Has XSV changed the face of tournament Paintball forever?

[rpcruzr]

It's not valuable IP at all. Like I said, and like you said, turning trigger events into solenoid movements is a fairly trivial task to anyone with a decent amount of electrical engineering skill.

Do you read your posts after you write them?

"fairly trivial task to anyone with a decent amount of electrical engineering skill"

Who are these people? The general paintball-playing population? Who are you talking about? How can one identify these wandering electrical engineers?

Most 'ballers I know don't know jack**** of how their own guns work. Are they giving away electrical engineering courses in your country? Are you equiping 4 year olds with soldering irons right out of kindergarden?


Chicago, I think that you just keep changing reality in your head as to support you opinions as we go along.

Your "logic" defies the reasoning that accepts that other people have opinions too and that it's alright to "agree to disagree".

This is not a contest and you don't have to "always" win.

Wait... unless... you're american??

 

[duffistuta]

Ya know Paul, when intellectual Paintball debates get reduced to semantic pursuits, we really have lost sight of the original propositions, but I do understand the need to sometimes clarify details .... I think this is a great example of over-intellectualising but it makes fascinating reading..if only for a select few

Don't worry, Paul and I have called time on it as we are aware we're boring people, and now Mr telford has arrived it would be nice to refocus the thread.

 

[Robbo]

Don't worry, Paul and I have called time on it as we are aware we're boring people, and now Mr telford has arrived it would be nice to refocus the thread.

Boring?
I doubt it, confusing?
Maybes.
Stimulating?
For some, yes!

But since Rich has turned up and refocused us all back on course, the questions that erupt in my head are these :-

I don't believe Rich's exploits are sustainable because I think the industry will end up realising sponsoring pro teams (to the levels they do) is just another example of the Emperor's new clothes....
or do people think maybes the ESPN deal (or rather the proposed new IMG package for next year) is gonna inject sufficient cash into the teams (via the league) to help sustain these levels of sponsorship and therefore the same levels of fiancée management that XSV and Dynasty (and others) enjoy?

There is a side point that I know Baca will pick up on in that he will undoubtedly question any income streams going via the league into teams and I think he's right to question that (if in fact he does) because if any significant income streams are to be created on the back of any TV deal then we best not rely on the league to provide us any trickle down financing, we are gonna have to go outside the industry and perhaps this was another one of Rich's innovative moves...

 

[Baca Loco]

There is a side point that I know Baca will pick up on in that he will undoubtedly question any income streams going via the league into teams and I think he's right to question that (if in fact he does) because if any significant income streams are to be created on the back of any TV deal then we best not rely on the league to provide us any trickle down financing, we are gonna have to go outside the industry and perhaps this was another one of Rich's innovative moves...

Since I have in the past I certainly will--particularly the apparent NPPL model which seems to be "we'll get you on TV and that's valuable to you but what you do with it is strictly up to you" and if we make money while you scramble, well, life is hard. Excepting the league is making it's cheese off the teams and players who participate and a deal between IMG/ESPN/PP/NPPL is an empty suit without the teams.
And, as I have said before, this model also puts the participating teams into a competition with the league for sponsors, outside or otherwise, which isn't a recipe for stability or parity both of which are, seems to me, desireable goals for any sporting league with pretensions to longevity.
Then there are the control issues. The history of PB is, in one sense, a struggle for dominance and I don't mean on the field. Cash is one weapon in that war and if the volumes of cash suddenly explode so will all semblance of normalcy and whatever uneasy balance exists. A situation very well could and likely would develop very quickly where if peeps think loads of green are being dumped into paintball now just wait. Instantly parity or even the attempt at parity would become a joke, factory teams would, in the near term, become more dominant and the necessity of chasing outside revenue sources by the independents would shatter the web of control that presently exists called sponsorship and business relationships.
But hey, if you want to radically change the face of Paintball overnight then infuse tons of cash into the Game with no plan or purpose beyond making yours. I will guarantee you'll get your wish and I say, go for it--but then I'm an anarchist at heart--so maybe my support isn't what you really want.

 

[Chicago]

Do you read your posts after you write them?

"fairly trivial task to anyone with a decent amount of electrical engineering skill"

Who are these people? The general paintball-playing population? Who are you talking about? How can one identify these wandering electrical engineers?

Your "logic" defies the reasoning that accepts that other people have opinions too and that it's alright to "agree to disagree".

Of course other people have opinions. If they're good ones, I steal them, and if they're bad ones, I point out why they're off the mark.

As for electrical engineers, you do what you'd to anytime you'd want someone who was skilled at something to do something for you - you hire one. There are guys who already program paintball marker boards, and there are plenty of electrical engineers who do contract work. You don't let a broken pipe flood your basement just because nobody in your neighborhood happens to be a plumber, do you?

Saying you can't have certified software written because almost all paintballers arn't electrical engineers just doesn't make sense. That's like saying nobody can create a paintball gun because most paintball players arn't capable of it.

You make it and you charge for it. The REAL question is, can you do it for a price that is reasonable as compared to the benefit? I believe you can.

 

[manike]

As for electrical engineers, you do what you'd to anytime you'd want someone who was skilled at something to do something for you - you hire one. There are guys who already program paintball marker boards, and there are plenty of electrical engineers who do contract work.

Yep, and for the good guys, it you want to then own the board and rights to make it, would charge you about $10,000 per gun style.

However, if you want to make the gun code public (which you don't usually get for that price), I don't know what the cost would be. Probably more.

Before you could even dream of implementing such a system you would need a board and code capable of running all the guns you are likely to come across at an event. How many different boards and set up capabilities do you think that would be?

Rich T, Thanks for joining us. I think what you have done with XSV is awesome. What's changed since the Facefull article you wrote on electronic gun cheats? What made you change your mind about using a cheater chip?

 

[Chicago]

Yep, and for the good guys, it you want to then own the board and rights to make it, would charge you about $10,000 per gun style.

However, if you want to make the gun code public (which you don't usually get for that price), I don't know what the cost would be. Probably more.

Why? It's a work for hire. I pay you to write the code, you give me the code you create. What I choose to do with it after that point is none of your business.

 

[manike]

Why? It's a work for hire. I pay you to write the code, you give me the code you create. What I choose to do with it after that point is none of your business.

Well you pay depending on what you get. If you get their IP, it costs you more. If you get the right to make the product etc. it costs you less (but they get to keep their IP secret to themselves). Simple really. All depends on what you want to pay, as to what you get, as I thought I pointed out.

You want more that is of value. You pay more for it.

 

[Chicago]

Well you pay depending on what you get. If you get their IP, it costs you more. If you get the right to make the product etc. it costs you less (but they get to keep their IP secret to themselves). Simple really. All depends on what you want to pay, as to what you get, as I thought I pointed out.

You want more that is of value. You pay more for it.

If I was paying for an existing asset, sure. But I'm not paying for their IP, I'm paying them to create MY IP. Cost is based on market rate for the necessary amount of labor from someone with the necessary skillset.

 

[manike]

I'm just telling you what the prices are for what you want to get done, based on the current market and people who do this work.

Whether you are paying for 'their IP' or paying for them to 'create your IP' your point is purely semantic and irrelevant. The IP is theirs until paid for, then yours. Happy?

You want, new gun boards and chips with semi only and the source code to be available for all to see, right?

If you want to let everyone know how the code works, then you need the source code. As much as you don't want to admit it, that is IP. It will start out as theirs, once you pay for it, it will be yours.

You don't need the source code to make and sell boards.

So you can buy what you need to make and sell boards, from current board guys who know what they are doing, without getting the source code for LESS than if you buy the source code and rights to it also. You are getting more if you get the source code. Having the source code gives you more capability.

If you buy the ability to make and sell boards without the source code, the cost is currently approx $10,000 depending on who you want to deal with.

If you want to pay for the rights to the source code you can expect to pay more. The source code gives you the ability to make changes and updates and know exactly how the software works and everything they put into it and how they did it. Yes you could pay someone for this. Expect it to cost you more though. That's just the way it is.

I'm not sure what's so hard to understand? Or why I need to keep repeating myself. Do you really not understand what's needed or involved? Or do you just want to pretend that in the real world, everything you want is negligable work and negligable cost?

p.s. To everyone else, yes I'm bored with repeating myself and this line of discussion too.