and while I am on a rant, let's revisit tigerlynk.
Post# of 17862
Posted On: 09/06/2014 5:07:08 PM
Re: TexasRambler #17210
and while I am on a rant, let's revisit tigerlynk. you are a good engineer. you have posted as much. so, tell me where my thinking is flawed.
tigerlink has less that 3 years left on its patent(s). even if they started on a tigerlynk tomorrow it would most like be a year or more before it could even be in the water at bayano. first, redesign is a must. the current design is over 10 years old. also the current long-arm version could only lift 2.5 tons. the trees being talked about are much bigger so either redesign or make multiple cuts on a tree. well multiple cuts means more time, less trees pulled, and possible less revenue because the boards are too short.
and second, anyone can come in and make a small change to the design and bypass the patent. Remember the HP inkjet printer series? the little ink cartridge? HP tried to protect its manufactur with patents, and mostly failed. one company I had a small association with showed me how extending a little plastic tab, that had nothing to do with the function, allowed them to get around a patent. I didn't agree with the concept. but that didn't matter. the company manufactured and sold bunches of ink cartridges.
And this is just two reasons.
Folks, to have any chance at salvaging our money here, we have to get peter and company to focus on the one thing. If they cannot or will not, while joking before I am not now. I do think there is plenty of money to be made harvesting underwater trees. Alana has proven that. It does not have to be with peter and co.
tex
tigerlink has less that 3 years left on its patent(s). even if they started on a tigerlynk tomorrow it would most like be a year or more before it could even be in the water at bayano. first, redesign is a must. the current design is over 10 years old. also the current long-arm version could only lift 2.5 tons. the trees being talked about are much bigger so either redesign or make multiple cuts on a tree. well multiple cuts means more time, less trees pulled, and possible less revenue because the boards are too short.
and second, anyone can come in and make a small change to the design and bypass the patent. Remember the HP inkjet printer series? the little ink cartridge? HP tried to protect its manufactur with patents, and mostly failed. one company I had a small association with showed me how extending a little plastic tab, that had nothing to do with the function, allowed them to get around a patent. I didn't agree with the concept. but that didn't matter. the company manufactured and sold bunches of ink cartridges.
And this is just two reasons.
Folks, to have any chance at salvaging our money here, we have to get peter and company to focus on the one thing. If they cannot or will not, while joking before I am not now. I do think there is plenty of money to be made harvesting underwater trees. Alana has proven that. It does not have to be with peter and co.
tex
(0)
(0)