On Jun 22, 1:14*pm, wrote:
On Jun 22, 2:01 am, Le Chaud Lapin wrote:

But at least it shows that, if someone builds something that consumers
will want, before the consumers know what it is, the consumers will
still want it.

In case of low-cost PAV, it is already known that the consumers will
want it.

* * * Just like the Segway. I have seen ONE of those things. Really
popular. Everybody wanted one, didn't they?

Not sure if they did. I remember there was a lot of interest, but one
must not confuse intellectual curiosity with inclination to purchase.
The average consumer simply does not have an extra $5000US ($10,000US
in France) for a vehicle that moves slower than the average teenager
can run (~20km/h, 12.5mph) and requires 4-6 hours to charge for a
range of up to 40km.

By contrast, here is a machine that is 1/10 of the cost that does,
with some exceptions, the same thing. With this alternative, unlike
with the segway, the human actually has to balance himself/herself to
keep from falling:

http://urbanscooters.com/cgi-bin/urb...ml?id=7wbs5GVf

The value proposition is a bit hard to swallow. Last year I paid $8100
for a VFR-800, a machine with top speed of 260km/hr, outrageously
generous fun during acceleration and cornering, able to carry a
passenger, and has essentially unlimited range with quick refueling.
It does not do well on cobblestone streets or on sidewalks in city
parks, but, when in such environments, I prefer to walk.

This is why objectivity in assessing the value of the product is
important.

If someone were to make a PAV that did not cost 10x that of a low-end
kit plane, but was roughly in line with cost of automobile, with all
the features outlined by NASA/CAFE/PAV, consumers would respond with
purchases (or rentals at least).

-Le Chaud Lapin-