How much a ML beating metal detector should cost?

[Aziz]

How much a ML beating metal detector should cost?

Any serious comments????

Aziz

[WM6]

How much a ML beating metal detector should cost?

Any serious comments????

Aziz

No more than existend cheapest ML challenger GARRETT prospecting PI metal detector INFINIUM LS.

Or you mean "ML beating" in overpricing?

But as people say: - First leap, and then say "hop"! -

[Frederick]

How much a ML beating metal detector should cost?

Any serious comments????

Aziz

It wouldn't have to beat a Minelab, close will do. $2000 to $2500 (AUD) will guarantee its success.

[Aziz]

It wouldn't have to beat a Minelab, close will do. $2000 to $2500 (AUD) will guarantee its success.

Thanks for your honest comment Frederick.

But the original question was:
How much should a Minelab beating metal detector cost?

The question is serious. And I'm riding on a wild devil    .
 
Aziz

[bugwhiskers]

How about the current gold price per oz?

[Aziz]

How about the current gold price per oz?

No gold tax or comparison with gold please.
 

Let's assume, the new machine can go 20% deeper than the best ML machine can do.

And let's assume, this is a virtual game only. Your comments won't have any consequences. Where are the brave guys?

How much would you reckon for such a machine?
 

Aziz

[GEORGE]

20% deeper? And good as Minelab in mineralized soil.   Probably $10,000.00 or so I would say.  Probably never happen in my lifetime.  Or at least till the QED is released.

[Aziz]

20% deeper? And good as Minelab in mineralized soil.   Probably $10,000.00 or so I would say.  Probably never happen in my lifetime.  Or at least till the QED is released.

Are you willing to pay $10,000.00 for such a machine?
Please, answer seriously. No consequences. Pure truth.
 
Aziz

PS: Of course in highly mineralized soil/ground. Better GB and DISC than ML machine too.

[FrankMD]

Serioulsy,

I say it should be compete and cost the same as the ML. Think about it. If it cost the same and is 20% deeper than the ML, then no one would buy the ML because it costs less. ML goes under down under. :)

HH

Frank

[Aziz]

Ups... sorry, I have unintentionaly modified the post from Frank.
(I should have pressed the other button).

[Aziz]

Serioulsy,

I say it should be compete and cost the same as the ML. Think about it. If it cost the same and is 20% deeper than the ML, then no one would buy the ML because it costs less. ML goes under down under. :)

HH

Frank

Hi Frank,

your comments makes very much sense mate.

But I do not want to have that ML goes under down under. (I love ML guys! I love other competitors as well.)
 

If I were the developer of such a machine, I rather would force them all to be significantly cheaper (realistic price building).

Where is the price limit for such a machine?
Where is the pain threshold?
Where is the threshold for greed? (Let's assume, I have some greed as well.)
 

Let's play the game further. (Spies are welcome.)
Aziz

PS: Normal thread continues...

[Doug]

Serioulsy,

I say it should be compete and cost the same as the ML. Think about it. If it cost the same and is 20% deeper than the ML, then no one would buy the ML because it costs less. ML goes under down under. :)

HH

Frank

Hi Frank,

your comments makes very much sense mate.

But I do not want to have that ML goes under down under. (I love ML guys! I love other competitors as well.)
 

If I were the developer of such a machine, I rather would force them all to be significantly cheaper (realistic price building).

Where is the price limit for such a machine?
Where is the pain threshold?
Where is the threshold for greed? (Let's assume, I have some greed as well.)
 

Let's play the game further. (Spies are welcome.)
Aziz

PS: Normal thread continues...

ML was beaten for depth on larger nuggets over 30 years ago!
Watch this space!
doug

[Aziz]

ML was beaten for depth on larger nuggets over 30 years ago!
Watch this space!
doug

That's interesting. I'm investing in Coke & Popcorn now.
    
Aziz

[Doug]

ML was beaten for depth on larger nuggets over 30 years ago!
Watch this space!
doug

That's interesting. I'm investing in Coke & Popcorn now.
    
Aziz

Yes and still NO Pi detector could match this performance spec today! Eat your heart out ML!!!!
Watch this space!
doug

[Huego]

Aziz, from my perspective you question needs more clarity. Please allow me to explore it a bit.

Are you asking amateur prospectors what is the maximum they would be willing to pay for a PI that outperforms the current GPX-5000? I assume it is similar, or lower in weight, simpler with better ergonomics, more adaptable, etc.

Amateur Prospectors want the' best bang for their buck’ and prefer to detect alone. I believe most would pay $1500 yet many may pay $10,000 for better performance.

Personally, I would not pay the upper sum of $10K even though I could afford it. (Yet, I know Sawmill and serious prospectors & miners would pay a premium for premium performance. Those who are serious prospectors and can make an income from it would pay top dollar.)  From a business point of view, if customers are willing to spend $6K on a GPX-5000 they will switch to another for the same more or less.

As others have said $1.5K to $2.5K seems affordable to most amateurs, including those who buy used older models. This pricing would reach the greatest number.  Speaking personally, I am also influenced by what I know of the QED and its ethical developer.

So you see, ANY answer depends on WHY the question is being raised. 
Is it to maximise benefit (profit?) for a developer / manufacturer ……or to benefit the amateur prospector (minimum cost, minimum profit to manufacturer) without the advertised promise of riches and glory. I am just saying what others are thinking.

It appears that ML works at the highest price the market will bear with current competition.
If you asking what a manufacturer of such a machine should mark that machine up to I.e. what the profit margin? This is much more complex to answer. Answering such a question needs to consider all the costs, volumes, distribution, warranty, etc and all competition etc.

Huego 

[Doug]

Aziz, from my perspective you question needs more clarity. Please allow me to explore it a bit.

Are you asking amateur prospectors what is the maximum they would be willing to pay for a PI that outperforms the current GPX-5000? I assume it is similar, or lower in weight, simpler with better ergonomics, more adaptable, etc.

Amateur Prospectors want the' best bang for their buck’ and prefer to detect alone. I believe most would pay $1500 yet many may pay $10,000 for better performance.

Personally, I would not pay the upper sum of $10K even though I could afford it. (Yet, I know Sawmill and serious prospectors & miners would pay a premium for premium performance. Those who are serious prospectors and can make an income from it would pay top dollar.)  From a business point of view, if customers are willing to spend $6K on a GPX-5000 they will switch to another for the same more or less.

As others have said $1.5K to $2.5K seems affordable to most amateurs, including those who buy used older models. This pricing would reach the greatest number.  Speaking personally, I am also influenced by what I know of the QED and its ethical developer.

So you see, ANY answer depends on WHY the question is being raised. 
Is it to maximise benefit (profit?) for a developer / manufacturer ……or to benefit the amateur prospector (minimum cost, minimum profit to manufacturer) without the advertised promise of riches and glory. I am just saying what others are thinking.

It appears that ML works at the highest price the market will bear with current competition.
If you asking what a manufacturer of such a machine should mark that machine up to I.e. what the profit margin? This is much more complex to answer. Answering such a question needs to consider all the costs, volumes, distribution, warranty, etc and all competition etc.

Huego 

For some people  $10k or even $20K or more would not be a barrier to them buying a  a new detector that went 20%+ deeper on bigger nuggets over typical GF ground!
doug

[GEORGE]

ML was beaten for depth on larger nuggets over 30 years ago!
Watch this space!
doug

  If it was 30 years ago, why wait to announce it Doug?  I hope it was in mineralized ground and not a air test.  And a hand held unit that a person could swing for a few hours.

  And please don't say it was a early QED!

[Doug]

ML was beaten for depth on larger nuggets over 30 years ago!
Watch this space!
doug

 I hope it was in mineralized ground and not a air test.
  

Yes it was over very mineralized (magnetically viscous) ground!!
doug

[Aziz]

Hi Huego,

thanks for saying what others thinking of only.

Remember: This is a fictitious price finding game only.

The production costs will be very low. Well, the chinese gets only max. $10 per day for their hard work (thanks for globalisation and exploiting cheap human capital resources). Hence, the profit margin is huge, damn huge. My fictitious partners and investors are very very greedy and they want to have a huge profit return. They also have advised me to restrict the depth advantage to only max. 5% (fk'n ba$tard marketing people). Every 18 month, a new and improved version is intended (more bells & whistles, 5% more depth, 5% lower noise).

Let's assume, the fictitious new detector is ergononic, smart and easy to use.

Now the interesting question again:
What should the new fictitious detector cost?
It's still beating the best metal detector in the world (5% depth advantage now).


Remember, this is a game only. Has no consequences.
Aziz

[sd2200d digger]

$$$ 5% more than the Minelab - ha ha.