Re: Fractional Ownership

From: Charles Norton (
Date: Wed Sep 01 1999 - 17:34:33 EEST

David & List,

It's kind of like having a Service Bureau that you can't fire. If a user
is unhappy with the "ABC Service Bureau" it's not particularly difficult to
find a replacement if the quality, service, or support is unsatisfactory.

Charlie Norton

At 10:26 PM 08/31/1999 -0500, you wrote:
>2 Major flaws with this business model in this arena. . .
>The ability of the "owners" to control the costs.
>The ability of the "owners" to control quality.
>Owner A wants parts in 2 days but owner B needs to have something run in
>0.001" layers. Someone has to give. This concept is the commercial
>equivalent to some of the universities' consortiums. Why belly up to the
>bar with $200,000 and not have a machine in your facility? Will this be a
>true "co-op" with profits being shared by the owners? Or will it be a
>service bureau with fractional owners paying $X per hour for machine usage.
>In that case tomato-tomato. (That saying doesn't work nearly as well when
>typed -- tomAto, tomAHto).
>David K. Leigh ph (254) 933-1000
>Harvest Technologies fax (254) 298-0125
>Rapid Prototyping Services
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Marshall Burns <>
>To: <>;
><>; <>
>Date: Tuesday, August 31, 1999 6:39 PM
>Subject: Re: Job Posting
>>><< Shared Replicators is pioneering Fractional Ownership Programs for
>>>top-of-the-line industrial rapid prototyping equipment. Currently, the
>>>company is marketing shares in SLA7000 solid imaging systems. >>
>>>Is that the only way someone can afford one of those?
>>>Andy Scott
>>>Lockheed Martin Aero Sys
>> I'm sure your question is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but the fact is
>>while there will be major companies, including probably yours, that will
>>belly up to the bar for the 7000 because of its enhanced performance
>>characteristics, the Shared Replicators business concept is an interesting
>>one that will allow smaller companies to take advantage of the same
>>capabilities without needing to cost-justify the whole $800,000. The idea
>>similar to the advantages that one gets from using a fab shop (i.e. service
>>bureau) but with some additional advantages related to actual, partial
>>ownership versus merely contracting time on the machine. My guess is that
>>would be similar to the difference between having a time-share deal in a
>>resort versus staying in a hotel. There will be pros and cons of each way
>>doing business.
>> These comments are based on my reading of Ron Jones' several postings
>>this list in the last couple of months. I have not been privy to the Shared
>>Replicators business plan, nor am I affiliated in any way with the company.
>> Ross Perot became the richest man in America (at one time) by starting
>>company (EDS) that provided time sharing on mainframe computers. Perot's
>>business model was quite different from both Jones' and from a fab shop's.
>>Perot bought time on computers owned by large companies and resold that
>>to smaller companies. It was a different business model, but its intended
>>impact was similar to that of both the fab shop and Shared Replicators:
>>reduce the cost of ownership of expensive new technology, thereby making it
>>accessible to a broader base of users. I'm looking forward to seeing how
>>this works out.
>>Best regards,
>>Marshall Burns
>>Ennex Corporation, Los Angeles, USA, (310) 824-8700
>>For more information about the rp-ml, see
>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 - 22:52:32 EEST