Second Hand Epic M

[Elsie N]

Ferrari does.

Just curious... in what way?

 

[Johnny Friday]

Lot of assumptions in this thread. There is a TERMS OF SALE clause that all M owners must sign. Nothing is referred to in the contract about limiting or prohibiting the sale of your red. I imagine that line would not be crossed due to "restraint of trade" issues. And, i imagine or would like to assume that red is focused on much bigger things like R&D or getting quantity of X's out there than worrying about three or four or ten or twenty M's being sold. And why would they? Just more hype and controversy and free press for the camera and company. To assume that red has a feed on each m owner and awaiting their feedback is a bit presumptuous. I'm sure they get that on set enough on features....and from a select few of early m's/tatoos. At this point, make cameras, sell cameras, make salaries and get as many cameras sold to support a profitable business. as someone pointed out earlier....this is really just "noise" at this point. I'll bet RED is going to sell as many M's as possible at this point. Time to get cash flow. Kind of been stagnent recently with the slow down and chain of supply keeping cameras from moving out the door. So again, why would red care about cameras being sold second hand now? I think it adds to the mystery of M and sure is interesting to see what it trades for with limited quantity at this point.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Not that I want to spill all the details of the M sales agreement, but there is no re-sale restrictions of any sort. You're agreeing that the camera is in beta state, and that you won't do stupid things with power on 3D rigs and whatnot (which could fry any camera). It's just a camera and a piece of equipment, in time many M's will be re-sold or change hands in various ways. At this stage in the game though, I personally would want RED at arm's length on any such purchase to make sure I would have their support if I bought an M from someone else. There are still a lot of unanswered questions (and a lot of assumptions made in this thread), that are issues which should be discussed with RED. I know, I would definitely pause on buying a second-hand M until I knew what would happen with the 2-year warranty, official ownership transfer and continued support.

 

[Erik Franzén]

Why on earth would any current day EPIC-M user sell their camera when people are screaming to get their hands on buying one of 'em? Unless you were a shady trader and not a shooter, that is. Which no EPIC-M owner is going to be...

 

[L. Langer]

Just curious... in what way?

Under their current purchase agreement, you have to give them first crack at buying your vehicle if you choose to resell it within a certain period of time. They implemented the policy because there's a huge grey market for their vehicles and the sale prices are often significantly higher than the prices Ferrari dealerships will agree to, which affects Ferrari profits because they don't see a cent of that money and because more people buy Ferrari cars from owners or third-party exotic car dealerships/brokers than the authorized Ferrari dealers.

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

So again, why would red care about cameras being sold second hand now?

I don't think RED cares, as you say. I agree completely... - my point is that the buyer should care and be able to know exactly what it is they are buying. I imagine that it will be similar to re-assigning a RED ONE. But no one has that information yet, at least not publicly. This thread may let RED know that it is time to clarify the process, if cameras are changing hands and folks are asking questions. I do think, as Jeff says, that RED will be smart about keeping these second-hand owners close until all features are enabled, though - too much FUD gets spread through ignorance.

 

[Greg M]

Why on earth would any current day EPIC-M user sell their camera when people are screaming to get their hands on buying one of 'em? Unless you were a shady trader and not a shooter, that is. Which no EPIC-M owner is going to be...

I agree...seems odd. You would have to shoot me to get either of mine. (no ideas please)

 

[Elsie N]

Under their current purchase agreement, you have to give them first crack at buying your vehicle if you choose to resell it within a certain period of time. They implemented the policy because there's a huge grey market for their vehicles and the sale prices are often significantly higher than the prices Ferrari dealerships will agree to, which affects Ferrari profits because they don't see a cent of that money and because more people buy Ferrari cars from owners or third-party exotic car dealerships/brokers than the authorized Ferrari dealers.

That sort of agreement makes sense. And I wouldn't blame RED if they had made the same condition a part of agreeing to sell a party an Epic M.

Like Johnny said, apparently they didn't want to be bothered.

 

[Elsie N]

I agree...seems odd. You would have to shoot me to get mine.

If I had one, same here... unless you mean shoot me with bullets and not a camera? THAT's a whole different decision.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

I want to clear up a couple things about The "second hand Epic M" for sale. Again for obvious reasons the seller will NOT ever be named by me. This camera is being used on a project and was bought for a project, as Michael has guessed might be the case. It is not for sale now, but will be when the project is finished, probably after Epic X's are delivering. It will not be sold at a premium, the seller is not trying to make a buck, just recoup some bucks. The buyer, me, considers himself part of the "family" and is on the stage 2 list, and is planning on being on the stage 3 list too. I am sure I will not be the only Red owner to be offered a deal like this in the future. I am pretty sure there will be other Epic Ms available for sale in the future by private parties. If Epic Xs are available at a lower price and demend is still high for Epic M, then you'll see some want to trade down and get some money back. I wouldnt be surprised to see Epic Ms in the future sell for less then they were bought for, pay $58K use it on a couple of productions for 6 months, sell it for $48K, buy an Epic x for $28K. A big increase in supply will soften the demand and the price.

This makes more sense, and I'm sure if you had posted this in the original starting post, many replies would had been different, including mine...

 

[Robert Frank]

We are required to provide feedback -there are still some features not yet enabled...so it is in essence a Tattoo stage. As i respect the confidentiality of Red's terms of purchase contract, I won't say anymore until officially sanctioned to do so.

I thought the M program was also intended to be an offering to the original early adopter "believers", giving them a chance to acquire a groundbreaking, industry shaking, paradigm shifting camera before anyone else, with the understanding that these owners would in return provide real world feedback, bug reports, and contribute to the knowledge base on REDUser. The hand picked nature of EPIC-M buyers by RED, and that some features might not be fully enabled yet, along with feedback to RED, was why I mentioned that I thought "flipping" EPIC-M cameras was not in the "spirit of the program", whether explicitly allowed or not.


I'm not in the loop here, but this was my impression of what the EPIC-M program was about. Of course this is completely up to RED, and perhaps I missed information about the EPIC-M program shifting to being available to anyone who wants to buy one.

All that said, I'm in Stage 3 and personally I'm OK either way, I don't have any agenda, and am patiently waiting my turn. This thread seems to be mostly about hypothetical scenarios anyway.

 

[michael zaletel]

Not sure who in their right mind would sell an EPIC X for $28k anytime in the next year. The cost of the body including accessories on the stage program exceeds $28k and demand will likely restrict supply of some of the accessories.

My prediction...

Mint EPIC-X Stage 2 Packages will go for as high as $40k as soon as they are an in-hand sale instead of advance reserve.
Mint EPIC-M Packages could go for as high as $80k if a major feature loses or requires a body and has no other choice.

I think everyone is severely underestimating both the demand for EPIC and overestimating the ability of RED to satisfy the demand for all the related necessary accessories even if they are able to satisfy demand for the bodies.

I hope to keep my EPIC until I'm 110. I want to take "Rendering Obsolecense Obsolete" to the extreme!

-michael zaletel

 

[Robert Frank]

I'm asking this out of curiosity... not to make a point.

Are there other companies that sell physical hardware items and retain control of what the buyer can do with that hardware? I know there are software companies that sell licenses for their apps, but I can't think of a hardware item where the company dictates terms of ownership (other than RED with the R-1, but that was due to rewards given to loyal customers... a carrot backed up by a stick of losing those rewards if "sold" before taking ownership of their Epic). Someone help me out here.

I bought a very high end audio interface years ago as a pre-order. It was paid in full in advance, and took about a year to get through the beta stage into final release. The benefit for early pre-order buyers was a significantly lower price, and the ability to get a groundbreaking tool before anyone else, that changed the way I worked, and became a strong selling point for clients to use my services.

Sometime later, due to the success of the first product and feedback from professional users, a second product was released. If you were an original pre-order buyer of the first product you were offered a very significantly lower "loyalty appreciation" price and the opportunity to get the new interface before they were available to the rest of the world.

This happened an astounding third time. I bought all three and am extremely happy with the devices that continue to be improved with free firmware upgrades and a recent reasonably priced DSP upgrade.


The second and third pre-orders were only available to original buyers and in all three cases to get the pre-order price and early delivery you had to agree to NOT sell the unit for ONE YEAR from the time of delivery.

 

[Scott Crawley]

When I mention continued secrecy, it is the pre-release NDA kind of secrecy that I am referring to, not a conspiracy theory. I tried to make that pretty clear. Sorry if it wasn't

I don't think there is any secrecy - there is a parts shortage, that's not a secret - the parts can be located, but they can only be purchased individuallly.

That is why M is available while X is in a holding pattern - how many times a day is RED supposed to continue to repeat this?

They can't make the X cams until they can find a source for parts which allows them to HIT THE ORIGINAL PRICE TARGET for the X -

I'm sure they are working madly to make this happen, their reputation depends on it -

Are they happy that there is a huge pent-up -M demand while they wait? i'm sure they are....because NOT selling cameras on their planned economy of scale means RED is not making money - cuz they sure aren't selling many RED ONEs while this holding pattern exists.

I mean, really, think about it, instead of letting the conspiracy brain rule the day. They need to sell stuff to keep their business running, and what they have to sell is M cams. So let them sell some cameras while they work out supply chain issues....

No one has a higher stake in getting these X cameras out the door than RED - doing it on their intended economies of scale means market domination, you think they don't want that?

I have no doubt they are doing everything they can to move as many cameras as possible, bottom line, but they are a little stuck -

RED has limited choices here - they can sell M cameras and make a few bucks, or they raise X prices and have everyone angry with them, or they can delay the X camera while working out the supply issues and have everyone suspicious of them.

There is a bottleneck here, that is all - no secrecy.

As I watch the dollar collapse and inflation soaring, I don't envy RED trying to fulfill on promises they made over a year ago, based on price points that were in reach, at that point. And why did they do this? So that they could give us enhanced features, like HDRx - and now they are having to swallow a wad of negativity for it.

Imagine if you were a gas station owner selling gas futures one year ago, for last year's gas prices, which you had to honor today - you'd be screwed. But you might find a little relief selling gas at cost to people who had not purchased the contract but still were willing to pay for gas at existing prices.

It's not a perfect analogy, but I'm sure the parts shortage has created a similar set of circumstances. It makes a lot more sense than secrecy...

 

[Scott Crawley]

Why on earth would any current day EPIC-M user sell their camera when people are screaming to get their hands on buying one of 'em? Unless you were a shady trader and not a shooter, that is. Which no EPIC-M owner is going to be...

If you were buying for short term use (in effect, a cost effective long term rental) then it makes perfect sense, especially when 100% recovery is possible. If work is complete and the company is dissolving, then liquidation of assets is required. I don't see anything shady in the practice. It all depends upon individual needs and priorities.

 

[Phil Jagger]

Why on earth would any current day EPIC-M user sell their camera when people are screaming to get their hands on buying one of 'em? Unless you were a shady trader and not a shooter, that is. Which no EPIC-M owner is going to be...

For some people buying something is only a business transaction. While it's for sure everyone who has one (Epic) is super, super frothing on it ,for some business people all it is is a tool for them to get what they need for a certain amount of time, then it can be moved on and replaced if need be down the track. While alot of us here could never imagine selling a camera of this steed, some wouldn't even blink at the notion.

 

[Johnny Friday]

For some people buying something is only a business transaction. While it's for sure everyone who has one (Epic) is super, super frothing on it ,for some business people all it is is a tool for them to get what they need for a certain amount of time, then it can be moved on and replaced if need be down the track. While alot of us here could never imagine selling a camera of this steed, some wouldn't even blink at the notion.

.....i remember when RED was the "thing"....now it's Epic M, tomrrow X with monstro and so on. RED has made an incredible tool for us....and as much as i love my RED MX....adios, and soon my M will be adios....or maybe in a few months....when my X's arrive. BUT, bottom line for me at this time is that it's a TOOL. And this tool allows me to do things that other tools can't. Am i attached to it? Not really in the sense that it is a valuable and sought after tool that gives me an edge....when that edge is gone, move on to the next tool. I'm sure that's easy enough put into perspective. RED products keep gettting better and i'm sure most of us will leave the old tools behind OR sell them when they are not needed. IN case of M.....when job's done, why not sell it and get next item or if not using it, why sit on the shelf and depreciate? I also don't see anything wrong with selling it once you are done with it.
...and goes w/out saying.....thanks for the TOOLS RED!

 

[Brad Webb]

If someone has fully paid for their EPIC - M I don't see any reason why they couldn't sell it. It's their camera, they can do whatever they want with it.

I'm sure anyone who currently owns an EPIC didn't buy one with the intention of selling it, but stuff happens. Sometimes life just shits on you and everything in your life has to change. There are an infinite number of reasons why someone could want (or need) to sell their EPIC-M. Maybe someone offered them $100K for it, maybe they need a kidney transplant, maybe their girlfriend is pregnant, maybe they can't afford the loan payments anymore, or maybe they have 2 EPIC-Ms. Regardless it shouldn't matter. You bought it, it's yours.

 

[Mike Seymour]

I get the problem with buying and selling at a profit - and I have NO intention of selling - none. But it is my camera - I can and should be able to do what I want with it, sure buying it just to resell would be bad, but other than that - if you own a car you own the car - sell it dont sell it - it is your car. I am sorry but this seems like a non-issue.
If you buy a camera in good faith and for some reason you choose to sell it - so be it. If RED had a problem with it - I am sure they would not sell you a second one !! You should not have to explain yourself - I can think of a dozen reasons why someone would sell, - company problems, production finished, divorce, illness, over capitalized .... I say it is your business, ( and most of these cameras are bought for business reasons... they are capital items that allow us to earn a living).

Red seem fairly relaxed and normal about this stuff normally. I would be surprised if they said differently.

Just my 2c

Mike

 

[Paul Nordin]

I'm with Mike on this, seems pretty much a no-brainer. Its hard to believe there are 5 pages on this. Must be slow for a lot of people.