Would you buy this scope?

[Dobermann]

I understand what you’re saying, but it’s called risk, and acceptance of it is a cornerstone of capitalism. Businesses assume the risk, not pass it off to the consumer. Consumers shouldn’t be so gullible so as to allow this practice to proliferate.

I'll play ... but shouldn't we customers, who have wanted and demanded this product for years be allowed to give our money in advance to S2H to ensure this scope becomes a reality? In some ways, one could argue that we're nearly beholden to, because we demanded it ... otherwise, we increased the risk for them.

 

[pattimusprime22]

I'll play ... but shouldn't we customers, who have wanted and demanded this product for years be allowed to give our money in advance to S2H to ensure this scope becomes a reality? In some ways, one could argue that we're nearly beholden to, because we demanded it ... otherwise, we increased the risk for them.

We are allowed to. We as customers can assume some of the risk as a means of expediting the production of the scope. We're encouraging a business to produce something by giving them a risk free loan.

Seems like this is becoming more normal with businesses launching things on Kickstarter. The difference there is that the early purchasers (lenders) are getting a discounted product when they are early buyers on Kickerstarter.

 

[Dobermann]

We are allowed to. We as customers can assume some of the risk as a means of expediting the production of the scope. We're encouraging a business to produce something by giving them a risk free loan.

Seems like this is becoming more normal with businesses launching things on Kickstarter. The difference there is that the early purchasers (lenders) are getting a discounted product when they are early buyers on Kickerstarter.

Exactly. I don't 'follow' what's on Kickstarter, but have scored some very, very, innovative and well-made things that used Kickstarter campaigns - these were made by true innovators/mavericks who had a vision and just wanted it done well ... quite the opposite of a lot of dominant corporate ethos.

Their ideas spread by word-of-mouth, we effectively crowdsourced the funding, and allowed a product to come to market that would never have made it via the existing models. Old textbook economic and marketing theory are out of date.

 

[fwafwow]

@fwafwow - if you continue in this discourse, you may require a prophylactic. May I propose the following:

I think this video also gives context to much of what @Formidilosus has posted about engineers here over the years ...

I’m not an engineer, so I have no excuse. I started the video but didn’t get very far.

 

[SDHNTR]

we increased the risk for them.

No. We did not increase any risk whatsoever. The same business risk was always there. Always has been when any company brings something to market. Those who have enough confidence in their product and their ability to deliver it and market it are unafraid of such risk. Then on the other side, the investors who bear the risk deserve loan repayment or equity stake as compensation. And investors also generally expect a track record of positive prior performance. This is neither. This is just hope.

 

[Dobermann]

I’m not an engineer, so I have no excuse. I started the video but didn’t get very far.

Just to be clear, the prophylactic wasn't due to your arguments, but what you were up against ...

 

[Formidilosus]

Fair point, for those willing to be scammed.

Do you know what a scam is?


You have either genuinely turned into a troll, or you have some personal issue going on. You have continually gotten more out of reality with what you write in the last year or two.

 

[SDHNTR]

Do you know what a scam is?


You have either genuinely turned into a troll, or you have some personal issue going on. You have continually gotten more out of reality with what you write in the last year or two.

It’s fun.

 

[Cmack0102]

I know we all appreciate the financial advice, but I would assume the majority of the people monitoring this 108 page thread would like a chance to use this scope this hunting season. We all trust the testers of this scope, and we know we won’t get it until it does what it’s been designed to do.

I’d be willing to put down $1000 and give up $20 of interest in my savings account to have a chance to hunt with it this year. If they need more time to get it right, so be it. I gave a loan to people making something I want, and I want to prove that I’ll be back for the 2-8x when they make it.

I’ve been in a lot of website refresh races for drops, and I’d gladly pre-pay to avoid that and guarantee that I’m getting one in the first shipment.

If that was offered and enough of us took them up on it, the initial order could be bigger and more of these could be in people’s hands this fall.

 

[Dobermann]

It’s fun.

Self-acknowledged trolling noted.

But this post:

And investors also generally expect a track record of positive prior performance. This is neither. This is just hope.

... it might be worth remembering that you're effectively having a conversation in @Ryan Avery's virtual living room ...

 

[BjornF16]

@fwafwow - if you continue in this discourse, you may require a prophylactic. May I propose the following:

I think this video also gives context to much of what @Formidilosus has posted about engineers here over the years ...

 

[cuerro viejo]

No. We did not increase any risk whatsoever. The same business risk was always there. Always has been when any company brings something to market. Those who have enough confidence in their product and their ability to deliver it and market it are unafraid of such risk. Then on the other side, the investors who bear the risk deserve loan repayment or equity stake as compensation. And investors also generally expect a track record of positive prior performance. This is neither. This is just hope.

what was Kuiu?

 

[Boltgun]

prove that I’ll be back for the 2-8x when they make it.

There’s going to be a 2-8x?? Make it 18oz and I’m totally in. Would love to upgrade my hog rifle scope.

 

[prm]

I may end up here:

https://www.eurooptic.com/trijicon-credo-2-10x36-ffp-w-red-mrad-precision-tree-30mm-matte-black-riflescope?srsltid=AfmBOorQmCVCBmxFB6LKGMVXzc0v6zTdSb20Px4d3w6IkwpdDWfj6Fc_

I had one. Reticle was not for me. I really, really, dislike tree reticles. The 2-12 NX6 would tick all the boxes if I didn't care about the reticle. Until a better package comes along my SWFA 6Xs work just fine. And I can buy 6 of them for one NX6! (If they were actually in stock).

Mention of a S2H 2-8 is great. That’s really what I want.

 

[JDZ]

and I won’t lie about anything if it does. I wouldn’t do so firstly because I’m not a ****; secondly- it goes against the entire reason that I started posting here: to get people information to force change

Great conversation.

Without regard for cost, what existing scope is better than the new S2H scope?

 

[Dobermann]

Great conversation.

Without regard for cost, what existing scope is better than the new S2H scope?

"Better" for what application? Using what criteria?

 

[Speaks]

Its far from a scam unless there is intent to not deliver or there is knowledge of something impeding delivery that is not disclosed.

In this case aside from making any difference on if the product gets made the customer is also buying a guaranteed item from the first batch. The 2nd batch will likely take much longer.

Give me the option of having to pay attention to when they go on sale, be sitting at my computer at the right time, and then maybe get one or maybe not. And compare that to letting me order in advance and get one with no hassle right when they come in, at the cost of only the potential returns on investing $1k for a few months. Thats really not a bad deal.

Im really not desperate for a new scope right now so not sure I would do it for this. I would do it for two of the rokstock lites right now though. I would also do it for the 2-8x32 if that was the one coming out right now.

Its not a scam, its a voluntary business transaction that you do not have interest in partaking in. Others might find it to be a great value.

 

[Formidilosus]

Great conversation.

Without regard for cost, what existing scope is better than the new S2H scope?

Better for what?

 

[Ryan Avery]

scam /skăm/

noun​

1. A fraudulent business scheme; a swindle.
2. Fraudulent deal.
3. A fraudulent business scheme.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition • More at Wordnik

Google is your friend. Check it out before you use words you don’t understand.

We have a huge stock thread and have sold over 1,000 stocks. Tell me who has been ripped off? Just cause you don’t like it doesn’t mean it’s a scam or fraud.

@SDHNTR

 

[JDZ]

Better for what?

I’m asking what scope is better for the same intended use you have for the S2H scope if cost is not a factor?

If the overall the answer is “none”, because that’s why you’re building this one, then we want to hear it from you.

If that’s not the answer, then we want to hear that also.

Maybe address specific feature comparisons in your answer, such as glass quality/clarity, reticle, turrets, eye relief, and such.