Re: Picking Mark IV Optics -- Buying option

[Tom Droege <droege@wwa.com>]

Dear Dan,

At 01:22 PM 1/19/98 -0800, you wrote:
>Tom
>
>As I understand it, the Mark IV goal is
>to the following system requirements:
>
>1.	a large number of systems - 40
>2.	undistorted field of view 4degrees
>3.	limiting magnitude - 15 or whatever.
>4.	optical resolution 7.2 arc-seconds per pixel (assuming 2k sq.
>CCD)
>5.	cost
>
>Even if the Mark IV requirements are different from above, we should
>know what they are for the sake of comparing alternatives.
>
>It seems to me that TASS should issue an RFQ to all the competing
>scope manufacturers foreign and domestic for a specialized quote of
>whatever will meet the Mark IV needs.  In the request TASS should 
>request an evaluation unit to prove the quoted optics will meet TASS 
>needs. The quote would also offer the winner of the bid all of the 
>exclusive and free advertising that would come from having their 
>optics used in so significant a project especially when it will be 
>agreed to that their names will be used in all articles that result 
>from the Mark IV survey.

I am quite aware of how this works in big business, the government,
and large research establishments.   I have worked at all three.  I used 
to spend $1-$2 million a year this way.  

My observation is that there is no real money floating around in the 
astronomy business.  So I don't think I could get *anyone* give me an
evaluation unit.  To build it might cost half as much as the full order.
It would be nice if a tass endorsement were worth something, but I
doubt it will get me a beer at the local pub.   Someone prove me wrong
by stepping forward with a big check.  I will eat humble pie.  

>
>With the quantity of business TASS will be offering and the winning
>selection and the new business they will get as a result of their
>mention
>in TASS articles, there should be a lot of motivation by competing 
>companies to give TASS exactly what it needs at a reasonable cost.
>

I wish this were true.  I suspect instead that the company that does
quote will find it harder than they expected and thus will not make 
very much on the contract.  This has been my constant experience.
It is hard for a company to make money on a new item.

>This is a standard practice for the businesses I've worked for get 
>the best products and prices from their suppliers.  Its no different
>for the competitive amateur astronomy industry.

As I say, I have spent a bundle this way.  It is done to keep everyone
honest.  I am spending my own money.  So I can look for the lower cost
that comes from negotiating with a few vendors and just placing an
order with the one that I think will do a good job.  I don't have to keep
me honest.  I am not trying to give business to my brother in law.

Tom Droege

>
>Dan Griffing
>
>