New sail design - Keep the Dream Alive!

Discussion in 'Laser Class Politics' started by dyzzypyxxy, Sep 26, 2008.

  1. Deimos

    Deimos Member

    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    18
    For me the price and longevity are pretty much the same issue. If you have a disposable sail that lasted only a weekend but only cost £1 (or $1) then it would be a bit wasteful but no price/longevity issues. Similarly I would happily ay twice the already high price for a sail that would keep shape sailing every weekend in F6 for 10 years. Both stupid examples but is many respects it is cost per race (or cost per year or similar). Trouble is that from what people say (as I don't have any knock-off sails) the 3rd party ones are both cheaper AND last longer.

    But being honest I still (presumably happily) pay the high UK price for class legal sails anyway - only because I want to race Lasers and not because I need to be legal for Open Meetings/Regattas.

    Ian
     
  2. jeffers

    jeffers Active Member

    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Hi Ian,

    I agree wholeheartedly that having a cheap disposable sail is very wasteful my point was that LP (at least here in the UK) have recognised that they are losing a lot of sales to the replica market, like it or not replicas are here to stay for the forseeable future.

    I would also happily pay the current price if the sail was as durable as other classes.

    The 3rd party sails on the whole are more durable and a lot cheaper (I do have one and use it for club racing). Even when you take into account supply chain and the support of a dealer network (absolute tosh in my opinion, here in the UK we can buy directly from LP so the chain is Manufactuerer -> LP -> us) the genuine sail is very expensive. That and the fact that suddenly LP can offer huge discounts on relatively small volumes does tend to back up the popularly held belief that the builders make a huge profit on each sail that they sell.

    The winds of change appear to be getting up though, which is good as long as the class does it properly!

    Just my 2p as always....
     
  3. 49208

    49208 Tentmaker

    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    48

    Can you give some real examples of what sort of quantity vs discount you are seeing in the UK ?
     
  4. jeffers

    jeffers Active Member

    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I heard of a recent enquiry made to the LP sales team wanting 3 sails. The price offered by LP was of the order of £220 per sail as opposed to the more normal £360-400.

    This came from our clubs fleet captain who himself was trying to organise something and was offered a similar price.
     
  5. marvin-miller

    marvin-miller Arrrr...

    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    That's usually what happens. Someone is asleep at the switch for far too long and then comes the 'knee-jerk' reaction to a changing marketplace. In short, they wait until they have to do something and then react instead of taking a pro-active approach as they should have some time ago to protect their market.

    Normally what happens is this - while the OEM has a stranglehold they gouge the living snot out of everyone. Once a potential competing product comes on the market, what they are supposed to do, is start dropping the price in an effort to squeeze out the competitor and maintain their market share. And thus, the free enterprise system benefits the consumer.

    Usually this occurs very quickly but I think I mentioned something about sleep above :D

    That's been my driving point all along. It's the class that continually give the OEM's the right to gouge. The class actually is endorsing this gouging.

    That's what I've been getting at when I mentioned this;

    If the legislating body woke up one morning and decided that everyone had to use an Intensity sail it would mean three things;

    1) Everyone would be saving $400 every time they bought a sail
    2) Everyone would have the same sail
    3) There would be no need for measuring.

    Problem solved.

    Personally, my thoughts are that if they did this just with sails, I think it would send an important signal while benefitting the sport.

    Certainly I understand the need for profit. But I still maintain that the viewpoint on sails as being a significant profit item should change to them being viewed as consumables and being priced as such.

    This is just a suggestion, but if the monopoly were viewed as 'hard' parts vs 'soft' parts then maybe it would make more sense to view sails as consumables, price them as such, and if you need 'hard' parts (ie hull, spars, foils etc) then you have to go back to the dealer and you get gouged. This is normal when viewed against a mature industry like automotive.

    Where it differs is that all the power is at the legislative body. They could, for all intents and purposes, authorize a ton of 'replica' gear and that would be that - all prices would drop like a rock. The problem is this would hurt the OEM too much and would damage the better parts of the one design deal.

    So, a compromise needs to happen. One that takes into account the needs of the OEM and balances that against the best interests of the class and the end users.

    That's why I've been suggesting a hard parts vs soft parts philosophy. I don't think it's ever right to gouge the consumer on consumables. On the other hand, if you broke your daggerboard, well, then it sucks to be you!

    I think there's an enormous amount of wisdom your post. :)

    Imagine that - direct sails (pardon the pun) and the dealer network didn't even blow up!
     
  6. Eric_R

    Eric_R D10 Secretary

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Think about it though. Go to LP's site and you see that they charge full dealer price for a sail. LP has the ability to drop the price down because they take the dealer out of the mix and make the extra money that would go to the dealer when they sell a sail. Because LP make X amount of money when they sell to the dealer they have the option to lower the price to sell volumes because they are making something regardless. Doing that removes the dealer out of the mix and they couldn't make money on the sail if they charged that cheap.

    What's that to say that they start lowering the price for everything where the dealers can't make any money because they can't sell the parts like LP does and everyone goes to LP for parts. That would destroy the dealer network.
     
  7. marvin-miller

    marvin-miller Arrrr...

    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    That was already covered many posts back :)

    Look, the single biggest issue everyone is complaining about it the sail price. Not many folks are complaining about the hard parts pricing. This is because, compared to sails, hard parts are not as common of a purchase.

    Everyone assumes that the minute sails are sold direct or at a lower price the dealer network will explode with a giant mushroom cloud and cause the wholesale (pardon the pun) destruction of the Laser world. I don't believe that at all - the Laser OEM needs to change their business practices significantly. They should not be dependant at all on the legislative body to maintain their monopoly to survive - they should be able to stand with or without legislation.

    This comes back to something that I mentioned that I think is very, very important. Everyone here (and everywhere else) seems to view Lasers strictly from the standpoint of racing. I believe this is a big mistake because it limits our vision. The OEM view their products as racing equipment yet the Laser's biggest untapped market is the 'real' world with new sailors and racing isn't going to be the biggest draw in getting them to purchase a new boat. Racing will come later, if they want to.

    Lookit, let's say they've been making Lasers for 40 years and they've now made boat number 200,000. There's two ways to look at it - you can either pat yourself on the back and say we're doing good (and we are!) or you can expand your vision and compare the company to any other sporting goods company that's been in business for 40 years and broaden your perspective. If you did so, here's what you would find;

    Honda has sold 20 gazillion motorbikes in 40 years and achieved much better market penetration. So has Kawasaki and Suzuki. Those are all luxury sport items of a similar price. Compare the Laser to that.

    Everyone and their dog has a quad these days. It's a luxury sport item. How does Laser's market penetration compare to those (again - same price point, probably even the same seasonality).

    I'd be willing to bet that more people threw out (in the garbage) more windsufers then the sum total of the Laser production run.

    In my mind the Laser OEM is a business. I love the Laser, I believe in the Laser and I believe everyone should have a Laser. When I contrast market penetration of motorcycles, quads, seadoos, windsurfers etc, which are all luxury sport items, I cannot help but some to the conclusion that the Laser OEM's are overlooking their single biggest untapped market wich is NOT racing.

    That is to say, the strictly racing viewpoint is coming at the expense of new, hobbiest sailors who would just enjoy the product - if they knew about it.

    The biggest case I can make about how messed up the whole thing is, is that this sail argument is the biggest and longest lasting issue that's never been resolved. Every 5 years for the last 25 I've looked to see if Laser sail prices have dropped - and they haven't. It was only when Intensity came on the scene that I bought a new sail.:D

    But I'm part of that great untapped market - I sail because I love it and I love the Laser. Racing has nothing to do with my sailing.

    I would submit to everyone that if the Laser OEM's actually reached out into the 'real' world, that is to say, the world that is not made up of sailors and then concentrated their marketing effort there they would probably end up making their one millionth boat in no time flat, they'd make so much money that sail prices would become irrelevant (which is the way it should be) and the racing fleet would quadruple in size, not by marketing to racers, but just because a percentage of all new sailors may well end up racing because they grew into that.

    But to focus everything on racing at the expense of the market share that companies like Suzuki, Kawasaki, Mistral and all those other turkeys enjoy - well, that's just crazy. The name of the game for the Laser OEM should be increasing market penetration and living off the fat of new boat sales as opposed to sails.

    In any manufacturing concern the parts money is typically viewed as gravey while the production of the boat should be considered their core business. But it seems to me that this symbiotic relationship with the legislative body has probably resulted in tunnel vision at the expense of market penetration that's been ultimately caused by an endorsed monopoly with the ultimate cost of that being passed off to the Laser sailor when they are forced to pay $400 more for a sail of lesser quality.

    I'm not asking for the legislative body to endorse all replicas and make a mess of the one-design goal. To me it's simple, if you shifted the sail endorsement to Intensity (and made a contract that garanteed a good price to all) then it's all fixed.

    The Laser OEM should not base their business's success on the legislative body's endoresment. That's a bad business practice. They should aggressively own the market and be very responsive to the legislative body.

    If the legislative body was seriously talking about endorsing a different sail then the Laser OEM should be running over to you, buying you dinner, and intently listening to your concerns in an effort to appease you as much as possible. But the bottom line is this, they should be very responsive. It's a partnership but ultimately, in the racing world, it's the rule-makers who have the power - not the OEM. The OEM should be able to stand on it's own two feet no matter what the rule makers do because of the strength of their product and it's positioning in the market.

    Anyway, having said that, I would suggest that sails be considered consumable items and be priced as such. Let's try an example;

    In order to buy a boat or any hard parts you need to go through the dealer network. When you buy a sail, you can buy it either from the dealer network or direct from Intensity (as an example). Both sails would be the same and they would be legal.

    The legislative body can, and should, continue to enforce the protectionist philosophy with regards to 99.99% of the Laser, that being the hard parts. Don't allow 3rd party hard parts. Only genuine OEM for racing. Protect the OEM when it makes sense but not at the cost of the end users (the sailors) when it comes to consumables like ropes or sails.

    In my view, it's the legislative body that is endorsing price gouging at the sailor level by enforcing the use of a sail that has $400 of padding in it. It's the rule makers that are forcing the sailors to pay that fee - it's NOT the OEM. If the rule makers changed their position, then the OEM would HAVE to respond.

    To me it's this simple, the legislative body should balance the needs of the OEM against the needs of the sailors and the general health of the sport. Is the legislative body doing it's job by endorsing an expensive sail when a better cheaper one is available?

    In the world I live in we reward innovators like Intensity and we punish companies that refuse to innovate. We do this by voting with our pocket book. That's the free enterprise system.

    It's very hard to force people to pay $600 for a sail when you can buy one that, if anything, is better for $189

    Having said all that, be advised that I'm not a racer and I have no real understanding of the legislative body or it's processes etc. So, if I've offended anyone or am off-base in that respect please understand that my views tend to be more business/consumer oriented but that they are ultimately, underpinned by a strong desire to see everyone win and that includes the OEM, the rule-makers, the racers, and most importantly, the end users.

    That's why I'm taking the time to outline possible ways and means to achieve these objectives, and hopefully, to cause the OEM's to think outside the box and try and grab more of that luxury sport market share.

    However, I still maintain that with respect to the sails, it may well be this simple;

    If the legislating body woke up one morning and decided that everyone had to use an Intensity sail it would mean three things;

    1) Everyone would be saving $400 every time they bought a sail
    2) Everyone would have the same sail
    3) There would be no need for measuring.

    Problem solved.

    It's not our job to ensure that a separate and distinct business stays afloat (pardon another pun). That's their job. We should be sensitive to their needs but not at the cost of the end user and certainly not to the extent that we abandon the free enterprise system and endorse price fixing at the cost of the sailor's pocket book.

    Don't get me wrong, I love Lasers, I want to see 'em stamped out by the millions, but Laser, as a company, must be able to stand on it's own two feet regardless of what the legislative body does. That's only prudent.

    If I owned the Laser company I would design/re-design the business so that it would be able to stand strictly on the manufacturing of boats so that my future was never in anyone else's hands. That's only prudent. Everything after that is gravey.

    Perhaps one way to accomplosh this is to stop focussing so much on racing because it's now limiting their expansion and start focussing on marketing into the real world so that they can attract new sailors. Whether or not those new sailors choose to race is up to them. Certainly, when it comes to racing, there's probably no better boat with a better racing pedigree or racing infrastructure. That's a big credit to you guys but you must understand that Laser will attract more new owners by de-emphasizing racing and emphasizing the general fun/health/whatever of Laser ownership as outlined in this post.

    Again, think quads, think jet skis, think motorcycles - they're all the same market and in comparison Laser owns .00000000000001% of that market. There's only 200,000 boats! So there's a LOT more money out there for the Laser OEM's if they would just expand their thinking outside of the racing world! Tap that market and start thinking about an executive jet!

    With respect to marketing and the de-emphasis of racing, let me put it to you this way, how many people who bought quads, jet skis and motorcyles did so with the sole intent of racing them? Very few. Instead, what happens is that people buy their first bike, they get comfortable, they get good, then they think they are the best, and then they go racing.

    But the vast majority of those quads, motorcycles etc are never raced and were never bought with the intention of racing them. Instead they get chucked in the back of the truck and taken out to the sand pit on a Sunday afternoon.

    Wouldn't it be nice to see Lasers in the back of those trucks instead?
     
  8. 49208

    49208 Tentmaker

    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The legislative body INCLUDES the builder - basically nothing happens without their approval.
     
  9. torrid

    torrid Just sailing

    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Let's suppose, just for argument's sake, that this could happen. How many more problems will be created by alienating the builder from the class? Sure everybody would love their $200 Intensity Sails, but they most likely would also be paying $10,000 for a new Laser.

    As I said before, the class and the builder need each other. They need to work together (and by class I mean everyone who races a Laser) to resolve the problem.
     
  10. marvin-miller

    marvin-miller Arrrr...

    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    You've got to be kidding me. So the builder can (and obviously does) create laws to thwart competition and protect their product?

    Holy toledo batman - hasn't anyone ever considered Sherman anti-trust?

    Why is the OEM not kept at arm's length from the legislative body? I'm pretty sure that raises to the level of illegal activity. Let's take a look at what Sherman Anti-Trust means and you tell me....

    "Around the world, what U.S. lawmakers and attorneys call "Antitrust" is more commonly known as "competition law." The purpose of the act was to oppose the combination of entities that could potentially harm competition, such as monopolies or cartels.

    Q: Is the OEM and the Class a combination of entities? Yes.
    Q: Do they potentially harm competition? Yes - they prevent a user from using any other sail then their own.
    Q: Does that make them a cartel? Yes.

    "Its reference to trusts today is an anachronism. At the time of its passage, the trust was synonymous with monopolistic practice, because the trust was a popular way for monopolists to hold their businesses, and a way for cartel participants to create enforceable agreements.[5]."

    Q: Is there an 'enforceable' agreement?
    A: Yes, in more ways then one.

    "The Sherman Act was not specifically intended to prevent the dominance of an industry by a specific company, despite misconceptions to the contrary. According to Senator George Hoar, an author of the bill, any company that "got the whole business because nobody could do it as well as he could" would not be in violation of the act. "

    Well, that's NOT the OEM Laser sail :eek: We all know that the Inteisty sail is $400 less and of higher quality. So it's being artificially propped up

    The law attempts to prevent the artificial raising of prices by restriction of trade or supply.[6] In other words, innocent monopoly, or monopoly achieved solely by merit, is perfectly legal, but acts by a monopolist to artificially preserve his status, or nefarious dealings to create a monopoly, are not."

    Q: Is there an artificial raising of price?
    A: Yes - it's $400 too much
    Q: Is there a restriction of trade or supply?
    A: Yes
    Q: Has the OEM Laser sail risen to the level of a 'natural' monopoly based on merit?
    A: No, it has no merit when you take into account the Intensity sail.

    Why? Because someone is acting to artificially preserve his status.

    "The purpose of the [Sherman] Act is not to protect businesses from the working of the market; it is to protect the public from the failure of the market. The law directs itself not against conduct which is competitive, even severely so, but against conduct which unfairly tends to destroy competition itself." [7]

    Hmmmm..... from the beginning I've said that Intensity is being punished and the OEM sail is being rewarded which is exactly contrary to the free enterprise system.

    In the free enterprise system, the cream always rises to the top. In this case the innovative cream is Intensity but it is being artificially prevented from rising to the top by a combination of entities.

    That's a text book definition of Sherman Anti-Trust.

    Indeed, the entire Sherman Anti-Trust laws could have been written by someone examining the Laser Sail scenario. It's illegal and anti-competitive practice.
     
  11. torrid

    torrid Just sailing

    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I, um...yeah.

    This is going nowhere. I'm through with this thread.
     
  12. gouvernail

    gouvernail Active Member

    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    nobody needs a laser and anybody can buy any other boat.

    this is hardly a problem for the courts
     
  13. TonyB

    TonyB Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Marvin, I'm sorry to say that it isn't actually as simple as you make out.

    At the risk of challenging your word count record, here's why.

    A
    s a non-racer no one is forcing you to use anybody's sail. As long as you don't race, you can make your own sail out of old bed sheets for all anybody cares. If you decide to race you (should) need official gear but it isn't the manufacturer enforcing this - it's the Class Association, which is ultimately the collective group of other sailors you are racing against. The Association is independent of the manufacturers, despite the symbiotic relationship between them.

    Neither is anyone forcing you to sail a Laser. Plenty of competition exists between makers of dinghies - that's the level at which you need to apply your anti-competition laws (which by the way only apply in the US - the Laser is sailed around the world). The automotive equivalent is that Volkswagen are the only company making Beetles and would come down heavily on anyone violating their trademarks or IP. Are they violating any anti-trust laws? Of course not - there are fifty other car makers out there. You don't have to drive a Beetle. They are selling one of many products in the marketplace, just like LP and PSA.

    Intensity and the other makers of replica sails haven't innovated anything - they've been able to sell a cheaper product because for better or worse they've bypassed the dealer network, and because they've bypassed the strict sail construction guidelines contained in the Laser Construction Manual. There are two important points here that have been mentioned numerous times in this and other threads. Firstly, the cloth that is specified for official sails (which was common at the time of specification) is no longer easily obtained. This isn't a problem for the replica makers - they just use the nearest thing they can easily obtain. They no doubt use a heavier cloth but pay less for it. Secondly, the Construction Manual dictates some archaic construction processes that undoubtedly cost North and Hyde more but the others are not compelled to follow.

    This makes it obvious that the thing that needs to change is the Construction Manual. What a surprise - this is happening! It's not straightforward to change though - it's easy to design a cheaper, more durable sail, but very difficult to design a new sail that performs identically to the existing sail across all conditions. Again, this doesn't matter from your non-racing perspective but for racing sailors maintaining the one design status of the class is critical. I'm happy to wait while the testing process continues (although more regular updates on progress of these types of changes would be appreciated).

    The class could also look at changes in the supply process but like plenty of others have said, it would be perilous to risk putting our dealers out of business. This is largely out of the sailors hands anyway - the manufacturers control the supply mechanism and would only change if it was in their interest.

    Ultimately, for all the complaining about the cost and durability of the sail, it really isn't that bad. Would I like a cheaper, more durable sail? Of course. But the current sail does a pretty good job and only costs me about $3 each time I go sailing - less than the beer I buy at the sailing club bar when I get back to shore. If my sail only cost me $1.50 per sail I could then afford a bit more beer, but I'd prefer to donate that money to the dealer - once he starts driving around in a Porsche, then I'll start to worry about it.

    And lastly, to me the Laser is first and foremost a one design fleet racing boat and marketing it as a plaything for the masses is more likely to kill the class. Sure, some people get pleasure out of cruising about, but frankly there are plenty of boats better than a Laser for that. Compared to many boats, the Laser is downright unpleasant to sail - I've never understood why people would want to sail one for its own sake. If you want to go fast then get a sailboard. If you want to cruise, get something with seats and a furling sail. But if you want to race there is nothing better than the Laser, for three reasons. Firstly, it is strict one design. Secondly, because relatively cheap and durable boats and parts are readily available due to the simple design and the dealer network. And thirdly, because of the fleet sizes, encouraged by the best range of well organised regattas of any class.
     
  14. marvin-miller

    marvin-miller Arrrr...

    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Hi Tony;

    Thank you for an excellent post! I learned quite a bit from it.

    I agree that the anti-competition laws don't truly stand up to the matter (I knew this when I made the post) but what I was actually trying to do was drive home the point that from a business perspective it's more then a pretty darn convienient arrangement that ultimately comes at the cost of the consumer. I don't know how anyone could not see that.

    What I find amazing is that I could actually draw a direct parallel between the anti-trust law and the OEM Laser sail, one that is spot-on accurate on each and every point. It speaks to a very convienient strategy does it not?

    In all honesty what I was trying to do was highlight the entire issue to such a degree that more people would look at it in an entirely different way and really start asking themselves if North & Hyde are being endorsed at the cost of the consumer and then drawing the continual parallel that there might be a better way by using Intensity as an example. Certainly the $400 price difference should strike a chord.

    While I don't race today, I may want to in the future. In that respect I try to keep my boat as 'legal' as I can and plan purchases accordingly. Obviously, I'd like to see my sail considered legal - so I certainly have a self-interest. Yet, I still can't help but feel that at $600 a crack I can't be the only one who finds it exorbitant. Personally, I feel it's wrong and I have for many, many years. it was only when Intensity came on the market that I said, Thank God! Too bad it's not been 'endorsed'. Wait a second, why hasn't it been endorsed? Wouldn't it make sense to endorse it? Anyway, that's what brought this whole thing up for me...

    That's what's endeared me to them. For the record, I don't know them, I have no interest in them and I sure don't speak for them. I'm endeared to them for addressing a problem in the marketplace. One that the Laser OEM's haven't. So there you go, that's truly an argument that anti-trust does not apply. Unless, of course, you want to go racing... :D:eek::)

    With respect to the sail making process, thanks for illuminating that for me. I can see that the OEM sail would cost more to manufacture in some ways (I'll give you that). It does bring to mind a different question though. Is it better to maintain the one-design standard by using a new sail that's identical in performance to the original spec or is it better to change the spec and make a new sail that addresses all original deficiencies and then that new sail becomes part of a new standard?

    This is an interesting question because as one with an older boat I'm also looking at upgrades to the vang/cunningham/outhaul and at times I can't help but think that my boat no longer meets the one-design criteria. Why? Because everyone else has new gear and it seems to me that the one design has changed and they now have an advantage - even if it's just ease of use.

    That kind of leads me down the path of, if it's OK to change those things (improve the boat) then why can't we look at a cheaper sail option because in my mind - that's really improving the boat!

    I strongly disagree about Intensity and innovation. I understand however that Intensity is not subject to the same construction methods (that's probably why their sails are better). But like you said, there are things under way with respect to a new sail and who knows, maybe they'll be able to make it so much better that it will last way longer and then, if it's still at the $600 price point, it will, at least, represent more value then the OEM sail is now giving.

    I have my doubts though because of the way that the OEM sail is endorsed and by the number of years that this has gone on for. To me it reeks of a shadey business practice. It's just too damn convienient for the OEM and worst of all, it comes at the cost of the consumer.

    That's about as close as I can come to a half-way point. Indeed, I've given more ground then sits right with me. In my world it's black and white - lower price and higher quality always wins. It has to because the free enterprise system is built on that very foundation. For me to deny that is like saying that the earth is flat. It's not gonna happen.

    Instead, I prefer to champion the little guy who innovates in the marketplace and makes a better product at a lower price. I just can't help it - it's my nature. :eek:
     
  15. gouvernail

    gouvernail Active Member

    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Just checking around a bit.

    3.8 oz Dacron cloth is an off the shelf item from Challenge sailcloth ...Available colors include>>>
    Red, Yellow, Coast Gold, Black,
    Light Blue, Dark Blue, Orange,
    Silver Grey, Green, Purple,
    Fluorescent Pink, Fluorescent Yellow,
    Fluorescent Orange, Fluorescent Green.

    My guess is they could be convinced to meet any cloth standards the Class and Builders describe.

    As I see it, one HUGE problem with our current supplier is that supplier has been trying to manufacture its own cloth.

    When the cloth is sorta kinda near the desired spec, and profitablity is an issue, it is awfully tough to reject stuff you made yourself and will have to throw away instead of using.

    if there is a supplier whose specs are well defined, the cloth eithr meets the specs or delivery is refused.

    Also, when workers know they have a specific "I will lose my job if I build outside these specs" job...The specs tend to be met with more regularity.

    Long lasting 3.8 oz cloth was made in the sixties, seventies and eighties. I simply refuse to believe the technology surrounding durable sailcloth manufacture was lost the exact same day North Srtarted making Laser sails.

    I am not among those clammoring for a new and better sail. I want the cloth we had in the early nineties combined with the larger design size and shape used beginning in about 1993. The only new change I would like is a slight change in the cut to decrease the fluttering between the battens. ( and I could tolerate that flutter if my sails lasted a couple eyars again as tehyy did while Haarstick was manufacturing sails for lasers in the early nineties. feel free to drop by my shop and I will show you a couple old Haarstcik manufactured Laser sails. The cloth is obviously more of threads and stronger than the currently supplied sail have as their structure

    If we simply were provided with the same long lasting cloth Haarstick was using in the early nineties I would have no gripes sufficient to make me complain.

    I have objected since the very first day I saw the very first North Built 1990s Laser sail.'

    There is too much plastic and less thread. We are being sold sails made from materials whose design includes less attention to durability than that which was paid by our previous supplier.

    When sonmebody starts selling me the same product made from less appropriate materials...I complain.

    I don't like being ripped off by profiteers.

    I feel I AM being ripped of by profiteers..

    Therefore I bitch.

    Constantly


    relentlessy


    and plan to continue until profiteering is no longer apparent to me.

    It's real simple . North can either make their sails as well as Haarstick made the Laser sails, or I will bitch.

    And I will continue to buy the garbage sails because I simply must sail in Laser regattas..

    .or

    hell I don't know and I am not about to risk finding out.
     
  16. Ross B

    Ross B Guest


    I'll still do it...:cool:
     

Share This Page