is worthless, at least to a for profit company.

Especially if, after doing all that innovation, others are going to push in on your intellectual property that you spent years and $$ to come up with, and if you protect it players are going to whine about it.

[snoopay700]

Right now we have markers that far exceed the cap imposed either by rules or human limitations.

We have markers that last for years.

We have markers that can get through incredible amounts of paint on a 45/45 (more than the vast majority carry).

What are you going to gain with a new marker that players will care about? Innovation without marketability is worthless, at least to a for profit company.

Especially if, after doing all that innovation, others are going to push in on your intellectual property that you spent years and $$ to come up with, and if you protect it players are going to whine about it.

Ok, yeah, we have what seems like all we need NOW, however like i said, there could be things beyond our wildest dreams that someone has thought of that would revolutionize paintball, yet they're afraid to market it because of the condition the industry is in. No matter how advanced anything is, there is ALWAYS room for improvement.

[Lohman446]

Ok, yeah, we have what seems like all we need NOW, however like i said, there could be things beyond our wildest dreams that someone has thought of that would revolutionize paintball, yet they're afraid to market it because of the condition the industry is in. No matter how advanced anything is, there is ALWAYS room for improvement.

If I innovate I will have to protect it with patents (as it will be an innovation).

If I protect those patents players will whine about it.

Why innovate? You cannot complain about lack of innovation, and complain about protection of past innovations in the same argument, not logically.

[snoopay700]

If I innovate I will have to protect it with patents (as it will be an innovation).

If I protect those patents players will whine about it.

Why innovate? You cannot complain about lack of innovation, and complain about protection of past innovations in the same argument, not logically.

Ok, after this i'm just not going to respond to you because you obviously aren't listening to anything i'm saying. Trying to make blanket patents is bad.

Protecting patents is ok, but going off on some technicality is not, many companies are doing this more for money.

Innovation is limited because people are afraid one aspect of it might be a little too much like something on marker b, so they would rather not get sued than put out a new product.

You obviously haven't been paying attention to my arguments.

[Lohman446]

Ok, after this i'm just not going to respond to you because you obviously aren't listening to anything i'm saying. Trying to make blanket patents is bad.

Protecting patents is ok, but going off on some technicality is not, many companies are doing this more for money.

Innovation is limited because people are afraid one aspect of it might be a little too much like something on marker b, so they would rather not get sued than put out a new product.

You obviously haven't been paying attention to my arguments.

Electronics into a marker was a big innovation, would you not agree with that?