Manufactures Lack of Images

[Casey[_2_]]

Have you ever noticed the lack of images on glider manufactures web sites? Especially cockpit and closeups. Sure they have a few of the gliders flying, but auto manufactures have detailed images and even 360 cameras and the autos cost less then a quarter as much. Yeah I know there is more auto competition and many more people buying autos, but with glider manufactures going after a smaller number of people I would think they would wow a potential buyer with detailed images. And it is all manufactures and not just web its also their downloadable brochures as well. I suppose I may have missed some images buried in their web sites but don't you think they should be up front and readily seen? I don't think at this point in the game any manufacture is going to change their tooling much to copy another manufacture.. And if so they probably would not go by a web image of a competitor. The only explanation I seem to come up with the lack of detailed, quality images is that they are too busy and selling all the gliders they can make. JS has a couple. And Schleicher has one of the better brochures, but has more of employees than cool looking shots of the interior and so forth. Schemp-Hirth has a new web site but lacking for images. DG has a lot of information on their site but its buried and still lacking current design wowing images. Most all the images on HPH site is of flying. Same for LAK. And many of the manufactures images look like the public sent them in. And a web site can not be any more generic than GP. Ironic that one of the smallest manufactures TST has images right on front page. Maybe the older, bigger manufactures know more than the large auto makers.

I hate to be busting on some of these manufactures that I drool over their gliders, but I hate to keep hearing that soaring is a dying sport or not as poplar as it once was. Well, don't you think manufactures should dazzle the public, potential buyers, or those that can afford a new glider ever so often, with better images and marketing?

Maybe us glider pilots are more informed consumers than auto purchasing consumers and don't need the extra eye candy. Maybe auto purchasers make fickle purchases based on eye candy and then trade after a short time.

Just wish I had more eye candy to view sometimes when its cold and rainy out.

[HGXC[_4_]]

On Sunday, March 6, 2016 at 9:30:11 AM UTC-5, Casey wrote:
> Have you ever noticed the lack of images on glider manufactures web sites? Especially cockpit and closeups. Sure they have a few of the gliders flying, but auto manufactures have detailed images and even 360 cameras and the autos cost less then a quarter as much. Yeah I know there is more auto competition and many more people buying autos, but with glider manufactures going after a smaller number of people I would think they would wow a potential buyer with detailed images. And it is all manufactures and not just web its also their downloadable brochures as well. I suppose I may have missed some images buried in their web sites but don't you think they should be up front and readily seen? I don't think at this point in the game any manufacture is going to change their tooling much to copy another manufacture. And if so they probably would not go by a web image of a competitor. The only explanation I seem to come up with the lack of detailed, quality images is that they are too busy and selling all the gliders they can make. JS has a couple. And Schleicher has one of the better brochures, but has more of employees than cool looking shots of the interior and so forth. Schemp-Hirth has a new web site but lacking for images. DG has a lot of information on their site but its buried and still lacking current design wowing images. Most all the images on HPH site is of flying. Same for LAK. And many of the manufactures images look like the public sent them in. And a web site can not be any more generic than GP. Ironic that one of the smallest manufactures TST has images right on front page. Maybe the older, bigger manufactures know more than the large auto makers.
>
> I hate to be busting on some of these manufactures that I drool over their gliders, but I hate to keep hearing that soaring is a dying sport or not as poplar as it once was. Well, don't you think manufactures should dazzle the public, potential buyers, or those that can afford a new glider ever so often, with better images and marketing?
>
> Maybe us glider pilots are more informed consumers than auto purchasing consumers and don't need the extra eye candy. Maybe auto purchasers make fickle purchases based on eye candy and then trade after a short time.
>
> Just wish I had more eye candy to view sometimes when its cold and rainy out.
>
>
> http://www.jonkersailplanes.co.za/instruments.htm
>
> http://www.alexander-schleicher.de/en/
>
> http://www.schempp-hirth.com/en/sailplanes/ventus-2/ventus-2cxa-fes.html
>
> http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/index.php?id=fotos-dg-flugzeuge-d
>
> http://www.hph.cz/index.php?option=com_phocagallery&view=category&id=3%3A304&Itemid=56&lang=en
>
> http://lak.lt/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=85&Itemid=140
>
> http://alisport.com/eu/eng/galleryglobal.htm
>
> http://www.gliders-albastar.com/projects/glider-as-13-5-m/
>
> http://www.gpgliders.com
>
> http://www.lsa-gliders.com/html/tst-10_atlas.html

Totally agree and the entire marketing effort of many manufactures is lacking from PR to events, inactive web sites and marketing automation.

I think these companies are mostly engineers and simply go by the falsehood that "if you build it they will come".

Dennis

[Tango Eight]

On Sunday, March 6, 2016 at 10:18:34 AM UTC-5, HGXC wrote:
> On Sunday, March 6, 2016 at 9:30:11 AM UTC-5, Casey wrote:
> > Have you ever noticed the lack of images on glider manufactures web sites? Especially cockpit and closeups. Sure they have a few of the gliders flying, but auto manufactures have detailed images and even 360 cameras and the autos cost less then a quarter as much. Yeah I know there is more auto competition and many more people buying autos, but with glider manufactures going after a smaller number of people I would think they would wow a potential buyer with detailed images. And it is all manufactures and not just web its also their downloadable brochures as well. I suppose I may have missed some images buried in their web sites but don't you think they should be up front and readily seen? I don't think at this point in the game any manufacture is going to change their tooling much to copy another manufacture. And if so they probably would not go by a web image of a competitor. The only explanation I seem to come up with the lack of detailed, quality images is that they are too busy and selling all the gliders they can make.. JS has a couple. And Schleicher has one of the better brochures, but has more of employees than cool looking shots of the interior and so forth. Schemp-Hirth has a new web site but lacking for images. DG has a lot of information on their site but its buried and still lacking current design wowing images. Most all the images on HPH site is of flying. Same for LAK. And many of the manufactures images look like the public sent them in. And a web site can not be any more generic than GP. Ironic that one of the smallest manufactures TST has images right on front page. Maybe the older, bigger manufactures know more than the large auto makers.
> >
> > I hate to be busting on some of these manufactures that I drool over their gliders, but I hate to keep hearing that soaring is a dying sport or not as poplar as it once was. Well, don't you think manufactures should dazzle the public, potential buyers, or those that can afford a new glider ever so often, with better images and marketing?
> >
> > Maybe us glider pilots are more informed consumers than auto purchasing consumers and don't need the extra eye candy. Maybe auto purchasers make fickle purchases based on eye candy and then trade after a short time.
> >
> > Just wish I had more eye candy to view sometimes when its cold and rainy out.
> >
> >
> > http://www.jonkersailplanes.co.za/instruments.htm
> >
> > http://www.alexander-schleicher.de/en/
> >
> > http://www.schempp-hirth.com/en/sailplanes/ventus-2/ventus-2cxa-fes.html
> >
> > http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/index.php?id=fotos-dg-flugzeuge-d
> >
> > http://www.hph.cz/index.php?option=com_phocagallery&view=category&id=3%3A304&Itemid=56&lang=en
> >
> > http://lak.lt/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=85&Itemid=140
> >
> > http://alisport.com/eu/eng/galleryglobal.htm
> >
> > http://www.gliders-albastar.com/projects/glider-as-13-5-m/
> >
> > http://www.gpgliders.com
> >
> > http://www.lsa-gliders.com/html/tst-10_atlas.html
>
> Totally agree and the entire marketing effort of many manufactures is lacking from PR to events, inactive web sites and marketing automation.
>
> I think these companies are mostly engineers and simply go by the falsehood that "if you build it they will come".
>
> Dennis

God help us all. You're right Dennis, these guys can't market their way out of a paper bag. It gets worse. I heard that Schleicher doesn't even have a proper telephone sanitizer on staff. And the hair! Look at these guys! http://tinyurl.com/jv4ym3t http://tinyurl.com/gskzr6q

It's enough to make you think that maybe Earth *wasn't* colonized by the B-Ark, after all!

What's the backlog at Schempp Hirth, Schleicher or Jonkers, again? :-)


-Evan Ludeman / T8

[Casey[_2_]]

>
> What's the backlog at Schempp Hirth, Schleicher or Jonkers, again? :-)
>
>
> -Evan Ludeman / T8

I suppose there is a lot to be said for custom work and not getting too big in order to stay busy enough to maintain a professional staff of craftsmen. But I have seen 2 new gliders with issues. One less than 6 months old and the other less than 12.

Regardless, I would like to see more professional detailed images of new ships.

Now I'm wondering how many people order ships without test flying that model, or seeing it in person, or actually comparing.

Guess I will have to wait until next SSA Convention to put my order in.

[[email protected]]

I read an article once about the differences between American everyday life and the rest of the world. It was mostly stupid stuff like warm beer and no refills on Coke, wall to wall carpeting, etc. One point I remember was marketing. In the 'States we're bombarded with massive amounts of media selling everything everywhere we go. They said as a result a third grader in the US could outsell most adults in Europe. Maybe we're expecting an American sales pitch from a European manufacturer?
I can tell you this much about those gliders...they're all likely phenomenal and I can't afford one. Besides the really smart old guys running my club at home have assured us all that 2-33's are outstanding gliders and the large dents in the leading edges are cosmetic only.
DT

[Jonathon May[_2_]]

At 17:00 06 March 2016, wrote:
>I read an article once about the differences between American everyday
>life=
> and the rest of the world. It was mostly stupid stuff like warm beer and
>n=
>o refills on Coke, wall to wall carpeting, etc. One point I remember was
>ma=
>rketing. In the 'States we're bombarded with massive amounts of media
>selli=
>ng everything everywhere we go. They said as a result a third grader in
>the=
> US could outsell most adults in Europe. Maybe we're expecting an
American
>=
>sales pitch from a European manufacturer?=20
>I can tell you this much about those gliders...they're all likely
>phenomena=
>l and I can't afford one. Besides the really smart old guys running my
>club=
> at home have assured us all that 2-33's are outstanding gliders and the
>la=
>rge dents in the leading edges are cosmetic only.
>DT
>

I am an English pilot and I think that gliders are expensive enough without

then spending money on pr.
When I bought my duo they said put your deposit down and we will tell you
the final price when it's ready ,in a couple of years.
I ordered a duo xt and got a xlt because they had update the duo.
The price was not a lot different to the list when I ordered but with the
extras
trailer and exchange rate not to mention instruments it was always going to

be a moving target.
Am I pleased with it,you bet,and every so often some one asks if I am
interested in selling it
Why would you want more photos when you can spend your money
developing the next generation.

[[email protected]]

"Besides the really smart old guys running my club at home have assured us all that 2-33's are outstanding gliders and the large dents in the leading edges are cosmetic only". DT

That made me smile, as it is the exact same thing I have heard at my club.
GX

[Don Johnstone[_4_]]

At 18:14 06 March 2016, wrote:
>"Besides the really smart old guys running my club at home have
assured us
>all that 2-33's are outstanding gliders and the large dents in the
leading
>edges are cosmetic only". DT
>
>That made me smile, as it is the exact same thing I have heard at my
club.
>GX
>
Almost all new gliders are sold ex-instruments, as are the majority of
new aircraft. The instruments you fit are a personal thing so it would
be pointless having photographs of a cockpit which may bear no
relation to what gets fitted.

[HGXC[_4_]]

On Sunday, March 6, 2016 at 10:46:17 AM UTC-5, Tango Eight wrote:
> On Sunday, March 6, 2016 at 10:18:34 AM UTC-5, HGXC wrote:
> > On Sunday, March 6, 2016 at 9:30:11 AM UTC-5, Casey wrote:
> > > Have you ever noticed the lack of images on glider manufactures web sites? Especially cockpit and closeups. Sure they have a few of the gliders flying, but auto manufactures have detailed images and even 360 cameras and the autos cost less then a quarter as much. Yeah I know there is more auto competition and many more people buying autos, but with glider manufactures going after a smaller number of people I would think they would wow a potential buyer with detailed images. And it is all manufactures and not just web its also their downloadable brochures as well. I suppose I may have missed some images buried in their web sites but don't you think they should be up front and readily seen? I don't think at this point in the game any manufacture is going to change their tooling much to copy another manufacture. And if so they probably would not go by a web image of a competitor. The only explanation I seem to come up with the lack of detailed, quality images is that they are too busy and selling all the gliders they can make. JS has a couple. And Schleicher has one of the better brochures, but has more of employees than cool looking shots of the interior and so forth. Schemp-Hirth has a new web site but lacking for images. DG has a lot of information on their site but its buried and still lacking current design wowing images. Most all the images on HPH site is of flying. Same for LAK. And many of the manufactures images look like the public sent them in. And a web site can not be any more generic than GP. Ironic that one of the smallest manufactures TST has images right on front page. Maybe the older, bigger manufactures know more than the large auto makers.
> > >
> > > I hate to be busting on some of these manufactures that I drool over their gliders, but I hate to keep hearing that soaring is a dying sport or not as poplar as it once was. Well, don't you think manufactures should dazzle the public, potential buyers, or those that can afford a new glider ever so often, with better images and marketing?
> > >
> > > Maybe us glider pilots are more informed consumers than auto purchasing consumers and don't need the extra eye candy. Maybe auto purchasers make fickle purchases based on eye candy and then trade after a short time.
> > >
> > > Just wish I had more eye candy to view sometimes when its cold and rainy out.
> > >
> > >
> > > http://www.jonkersailplanes.co.za/instruments.htm
> > >
> > > http://www.alexander-schleicher.de/en/
> > >
> > > http://www.schempp-hirth.com/en/sailplanes/ventus-2/ventus-2cxa-fes.html
> > >
> > > http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/index.php?id=fotos-dg-flugzeuge-d
> > >
> > > http://www.hph.cz/index.php?option=com_phocagallery&view=category&id=3%3A304&Itemid=56&lang=en
> > >
> > > http://lak.lt/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=85&Itemid=140
> > >
> > > http://alisport.com/eu/eng/galleryglobal.htm
> > >
> > > http://www.gliders-albastar.com/projects/glider-as-13-5-m/
> > >
> > > http://www.gpgliders.com
> > >
> > > http://www.lsa-gliders.com/html/tst-10_atlas.html
> >
> > Totally agree and the entire marketing effort of many manufactures is lacking from PR to events, inactive web sites and marketing automation.
> >
> > I think these companies are mostly engineers and simply go by the falsehood that "if you build it they will come".
> >
> > Dennis
>
> God help us all. You're right Dennis, these guys can't market their way out of a paper bag. It gets worse. I heard that Schleicher doesn't even have a proper telephone sanitizer on staff. And the hair! Look at these guys! http://tinyurl.com/jv4ym3t http://tinyurl.com/gskzr6q
>
> It's enough to make you think that maybe Earth *wasn't* colonized by the B-Ark, after all!
>
> What's the backlog at Schempp Hirth, Schleicher or Jonkers, again? :-)
>
>
> -Evan Ludeman / T8

Well Evan no I'm not looking for a job -:) but it doesn't take big advertising dollars to staff and coordinate a event presentation. The best example i saw happen to be of a glider that wasn't for sale..LOL SH knew that word was spread they would have their V3 at the show...OK I understand that they couldn't because they were still in test but ...THEY KNEW that there was reasonable expectation that the glider would be there and when I asked I receive a very defensive and clumsy (as if I wasn't supposed to ask), response..

I get it ...its a very small market but, I have worked in such small markets before and every win (sale) is precious and you never know what was the final factor that lead the customer away. When I bought my used Ventus ...I got pictures, Dan Johnson reviews sent, and he spent all day showcasing the glider to me and the staff at Williams was extremely helpful in supporting the private sale.

I'm not expecting Proctor and Gamble here but from Pete's sake they are 250+k products and there are limited buyers for new gliders.

Dennis

[DaTruth]

If you can afford a new glider, you can afford to visit the factory.

[2G]

On Sunday, March 6, 2016 at 6:30:11 AM UTC-8, Casey wrote:
> Have you ever noticed the lack of images on glider manufactures web sites? Especially cockpit and closeups. Sure they have a few of the gliders flying, but auto manufactures have detailed images and even 360 cameras and the autos cost less then a quarter as much. Yeah I know there is more auto competition and many more people buying autos, but with glider manufactures going after a smaller number of people I would think they would wow a potential buyer with detailed images. And it is all manufactures and not just web its also their downloadable brochures as well. I suppose I may have missed some images buried in their web sites but don't you think they should be up front and readily seen? I don't think at this point in the game any manufacture is going to change their tooling much to copy another manufacture. And if so they probably would not go by a web image of a competitor. The only explanation I seem to come up with the lack of detailed, quality images is that they are too busy and selling all the gliders they can make. JS has a couple. And Schleicher has one of the better brochures, but has more of employees than cool looking shots of the interior and so forth. Schemp-Hirth has a new web site but lacking for images. DG has a lot of information on their site but its buried and still lacking current design wowing images. Most all the images on HPH site is of flying. Same for LAK. And many of the manufactures images look like the public sent them in. And a web site can not be any more generic than GP. Ironic that one of the smallest manufactures TST has images right on front page. Maybe the older, bigger manufactures know more than the large auto makers.
>
> I hate to be busting on some of these manufactures that I drool over their gliders, but I hate to keep hearing that soaring is a dying sport or not as poplar as it once was. Well, don't you think manufactures should dazzle the public, potential buyers, or those that can afford a new glider ever so often, with better images and marketing?
>
> Maybe us glider pilots are more informed consumers than auto purchasing consumers and don't need the extra eye candy. Maybe auto purchasers make fickle purchases based on eye candy and then trade after a short time.
>
> Just wish I had more eye candy to view sometimes when its cold and rainy out.
>
>
> http://www.jonkersailplanes.co.za/instruments.htm
>
> http://www.alexander-schleicher.de/en/
>
> http://www.schempp-hirth.com/en/sailplanes/ventus-2/ventus-2cxa-fes.html
>
> http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/index.php?id=fotos-dg-flugzeuge-d
>
> http://www.hph.cz/index.php?option=com_phocagallery&view=category&id=3%3A304&Itemid=56&lang=en
>
> http://lak.lt/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=85&Itemid=140
>
> http://alisport.com/eu/eng/galleryglobal.htm
>
> http://www.gliders-albastar.com/projects/glider-as-13-5-m/
>
> http://www.gpgliders.com
>
> http://www.lsa-gliders.com/html/tst-10_atlas.html

I totally agree with you, but one admitted nitpick: when you write "manufactures" you really mean "manufacturers".

[2G]

On Sunday, March 6, 2016 at 4:58:17 PM UTC-8, DaTruth wrote:
> If you can afford a new glider, you can afford to visit the factory.

So, the manufacturer can't be bothered to take a 10 cent photo (if that), but you can be expected to take a week AND spend $5k to go visit them instead? I take it that your profession IS (WAS) NOT marketing.

[Casey[_2_]]

On Sunday, March 6, 2016 at 10:04:27 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
> On Sunday, March 6, 2016 at 4:58:17 PM UTC-8, DaTruth wrote:
> > If you can afford a new glider, you can afford to visit the factory.
>
> So, the manufacturer can't be bothered to take a 10 cent photo (if that), but you can be expected to take a week AND spend $5k to go visit them instead? I take it that your profession IS (WAS) NOT marketing.

But wait... if you can afford a new glider, you can afford to travel to 3 different manufactures in Germany, one in Italy, one in US, one in Poland, and one in Chez.. oh and one in S. Africa.

Hell, if I had that kind of money I would have 3-4 gliders anyway.

[[email protected]]

I too would like to see more pictures and videos from the manufacturers. On the other hand I'm never going to be in the market for a brand new glider due to lack of money so they're certainly not losing any sales in my case by not having them! I suppose even when they're thinking of real potential customers there probably isn't much urgency in putting resources into marketing when you've got a waiting list for the product.

[JS]

You have to sit in the glider to know if the cockpit is right for you. Not really something you learn from pictures or videos.
Unsure how you take photos or videos of things that don't exist. Many new gliders are purchased before serial number one is manufactured, every one is custom ordered anyway.
Every glider instrument panel is different. Is that the same for the Ford Focus?
Will Chrysler Corporation let you change a few things here and there in the construction of your new 300? Can you order a different battery system in your Prius? Can you order a new Silverado with interchangeable 6' and 8' beds? Will Subaru let you order white car with beige cloth seats? No cars I've seen can be delivered with the navigation system of your choice.
And if you ask for photographs or drawings of the inside of some parts of your car, will the manufacturer send them along with details on how to do the job you're working on?
I just checked a couple of the glider manufacturers' websites and found some light on imagery, but examples the ASG29 had ample photographs from my perspective and Schempp-Hirth's Wastebook page had videos. The GP14 Velo was documented as you may expect.
Hadn't watched the JS1 Wing Test video in a while. It broke the test rig, good stuff!
Jim

[[email protected]]

On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 11:36:03 AM UTC-8, JS wrote:

> It broke the test rig, good stuff!

I'm not sure I'd fullyt trust the engineering of folks who can't design a simple whiffle tree.

[[email protected]]

On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 7:48:49 PM UTC, wrote:
> On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 11:36:03 AM UTC-8, JS wrote:
>
> > It broke the test rig, good stuff!
>
> I'm not sure I'd fullyt trust the engineering of folks who can't design a simple whiffle tree.

The wing failed to break at well past its design limits so they continued and the rig broke. Its the wing engineering that was being tested not the rig.

[Craig Lowrie]

HPH also has some good images on the website of its UK dealer...
see www.HpHUK.co.uk

Craig

At 19:48 07 March 2016, wrote:
>On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 11:36:03 AM UTC-8, JS wrote:
>
>> It broke the test rig, good stuff!
>
>I'm not sure I'd fullyt trust the engineering of folks who can't design a
>simple whiffle tree.
>
>

[Don Johnstone[_4_]]

At 20:09 07 March 2016, wrote:
>On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 7:48:49 PM UTC,
wrote:
>> On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 11:36:03 AM UTC-8, JS wrote:
>>
>> > It broke the test rig, good stuff!
>>
>> I'm not sure I'd fullyt trust the engineering of folks who can't
design a
>simple whiffle tree.
>
>The wing failed to break at well past its design limits so they
continued
>and the rig broke. Its the wing engineering that was being tested
not the
>rig.

The MOD, after the Grob 103 was issued to the Air Cadets, put one on
the rig. When they had proved the service life they asked the testers to
break the wings. It is said they gave up after they broke the rig 3
times.
Just one other thought, with a waiting list as long as your arm and a
waiting time of over 12 months for some gliders why would anyone
want to spend time and money on marketing?

[Casey[_2_]]

> Just one other thought, with a waiting list as long as your arm and a
> waiting time of over 12 months for some gliders why would anyone
> want to spend time and money on marketing?

Give me something to look at on cold rainy days while I wish upon a star.

[2G]

On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 5:15:09 PM UTC-8, Don Johnstone wrote:
> At 20:09 07 March 2016, wrote:
> >On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 7:48:49 PM UTC,
> wrote:
> >> On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 11:36:03 AM UTC-8, JS wrote:
> >>
> >> > It broke the test rig, good stuff!
> >>
> >> I'm not sure I'd fullyt trust the engineering of folks who can't
> design a
> >simple whiffle tree.
> >
> >The wing failed to break at well past its design limits so they
> continued
> >and the rig broke. Its the wing engineering that was being tested
> not the
> >rig.
>
> The MOD, after the Grob 103 was issued to the Air Cadets, put one on
> the rig. When they had proved the service life they asked the testers to
> break the wings. It is said they gave up after they broke the rig 3
> times.
> Just one other thought, with a waiting list as long as your arm and a
> waiting time of over 12 months for some gliders why would anyone
> want to spend time and money on marketing?

How do you think they got into that enviable position to start with?

The lion's share of glider marketing is actually done by their customers. Most pilots I know buy gliders that their friends already own. All of the gliders I bought I had the opportunity to see, sit in and talk to their owners. I have never bought a new glider, but am now in the financial position to do so (after a lifetime of effort!). A huge part of this decision is the earned reputation of the glider manufacturer. And make no mistake, some reputations are better than others. I doubt that I would make such a decision based on photos alone. But, they are STILL nice to look at!
Tom

[HGXC[_4_]]

On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 10:29:34 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
> On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 5:15:09 PM UTC-8, Don Johnstone wrote:
> > At 20:09 07 March 2016, wrote:
> > >On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 7:48:49 PM UTC,
> > wrote:
> > >> On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 11:36:03 AM UTC-8, JS wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > It broke the test rig, good stuff!
> > >>
> > >> I'm not sure I'd fullyt trust the engineering of folks who can't
> > design a
> > >simple whiffle tree.
> > >
> > >The wing failed to break at well past its design limits so they
> > continued
> > >and the rig broke. Its the wing engineering that was being tested
> > not the
> > >rig.
> >
> > The MOD, after the Grob 103 was issued to the Air Cadets, put one on
> > the rig. When they had proved the service life they asked the testers to
> > break the wings. It is said they gave up after they broke the rig 3
> > times.
> > Just one other thought, with a waiting list as long as your arm and a
> > waiting time of over 12 months for some gliders why would anyone
> > want to spend time and money on marketing?
>
> How do you think they got into that enviable position to start with?
>
> The lion's share of glider marketing is actually done by their customers. Most pilots I know buy gliders that their friends already own. All of the gliders I bought I had the opportunity to see, sit in and talk to their owners. I have never bought a new glider, but am now in the financial position to do so (after a lifetime of effort!). A huge part of this decision is the earned reputation of the glider manufacturer. And make no mistake, some reputations are better than others. I doubt that I would make such a decision based on photos alone. But, they are STILL nice to look at!
> Tom

Exactly and the time and cost has already been invested by showing up at the event. So why not do it right and present the product in its best light. There was an outline on the floor that was labeled Ventus so I think they had planned for the glider to be there. I do understand why it didn't ship but, the follow up from the booth should have anticipated questions.

Question ... if there was a significant increase in demand would the companies respond and tool up?

Dennis

[2G]

On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 6:58:41 AM UTC-8, HGXC wrote:
> On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 10:29:34 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
> > On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 5:15:09 PM UTC-8, Don Johnstone wrote:
> > > At 20:09 07 March 2016, wrote:
> > > >On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 7:48:49 PM UTC,
> > > wrote:
> > > >> On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 11:36:03 AM UTC-8, JS wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > It broke the test rig, good stuff!
> > > >>
> > > >> I'm not sure I'd fullyt trust the engineering of folks who can't
> > > design a
> > > >simple whiffle tree.
> > > >
> > > >The wing failed to break at well past its design limits so they
> > > continued
> > > >and the rig broke. Its the wing engineering that was being tested
> > > not the
> > > >rig.
> > >
> > > The MOD, after the Grob 103 was issued to the Air Cadets, put one on
> > > the rig. When they had proved the service life they asked the testers to
> > > break the wings. It is said they gave up after they broke the rig 3
> > > times.
> > > Just one other thought, with a waiting list as long as your arm and a
> > > waiting time of over 12 months for some gliders why would anyone
> > > want to spend time and money on marketing?
> >
> > How do you think they got into that enviable position to start with?
> >
> > The lion's share of glider marketing is actually done by their customers. Most pilots I know buy gliders that their friends already own. All of the gliders I bought I had the opportunity to see, sit in and talk to their owners. I have never bought a new glider, but am now in the financial position to do so (after a lifetime of effort!). A huge part of this decision is the earned reputation of the glider manufacturer. And make no mistake, some reputations are better than others. I doubt that I would make such a decision based on photos alone. But, they are STILL nice to look at!
> > Tom
>
> Exactly and the time and cost has already been invested by showing up at the event. So why not do it right and present the product in its best light.. There was an outline on the floor that was labeled Ventus so I think they had planned for the glider to be there. I do understand why it didn't ship but, the follow up from the booth should have anticipated questions.
>
> Question ... if there was a significant increase in demand would the companies respond and tool up?
>
> Dennis

Highly unlikely - these are family-run businesses that are more tuned into generational longevity than quarterly results. However, they might slowly ramp up production if demand persists.
Tom

[[email protected]]

Yes, most glider sales probably don't need more elaborate marketing. We generally knows what we want, often because of seeing the latest examples on the contest grid or club launch line just because we like what we know or hear about a brand or a new model.

But...I've got to believe there are some sales on the margin: a pilot who might be hesitating over whether to go "all in" on a new glider. Or which manufacturer/model. At the cost/margin of today's gliders, it doesn't take many (one?) sales to cover the cost of better, more comprehensive images/descriptions.

There's also the question of which options/features to order. I know of more than one pilot who, after he/she discovered that his/her new glider could have included some obscure option he/she didn't know about or didn't understand, was annoyed. I actually faxed a series of questions to Schleicher when I ordered my ASW 24 many years ago...that were very well answered by Mr. Gerhard Waibel himself. He even sent a drawing of one part so I could evaluate it. I had several options on my glider than most U.S. pilots didn't even know were available.

Marketing isn't a bad word. Today's glider manufacturers all market their products. It's just a question of how. And unless they've somehow colluded to allocate fixed numbers of orders to each manufacturer at fixed prices, it's a question of how effective their marketing is.

Chip Bearden

[[email protected]]

On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 3:15:10 PM UTC-5, Craig Lowrie wrote:
> HPH also has some good images on the website of its UK dealer...
> see www.HpHUK.co.uk
>
> Craig

I'd say the HPH UK site has the best images. I had seen this site awhile ago but dont remember all these images. May be new.

HPH UK has a lot of info and pics on their FaceBook page as well and just saw that 2 new Shark Jets are being delivered to UK.

[2G]

On Friday, March 11, 2016 at 10:49:18 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> Yes, most glider sales probably don't need more elaborate marketing. We generally knows what we want, often because of seeing the latest examples on the contest grid or club launch line just because we like what we know or hear about a brand or a new model.
>
> But...I've got to believe there are some sales on the margin: a pilot who might be hesitating over whether to go "all in" on a new glider. Or which manufacturer/model. At the cost/margin of today's gliders, it doesn't take many (one?) sales to cover the cost of better, more comprehensive images/descriptions.
>
> There's also the question of which options/features to order. I know of more than one pilot who, after he/she discovered that his/her new glider could have included some obscure option he/she didn't know about or didn't understand, was annoyed. I actually faxed a series of questions to Schleicher when I ordered my ASW 24 many years ago...that were very well answered by Mr. Gerhard Waibel himself. He even sent a drawing of one part so I could evaluate it. I had several options on my glider than most U.S. pilots didn't even know were available.
>
> Marketing isn't a bad word. Today's glider manufacturers all market their products. It's just a question of how. And unless they've somehow colluded to allocate fixed numbers of orders to each manufacturer at fixed prices, it's a question of how effective their marketing is.
>
> Chip Bearden

Maybe we ought to do their marketing for them. What would it take for a knowledgeable pilot with a camcorder and/or Gopro to do a 30-40 minute Youtube video?

Tom

[Jonathon May[_2_]]

At 03:59 13 March 2016, 2G wrote:
>On Friday, March 11, 2016 at 10:49:18 AM UTC-8,
wrote:
>> Yes, most glider sales probably don't need more elaborate marketing. We
>g=
>enerally knows what we want, often because of seeing the latest examples
>on=
> the contest grid or club launch line just because we like what we know
or
>=
>hear about a brand or a new model.
>>=20
>> But...I've got to believe there are some sales on the margin: a pilot
>who=
> might be hesitating over whether to go "all in" on a new glider. Or
which
>=
>manufacturer/model. At the cost/margin of today's gliders, it doesn't
take
>=
>many (one?) sales to cover the cost of better, more comprehensive
>images/de=
>scriptions.
>>=20
>> There's also the question of which options/features to order. I know of
>m=
>ore than one pilot who, after he/she discovered that his/her new glider
>cou=
>ld have included some obscure option he/she didn't know about or didn't
>und=
>erstand, was annoyed. I actually faxed a series of questions to
Schleicher
>=
>when I ordered my ASW 24 many years ago...that were very well answered
by
>M=
>r. Gerhard Waibel himself. He even sent a drawing of one part so I could
>ev=
>aluate it. I had several options on my glider than most U.S. pilots
didn't
>=
>even know were available.=20
>>=20
>> Marketing isn't a bad word. Today's glider manufacturers all market
>their=
> products. It's just a question of how. And unless they've somehow
>colluded=
> to allocate fixed numbers of orders to each manufacturer at fixed
prices,
>=
>it's a question of how effective their marketing is.
>>=20
>> Chip Bearden
>
>Maybe we ought to do their marketing for them. What would it take for a
>kno=
>wledgeable pilot with a camcorder and/or Gopro to do a 30-40 minute
>Youtube=
> video?
>
>Tom
>


Hi schemmp have posted more photos on Facebook,the only really significant

thing I can see is they have moved the release up onto the panel which is a

very good thing .