Made in the USA...

[Curt von Badinski]

I couldn't agree more. And another challenge we will face is that people need to learn. If all of the entry level work is offshore today then where will the future veterans come Tomorrow? Perhaps we have to start subsidizing industry and manufacturing *today* as a loss leader on tomorrow's future economic landscape.

Subsidizing technology works when you have smart people in charge of who gets the funding. ARPA was a US government organization that funded ARPANET (the precursor to the internet) with only a million dollars and a 20 minute conversation to work out the specs/details. Thats about $6.5 million in todays dollars. Fast forward to Solyndra.... the government loaned $528 million dollars to kick start solar technology and we have nothing to show for it. I don't think our government has the capacity to know what technology is worth subsidizing and which entity (schools/corporations etc) should receive the funding. Most of the time there is a political angle rather than a honest desire to push innovation and technology forward.

 

[AnthonyFlores]

One of the problems I see is that young vision guns get bought up early by VC's and don't have a chance to take it all the way. Many take the 1st $20M they are offered after a year of work and go to Tahiti.

Jim

I agree 1,000% Jim -- and going to college in Silicon Valley, I saw this mentality often.

It's also one of the reasons why when someone mentioned the possibility of Canon buying Red in another thread, I replied that it was ludicrous. Anybody who thinks you are building this company up for a quick sell and another billion or two doesn't understand Red at all. There's something way deeper here -- yes, money is important for any business -- but this is clearly also a labor of love, the chance to really change the industry (and world) and as you've cited repeatedly here, the opportunity to make a statement about what's possible for American businesses and workforce.

I'm glad Red is growing and here to stay -- and will never get diluted, misguided or ruined by outsiders who don't "get" it.

 

[Bjørn Vermo]

I don't really understand how we are discussing if bringing business to the US is a good idea. What's the alternative?
Automation kills jobs, we know that for decades know. That is a totally different matter. Let's get back to the fact that RED has decided to make its brand pure "made in USA". And they are proud. I can understand that! Unfortunately that is an exception in the business-world today.

...

No, quite the opposite. Automation creates jobs. That is one lesson going all the way back to the Spinning Jenny, only the Luddites did not get it. Henry Ford proved it big time.
Financial acrobats kill jobs, which we have seen recent examples of in several countries.

The thing you must understand is that if you live in a high cost country, the only way to leverage your advantages is to make better products than everybody else. RED obviously understand that.

It was penny-pinching and quantity over quality which ruined the brand of "US made" in the seventies. We first noticed it with poorly built cars, but soon the good image was tarnished and we started to look for German or Japanese products of higher quality. It is high time that somebody polishes and restores that old image!

 

[John Bannister]

I am not an American, I am a kiwi but I lived and worked in t he USA from 1999 to 2010. The Pentagon was 2 miles from my home in Arlington when the sky fell; I visited the Home Depot one hour before that fatal shot was taken from the boot of a car in Fairfax. I became a volunteer Fire-fighter for Fairfax County; I supported the Capitals and the Eagles. I have supported the US Military to such a degree that I was presented a folded American Flag on the flight deck of the Midway for going above and beyond the call of duty in my support of American service men and women at home and abroad.

I mention all of this because I have an opinion on this tread and I feel the need to "qualify" it as an "outsider"

I am an Operations specialist, and at the risk of sounding like bighead, I am a bloody good one. The recession that hit the USA swept across Arizona like a hurricane. The real-estate industry imploded and we were a manufacturing company that supported a branch of that industry. At the time I took the appointment with a Tempe based Company they had 180 employees and were drowning. The period that would follow would be the most challenging of my professional career. As a Kiwi I have a different approach to business than I discovered during my time in the US and although it won’t be true for all business there did seem to be a curtain way of thinking that was hard to change. I will be honest at this point and tell you that I was not appointed to save this business; I was brought in to protect the owner’s investment from further loss. I am proud to say that I was able to not only protect the investment, but keep the doors open and good people employed for a year and a half beyond the project life expectancy. To this day believe in my heart that the business could have been saved, but the “poison” that resided at the executive level and their inability to change their way of thinking eventually doomed the company. The number one reason for the businesses failure was: THE ABILITY TO BE BRAVE. Other reasons I fought with the entire time were:


Failure to recognize the threat and react early enough and as a whole.

Inability to be flexible and change the business model to match current environment.

Continually wasting time and money trying to outsource rather than using the resources and people at hand.

Failing to recognise the skills and abilities of the employees and therefore not using them to the full advantage of the company.

Using 5 people to do the work of one.

Failure to control overspending on budgeted projects and plug the leaks in the existing structure.

What I couldn’t understand was why people refused to change. Why didn’t the want tot react to what was going on around them? Why did they refuse to use good people in other ways? Why did they look abroad for cheaper manufacturing process instead of maximising the efficiency of the plant already developed and at hand?

WHY DID THEY REFUSE TO CHANGE?

I put the lock on the doors of that company on its final day; I was part of laying off 180 good people. When I turned to go to my car, I wept. Why? Cause it didn’t have to be that way. The people with the ears weren’t listing and those that were told how to survived refused to recognize their impending demise and died regardless.

The USA is a mighty country and can lead the world, but there are many that are fucking it up. You must be brave, don’t be afraid to embrace change, be flexible, look at the resources you have right in front of your nose, think out of the box and work hard.

I love the USA, I hope one day to return. I know it will be better for all it has been through.

My 0.02 cents

 

[Elsie N]

One of the problems I see is that young vision guns get bought up early by VC's and don't have a chance to take it all the way. Many take the 1st $20M they are offered after a year of work and go to Tahiti.

Jim

This begs the question... has anyone tried to buy up RED?

 

[Jannard]

The "big guys" have barely acknowledged our existence, let alone thought about acquiring us for defensive reasons. No offer, however, would be well received.

Jim

This begs the question... has anyone tried to buy up RED?

 

[Antonio Forjaz]

Jim, please don't sell...

 

[Eric Lange]

I am not an American, I am a kiwi but I lived and worked in t he USA from 1999 to 2010. The Pentagon was 2 miles from my home in Arlington when the sky fell; I visited the Home Depot one hour before that fatal shot was taken from the boot of a car in Fairfax. I became a volunteer Fire-fighter for Fairfax County; I supported the Capitals and the Eagles. I have supported the US Military to such a degree that I was presented a folded American Flag on the flight deck of the Midway for going above and beyond the call of duty in my support of American service men and women at home and abroad.

I mention all of this because I have an opinion on this tread and I feel the need to "qualify" it as an "outsider"

I am an Operations specialist, and at the risk of sounding like bighead, I am a bloody good one. The recession that hit the USA swept across Arizona like a hurricane. The real-estate industry imploded and we were a manufacturing company that supported a branch of that industry. At the time I took the appointment with a Tempe based Company they had 180 employees and were drowning. The period that would follow would be the most challenging of my professional career. As a Kiwi I have a different approach to business than I discovered during my time in the US and although it won’t be true for all business there did seem to be a curtain way of thinking that was hard to change. I will be honest at this point and tell you that I was not appointed to save this business; I was brought in to protect the owner’s investment from further loss. I am proud to say that I was able to not only protect the investment, but keep the doors open and good people employed for a year and a half beyond the project life expectancy. To this day believe in my heart that the business could have been saved, but the “poison” that resided at the executive level and their inability to change their way of thinking eventually doomed the company. The number one reason for the businesses failure was: THE ABILITY TO BE BRAVE. Other reasons I fought with the entire time were:


Failure to recognize the threat and react early enough and as a whole.

Inability to be flexible and change the business model to match current environment.

Continually wasting time and money trying to outsource rather than using the resources and people at hand.

Failing to recognise the skills and abilities of the employees and therefore not using them to the full advantage of the company.

Using 5 people to do the work of one.

Failure to control overspending on budgeted projects and plug the leaks in the existing structure.

What I couldn’t understand was why people refused to change. Why didn’t the want tot react to what was going on around them? Why did they refuse to use good people in other ways? Why did they look abroad for cheaper manufacturing process instead of maximising the efficiency of the plant already developed and at hand?

WHY DID THEY REFUSE TO CHANGE?

I put the lock on the doors of that company on its final day; I was part of laying off 180 good people. When I turned to go to my car, I wept. Why? Cause it didn’t have to be that way. The people with the ears weren’t listing and those that were told how to survived refused to recognize their impending demise and died regardless.

The USA is a mighty country and can lead the world, but there are many that are fucking it up. You must be brave, don’t be afraid to embrace change, be flexible, look at the resources you have right in front of your nose, think out of the box and work hard.

I love the USA, I hope one day to return. I know it will be better for all it has been through.

My 0.02 cents

Hey I used to live in Arlington too.

The one thing I do to keep myself sane is I work with horses (have to get up bloody early in the morning); sort of in my blood. I train and coach all kinds of riders (mainly dressage) from beginner to Grand Prix (for quite some time), but I have to cut back (majorly). But I have found over the years that it’s almost impossible to get someone to change their mind about a horse (with every will and best intention in the world). [you learn a lot about nature and human nature that way]. A horse and rider combination that has developed for years, it’s like their child/baby. However, I do stick to my guns never waiver from the truest and most classical principals. Eventually after a few years the penny drops, with a client etc. and THEN it is possible to “unlock” all kinds of latent potential. They always regret the two years they completely lost, before they just begin to understand what it was they needed to understand. It requires great faith patience and time, something that is not really available in the “business” paradigm.

Unfortunately in the business situations that you describe, you don’t have two or three years to “educate” the thinking, structure and decision making behind an entire business; its simply too late. It’s very hard to change one mind, much harder to get substantial agreement amongst an entrenched “burocracy”. Even if you get more than half the people on your side you are always going to run into trouble. It’s a very emotional thing, as you describe.

Change is hard!

I am very grateful for Jim having the patience to lay things out crumb by crumb to follow digest and understand, step by step.

Unfortunately human nature being what it is if you say this is what we need to change, immediately this generates a negative thought process that can be hard to overcome and people instinctively dig in their heels. Sometime you have say don’t do that!..., but that seems to be one of the hardest things for people to accept.

[The thing that’s interesting about classical horsemanship is this was all figured out in about 340 BC and written down by Xenophon (a great general) that figured out that you actually had to be nice to the horses and work in a harmonious way (rather than beat the sh*t out of the horse). This was the Greek cavalry and they were not inclined to f*ck about. If the Cavalry didn’t function properly then they would lose the battle, and their families (wives and children would be enslaved) and they did a lot of battles! Even today (when this is well understood) and the nature and being of the horse has not changed, people STILL seek to find the quick short cut to the detriment of everything else.

Human nature IS hard to change…]

 

[David P Johnson]

You couldn't have better misrepresented my post if you had deliberately tried.
...
The dystopian outcome though is that capital consolidates in a few and we slip into a two caste system. I don't think that'll happen but I do think we should start the seeds of that future today by rethinking how we reward innovation and intellectual property in a post scarcity economy where most of our goods are digital.

The dystopian outcome though is that capital consolidates in a few and we slip into a two caste system......

There is disruption, no doubt, but the impacts are localized, and temporary. US wage growth has stalled; true. In that same instant, in China alone 400,000,000 people have been pulled up out of extreme poverty in the past 20 years....which leaves another 800,000,000 left...in China. The rest of Asia and the developing world is being lifted by the same rising tide. You need to ponder the justice (or injustice) of this. Who's losing exactly? At what cost?

Over 1 BILLION of the world's poor, no longer are. When skilled labor becomes scarce, wages rise. This is immediately visible in the developing world. Wages in SE China are rising at 15-20% a year. Employee turnover is high, as companies poach workers from each other. This erodes Chinese companies to compete. They move wages offshore. Wages in new centers rise. Companies find new labor, by providing training. This increases standards of education and health and human services, and everything else.

Have you actually been to the developing world? This is not an academic argument. It is immediately observable.

Are there fewer poor in the world, today? Yes. Do the poor have better access to support than they did just 20 years ago? Yes. Are there more wealthy people in the world? Yes. Does the world population have a higher standard of living? Yes.

Do these emerging economies buy things from the G8. Yes. Is there an equal playing field between "us" & "them"? No. And innovation (like RED) maintain and grow a competitive edge.

Inconsistency of results does not = failure or portend doom.

 

[Eric Lange]

The dystopian outcome though is that capital consolidates in a few and we slip into a two caste system......

There is disruption, no doubt, but the impacts are localized, and temporary. US wage growth has stalled; true. In that same instant, in China alone 400,000,000 people have been pulled up out of extreme poverty in the past 20 years....which leaves another 800,000,000 left...in China. The rest of Asia and the developing world is being lifted by the same rising tide. You need to ponder the justice (or injustice) of this. Who's losing exactly? At what cost?

Over 1 BILLION of the world's poor, no longer are. When skilled labor becomes scarce, wages rise. This is immediately visible in the developing world. Wages in SE China are rising at 15-20% a year. Employee turnover is high, as companies poach workers from each other. This erodes Chinese companies to compete. They move wages offshore. Wages in new centers rise. Companies find new labor, by providing training. This increases standards of education and health and human services, and everything else.

Have you actually been to the developing world? This is not an academic argument. It is immediately observable.

Are there fewer poor in the world, today? Yes. Do the poor have better access to support than they did just 20 years ago? Yes. Are there more wealthy people in the world? Yes. Does the world population have a higher standard of living? Yes.

Do these emerging economies buy things from the G8. Yes. Is there an equal playing field between "us" & "them"? No. And innovation (like RED) maintain and grow a competitive edge.

Inconsistency of results does not = failure or portend doom.

It isn’t a level playing field. We didn’t even bother to file patents in China (in 2003) because we knew that there wouldn’t be cat’s chance in hell that we would ever be able to defend them. Even if we were Microsoft. Jim’s message as I understand it is don’t piss away the last of the best resources that the US has left; and make a serious attempt to actually get really productive doing SOMETHING rather than nothing; re-claim what has been lost and then some.

I think in terms of international business law and conduct there is a long long way to go...

If you read through the posts I have spent time in Vietnam and have adopted from there. So I see all sides. Corruption at all levels is hard to work with and work around. I’ve spent time in Guatemala too and the link between corruption and exploitation is absolutely laid bare for all to see and the effect that so called G8 businesses create.

Having the US (right now) piss away its best assets in terms of tallent and intelectual capital etc. is pure madness as far as I can see.

No free lunch here in the US or anywhere else.

Charity and philanthropy can make a hell of difference. With great funds or money comes the power to really help.

Some corporations are philanthropic and some favored (sacred cows) are not.

What can I say, the world is a mess.

Cheers,

Eric

 

[Kris Anderson]

Sorry Eric, I just don't share your (as I perceive it) pessimism.

If the world is a mess, get out there and change it. You don't need wealth, though it helps, of course it helps. It's been my experience that the greatest help and change comes from one on one interaction. One person plus one persone plus one person... and so on. Start with the guy next door to you. See if he needs any help. Mow his lawn. Wash his car. Cook him a meal. Then watch the look on his face as he is inspired to do the same thing for someone else.

A flood starts with a rain drop.

 

[Nikhil Kamkolkar]

If you try to manufacture a commoditized product in the US of A, you are pretty much dead before you start. RED cameras and pretty much everything RED builds is far from that. So this model likely will work for RED.

 

[Denizhan Nacar]

One of the problems I see is that young vision guns get bought up early by VC's and don't have a chance to take it all the way. Many take the 1st $20M they are offered after a year of work and go to Tahiti.

Jim

Any examples?

 

[David Battistella]

The VC money is all about generating money. Passion, people, etc are only useful if it generates dollars. When a company makes a shift into feeding the VC money then often the focus shifts as well.

Let's face it it's pretty hard for young people or a young company to turn away 20 mil. and there aren't alot of people willing to pay 20 million and continue to mentor and nurture that.

At that stage the purchase is either to enhance your enterprise or cut the head off something that threatens you.

In any case some people leave a legacy by creating a fund. I always thought that Derek Sivers, the guy who invented CD baby did it right. He took what he needed, converted the company to a charitable organization sold it for 20 million tax free and uses that 20 million to give grants to support music students.

Is that greedy? No. Is it good? I'm not one to judge that but when a person turns 20 million, money the could have taken themselves, and creates something that has a direct effect on people lives and culture, that's pretty impressive.

David

 

[Eric Lange]

Sorry Eric, I just don't share your (as I perceive it) pessimism.

If the world is a mess, get out there and change it. You don't need wealth, though it helps, of course it helps. It's been my experience that the greatest help and change comes from one on one interaction. One person plus one persone plus one person... and so on. Start with the guy next door to you. See if he needs any help. Mow his lawn. Wash his car. Cook him a meal. Then watch the look on his face as he is inspired to do the same thing for someone else.

A flood starts with a rain drop.

Well Kris, Australia is a nice place, and I’m glad that you don’t share my “pessimism”. I try to think of it a as realism...?

I think the micro loans program is the closest that we will ever get to buying the world a puppy.

So as I said I had adopted my daughter from Vietnam almost ten years ago, love her to bits (I have a bio son too). Years ago we actually tried to set an Orphanage up out there (mainly focused on children that have birth defects from (still) agent orange from the Vietnamese wars), and have been very active in other countries for similar reasons. Basically you could say that been there done that and bought the “T” shirt (made for $0.0003).


So no matter how “noble” the cause or otherwise as soon as you turn up with a dollar in your pocket there are 50 people all lined up that are on the make at every level to get their cut. In a communist country you still have an oppressive and restrictive regime (that has the ultimate power to stop anything), then you have the corrupt higher level officials, then the corrupt local officials and then you have a whole chain of crooks in between. It’s not that folks in these countries are morally bankrupt; it’s just that there is not a system of law that protects the individual or any other entity regardless of size or nationality.


The (Italian)/venetians in the 1300’s had figured out that a very cohesive and strict code of law would HAVE to be set up if “international” commerce and trade was going to be successful and stable and able to grow and prosper. Fast forward to today and the China of today. I have friends and colleagues that are manufacturing relatively simple items (such as machine tools) over there. These are more than widgets but much less than less than the latest ground breaking tech. For real high tech, China is a nightmare as there is no practical system of law that protects or respects intellectual property of any kind. Basically all of your best R&D efforts are basically stolen (period). I.e. they did not pay to develop such technologies in the first place. This is absolute theft, and there is absolutely no recourse what so ever. To add insult to injury a cheap “knock off” is the likely outcome; this is hard enough to defend on US soil, but absolutely impossible in China itself. This is not good. If they had a system that respected IP things would be VERY different.


What Jim is suggesting I think is that US companies DO have a responsibility to hang onto US assets. The reality is that world economics and business go hand in hand (obviously) and also (obviously) political and national security are also directly affected. Anyone that has studied the history of the 20th century even in the most cursory way will understand the link between economic stability and “world” stability and security. Right now the Chinese are holding onto more dollars than they know what the hell to do with. The US is in greater debt than ever before, and has borrowed to a ridiculous degree from China. China has had its eye on Taiwan for several decades now (actually really Jonesing to grab it). Basically if the borrowing and debt situation gets worse then the US will be totally behind the 8 ball; totally powerless to say “Oi, China, you can’t march into Taiwan”; the Chinese will of course, and the US won’t be able to lift a finger in its defense as we owe the Chinese Trillions of dollars....…And we are already up to the neck and maxed out on “perpetual” war in other regions of the world

People talk about the butterfly effect; in essence the way we do business (today) does in fact determine the fate of nations. One might ponder if that should be so or allowed to happen in the first place? Unfortunately it’s a massive double standard that Chinese companies if they wish can file IP in the United Sates and have the benefit of one the world’s best legal systems, and yet if we try to do the same in China, you are absolutely screwed. I think it’s a huge mistake to believe that we are all playing by the same rules,… we are not. If I was Taiwanese I would be very worried right now.

The world is a mess especially in developing countries as there are no real systems of law that protect the individual. I think this is one of the things we take for granted in the US or don’t fully appreciate.


Eric

 

[Elsie N]

...

...China is a nightmare as there is no practical system of law that protects or respects intellectual property of any kind. Basically all of your best R&D efforts are basically stolen (period). I.e. they did not pay to develop such technologies in the first place. This is absolute theft, and there is absolutely no recourse what so ever. To add insult to injury a cheap “knock off” is the likely outcome; this is hard enough to defend on US soil, but absolutely impossible in China itself. This is not good. If they had a system that respected IP things would be VERY different. ...
...


Eric

This part of your post has left me wondering where on earth Epic M 00006 is. I was convinced from the start that camera was purposely stolen. Pity the poor buyer who buys a knockoff Epic. While it may look like an Epic on the outside, it will probably have 1080p guts.

You may scoff at the idea of a knockoff Epic, but it is my understanding there is an Asian pseudo Segway being sold.

 

[Detlev Eller]

One of the problems I see is that young vision guns get bought up early by VC's and don't have a chance to take it all the way. Many take the 1st $20M they are offered after a year of work and go to Tahiti.

Jim

... quite frankly .... i am tempted to do the same .... and buy boatloads of RED gear ... hehe

 

[Eric Lange]

I was raised and educated in the UK, at a very Victorian boarding school. We still had maps on the wall that showed the extent of the “British Empire” (circa 1900), i.e. huge and numerous regions of RED daubed all over the world map. “The Sun never sets on the British Empire”…. [Obviously the “grabbed up” British Empire was not the most politically correct institution in the world at that time but it was by far the most powerful]. So world events with the first and second world war, basically turned a lion into a whimpering mouse in less than 35 years. US manufacturing benefited tremendously by being physically remote and therefore virtually un-bombable.

A bit like the sentiment of what John Bannister was saying in his post. Don’t make the mistake in thinking that the US is this unsinkable battle ship (MCain “the fundamentals of the economy …”, a Lion can be (permanently) reduced to a mouse in a matter of a few decades. The Chinese were at the brunt of British Imperialism (the Chinese still make movies about it today); The Chinese do have more than a handsome collection of axes to grind, and if they see the opportunity they will go for it.

I honestly believe that this is the last chance that the US has to get it right. I think we (the US) have made a substantial number of “market” driven mistakes; time to re-think.

I am very greatful that Jim has taken the time to share his insights and understanding of the ways we need to go.

Ta.

Eric

 

[Eric J Kosinski]

I was raised and educated in the UK, at a very Victorian boarding school. We still had maps on the wall that showed the extent of the “British Empire” (circa 1900), i.e. huge and numerous regions of RED daubed all over the world map. “The Sun never sets on the British Empire”…. [Obviously the “grabbed up” British Empire was not the most politically correct institution in the world at that time but it was by far the most powerful]. So world events with the first and second world war, basically turned a lion into a whimpering mouse in less than 35 years. US manufacturing benefited tremendously by being physically remote and therefore virtually un-bombable.

A bit like the sentiment of what John Bannister was saying in his post. Don’t make the mistake in thinking that the US is this unsinkable battle ship (MCain “the fundamentals of the economy …”, a Lion can be (permanently) reduced to a mouse in a matter of a few decades. The Chinese were at the brunt of British Imperialism (the Chinese still make movies about it today); The Chinese do have more than a handsome collection of axes to grind, and if they see the opportunity they will go for it.

I honestly believe that this is the last chance that the US has to get it right. I think we (the US) have made a substantial number of “market” driven mistakes; time to re-think.

I am very greatful that Jim has taken the time to share his insights and understanding of the ways we need to go.

Ta.

Eric

Here Here !!!

 

[D Fuller]

One of the problems I see is that young vision guns get bought up early by VC's and don't have a chance to take it all the way. Many take the 1st $20M they are offered after a year of work and go to Tahiti.

Jim

I think this is the most important barrier to economic recovery at work today, and it's a real structural problem. A 20-something or 30-something entrepreneur gets offered so much cash that it's hard to refuse, then the company is controlled by people who don't have the passion for the business that grew it. The VCs are interested in harvesting all the money they can as fast as they can, so they look to a "China strategy" to deliver maximum short-term profit margins. Along the way, two things are lost: the business loses a founder who has passion for the idea, and the founder loses the opportunity to learn how to take a company through scale-up to maturity. And the economy as a whole suffers a lot from this.

No less an entrepreneur than Andy Gove (one of the founders of Intel) spoke to this in this article about a year ago. http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_15537041?source=rss Fascinating (and a little disturbing) reading.