Re: RPMI Symposium 2000

From: Steven (
Date: Fri Jul 23 1999 - 20:39:15 EEST

I would agree that RP will turn into RM and the net effect will be the
decentralization of manufacturing. The industrial revolution introducted
production line assembly which in turn rewarded ever larger economies of scale
in both manufacturing and marketing.

RP/RM will allow small production runs, or even single custom orders, to be
produced at very close to the cost of mass produced pieces. In fact, when RP/RM
costs come down and speed increases, the mass production techniques of
manufacturing may become limited to the most basic ball bearing types of

Now, with my Sanders machine, I can produce custom jewelry designs without
having to add the cost of hand making the model. I do have to add in my CAD
time but it seems to be about a third of the time and the models are more
accurate which cuts down on my post casting finishing time. Eventually I expect
to have a substantial CAD library with which to make modifications for
customized pieces and then the CAD portion of the cost will come down.

Of course the mass producers in Asia also have this same technology, but
previously they held an advantage of being able to afford to spend much more
time making a perfect model for production than I could afford on a
one-of-a-kind piece or even a small run. So now we are on an even footing and
we can get back to competing on design, not price.

Steven Pollack
The Missing Link Jewelers

Tom Richards wrote:

> Hello All,
> Marshall Burns wrote to regarding their RP&M
> symposium in early 2000. All RP people should visit
> and weigh-in. Marshall's statement included the
> following:
> "If you happen to agree with what I'm saying, that doesn't mean that you can
> solve the problem by directing your promotion of the conference to CEOs,
> lobbyists, and entrepreneurs. Because, by and large, those groups do not yet
> have any idea that fabbers are a phenomenon worth paying attention to. You
> have a classic chicken-and-egg dilemma. The purpose of your conference is to
> raise the consciousness of America about the fabber future, but to get
> attendance you need to find people who are already believers."
> Marshall Burns' insightful comments make sense to me: CEO's, Professionals &
> Entrepreneurs had better become aware of what could happen.
> I would like to see a plenary session built around a possible or probable
> emerging TENSION between two kinds of MANUFACTURERS of widgets, and the
> parts for widgets: A) Organizations (companies) vs B) Individuals (fabbers
> or cottage industries), as they might soon be competing for production of 1)
> prototypes, 2) early economical production quantities at minimum investment
> by consumers and 3) full-scale production quantities, of either I) Same
> Design from OEM's, catalogs or dealers or II) Custom Designs or Reverse
> Engineerings per order. It could become a classic struggle over distribution
> channels. Given the rapidly emerging internet communications and market, I
> would bet on a new paradigm to emerge and prosper, of B) producing 1,2 & 3
> of II, if RPG+M people do their jobs well. Canny CEO's themselves might well
> apply the new paradigm within their organizations.
> Best Regards, Tom Richards, Metallurgist
> For more information about the rp-ml, see

For more information about the rp-ml, see

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 22:52:13 EEST