[FRC Blog] 2017 International Game Piece Option

[Ari423]

Originally Posted by Jaci

Let's say FIRST adds this choice for domestic teams, too. Suddenly this very imbalance everyone is so sensitive about comes back.
In the US, you get your KOP on day one. In Western Australia, we get it about 3-4 days into the season (if we're lucky, in 2015 it took 1.5 weeks, that's 1/4 of the season).

Now you not only have everything you need to prototype, but an extra gamepiece as well, 3-4 DAYS MINIMUM before we do.

When you take all this into account, US teams getting 1 game piece 3-4 days minimum before international teams get 2 game pieces seems like a pretty good tradeoff.

I think pretty much everyone in this thread agrees that non-US teams have many huge disadvantages, in ways US teams can't even understand. But no good comes from lowering the ceiling, we need to raise the floor. Instead of limiting pre-orders to only international teams to balance the disadvantages, we (and FIRST) should work to make it easier for international teams. Perhaps that means shipping you the kit of parts early and trusting you not to open it like they trust you to bag the robot on bag day. Perhaps it means providing dimensions for parts in metric so it's easier to find locally sourced parts. It is impossible to make it completely even for non-US teams, but that doesn't mean we have to make it harder for everybody when we can make it easier for everybody too.

PS - this will be my first year as a mentor of a non-US team after 4 years on a US team so my opinion may be very different this time next year

[jeser#1772]

Originally Posted by Ari423

I think pretty much everyone in this thread agrees that non-US teams have many huge disadvantages, in ways US teams can't even understand. But no good comes from lowering the ceiling, we need to raise the floor. Instead of limiting pre-orders to only international teams to balance the disadvantages, we (and FIRST) should work to make it easier for international teams. Perhaps that means shipping you the kit of parts early and trusting you not to open it like they trust you to bag the robot on bag day. Perhaps it means providing dimensions for parts in metric so it's easier to find locally sourced parts. It is impossible to make it completely even for non-US teams, but that doesn't mean we have to make it harder for everybody when we can make it easier for everybody too.

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

If the extra game piece(s) option were available to US teams, we would almost certainly take advantage of the opportunity; I wouldn't be a bit surprised if half of the US teams took advantage of it. The reason I believe it should be extended to US teams is this: If AM (or another supplier) could reliably expect 2000-3000 orders of the game piece sight unseen (perhaps back in October), this would significantly ease the regular chicken-and-egg problem of FRC game pieces -- the global demand is usually 1500 units per year, then suddenly, in one month, there's a demand for 10,000 of them. The global stocks disappear in a day, and it takes a week or more to spin up the factory on the item. US teams get it in two weeks, and other teams in four (or more). Front-loading the demand would reduce the problem for EVERYBODY.

(And OBTW, I expect that the same would hold true for FTC.)

The problem in applying this option to all teams in my point of view:

1-First choice credits are not money
as I understand the items on first choice came from donations, and the risk involving the game pieces market is 100% on Andy Mark (they need to supply the market but they hold the risk of not selling part of it) so FIRST dont need to deal with it.with save costs and time

2- shipping costs
how can FIRST deal with shipping? since this will not fit into the box (depending of the game) and will be so much work if they need to charge differently for each team or kick off (it looks simple but if i know that all the boxes will have the same weigth probably is easier since we are talking about +2000 teams)

3- sorting
sorting orders is not included in what FIRST does as an organization. and Andy Mark for example cannot sell game pieces before kick off


4-time is money
anything that increase the amount of time or work in a operation will cost money, in my point of view First is trying to keep it working without increase the registration fee, it didint increased since i started in 2006

So, in my point of view what they are doing is working a solution that help the teams that have huge problems with "working case by case" (since is a qty of teams that dont demand a huge change in the way they work)
But yes is possible to give access to all teams, but it will cost money, and the only way i see it now is incresing the registration fee, and who wants it?

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by jeser#1772

The problem in applying this option to all teams in my point of view:

1-First choice credits are not money
as I understand the items on first choice came from donations, and the risk involving the game pieces market is 100% on Andy Mark (they need to supply the market but they hold the risk of not selling part of it) so FIRST dont need to deal with it.with save costs and time

These items are already available on FIRST Choice - if FIRST loses money by offering this option they are already losing the money.

2- shipping costs
how can FIRST deal with shipping? since this will not fit into the box (depending of the game) and will be so much work if they need to charge differently for each team or kick off (it looks simple but if i know that all the boxes will have the same weigth probably is easier since we are talking about +2000 teams)

FIRST is already in the business of shipping 3,000 kits of parts, which all weigh substantially more than the game piece, and are usually substantially bigger than the game piece. They even have different weights and boxes per team already, with the kitbot opt-in or opt-out. This would be the same amount of effort as that - an extra game piece opt-in or opt-out with extra boxes for some.

3- sorting
sorting orders is not included in what FIRST does as a organization. and andy mark for example cannot sell game pieces before kick off

This is indeed exactly what FIRST does every year. There are several possible configurations of the kit of parts - rookie tote, veteran tote, KoP drivetrain - all of which involve taking parts from dozens of suppliers and packing them together. One of those parts is even the game piece. This is literally adding one item to that list. This is something they do.

3-time is money
anything that increase the amount of time or work in a operation will cost money, in my point of view First is trying to keep it working without increase the registration fee, it didint increased since i started in 2006

The KoP drivetrain opt-out increases the amount of time and work on FIRST's part and didn't cost teams money. The entire FIRST Choice system increased the amount of time and work on FIRST's (and AndyMark's) part and didn't cost teams money. This is an argument vague and broad enough that it could be applied to almost any suggestion of change at all, but it isn't true in all cases.

So, in my point of view what they are doing is working a solution that help the teams that have huge problems with "working case by case" (since is a qty of teams that dont demand a huge change in the way they work)
But yes is possible to give access to all teams, but it will cost money, and the only way i see it now is incresing the registration fee, and who wants it?

This can be handled the same way it is for International teams - it can cost teams FIRST Choice credits. This is part of the value teams are purchasing when they register and get a kit of parts.

I am not confident that this change absolutely will result in increased registration fees at all - that implies, among other things, that FIRST is just barely breaking even on FRC, that FIRST Choice credits aren't part of the KoP cost (I understand most FIRST Choice parts are donated), that the increased cost is substantial, that teams who don't opt for this feature would have to subsidize the teams that do, and a bunch of other assumptions that may or may not be true. If it costs FIRST more to the point of which they have to ask for more money, a huge assumption, they can simply charge the teams who ask for more game pieces!

[jeser#1772]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

FIRST is already in the business of shipping 3,000 kits of parts, which all weigh substantially more than the game piece, and are usually substantially bigger than the game piece. They even have different weights and boxes per team already, with the kitbot opt-in or opt-out. This would be the same amount of effort as that - an extra game piece opt-in or opt-out with extra boxes for some.

Sorry but I see this one different, since the Kitbot option just reduce the amount of work FIRST apply to it, is one box less and not one more

But yes you are right they arealdy have 3 options of packages, including the game piece will be 6 different packages.

[MARS_James]

So while this is getting heated I think there is a few things we can all agree on:

1. International teams are at an inherent disadvantage to teams based in the United States

2. This is a good thing for anyone who can take advantage of it.

3. It being implemented for teams in the US would not be a bad thing but it is also not as necessary as for international teams.


So my 2 cents on this is two fold:

1. I think that being a team in the United States that 1/5th of my credits is a little steep for one extra game piece since it isn't that bad for me to get more. I think it would have been more fair for them to price out how much they would charge them if they were just a regular FIRST Choice item and teams just buy them that way, it's not like teams can grab much from how many credits they are. As a team who hosts a kick off it seems pretty simple for how FIRST can do this, either have a different colored tote for teams who wanted an extra game piece, or just mark it by having different colored zip ties.

2. The idea of shipping a lot of game pieces to the international regional directors and allowing them to become the shipper for the game piece seems fair and simple:
- FIRST ships a large amount (lets call it 3 per team) of game pieces very early to the regional directors (Who sign NDAs and whatever else FIRST wants) with hopefully a prepaid return label
- Teams post kick off can log on to Andy Mark (or whoever distributes the game piece) and purchase as if they are a US team (Limited by how many game pieces available).
- When it comes time to select shipping have a drop down box that lists international locations to ship from
- Teams select their location and get charged for the game piece and it is not refundable
- The regional director then gets an email and it will either contain the contact of who is coming to get the extra game pieces, or the shipping location to send said pieces

This should not be that challenging it is like either in store pickup or ship from store which is fairly common in retail these days. You keep the game pieces limited to say week 4 then it is free game for whoever wants however many they want. When stop build day comes around the RD can then choose to keep the extra game pieces (and pay for them) for their events, or return them to FIRST.

I really feel like either of these options above is not to challenging to implement nor that unfair.

[Jon Stratis]

Thinking more about this, why doesn't FIRST just take themselves out of the equation all together? The biggest issue with game pieces, typically, is them being sold out. So, lets get AndyMark to set up a pre-order system. Starting in November or December, I can order a "set" of game pieces for $X (where X is obviously different every year, depending on the game pieces). I could even have an option to by a "complete field set" of game pieces for $Y, that would let me run a full week-0 event (and let me decide if I want to invest in that full field set, or start trying to raise funds for it early). Then, just like numerous companies do when they have a big release of a new product (like the annual iPhone release), they work with Fedex or UPS to ship everything early so it's delivered world wide on the Monday after kickoff. That way, everyone can get as many game pieces as they want, production companies can tool up and produce extra numbers a month before kickoff based on pre-order demands, and we avoid selling out during the season.

[Steven Smith]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

Thinking more about this, why doesn't FIRST just take themselves out of the equation all together? The biggest issue with game pieces, typically, is them being sold out. So, lets get AndyMark to set up a pre-order system. Starting in November or December, I can order a "set" of game pieces for $X (where X is obviously different every year, depending on the game pieces). I could even have an option to by a "complete field set" of game pieces for $Y, that would let me run a full week-0 event (and let me decide if I want to invest in that full field set, or start trying to raise funds for it early). Then, just like numerous companies do when they have a big release of a new product (like the annual iPhone release), they work with Fedex or UPS to ship everything early so it's delivered world wide on the Monday after kickoff. That way, everyone can get as many game pieces as they want, production companies can tool up and produce extra numbers a month before kickoff based on pre-order demands, and we avoid selling out during the season.

I like the idea. As you suggest, FIRST/AM could probably take a pretty good stab at some breakpoints for what an "average team" wants, based on prior year spending number as well as the game design, and offer a few packages at different price points. I know I for one would be to pre-order ~$300 of whatever the game piece(s) are this year, and just add a few more on later on the open market if I'm short.

[ctt956]

Originally Posted by Ari423

Instead of limiting pre-orders to only international teams to balance the disadvantages, we (and FIRST) should work to make it easier for international teams. Perhaps that means shipping you the kit of parts early and trusting you not to open it like they trust you to bag the robot on bag day...

What if the kit was shipped early but with a combination lock on it, and the code for the lock was give out after the broadcast, similarly to the game manual password? Just an idea. Good luck with your new team!

[ollien]

Originally Posted by ctt956

What if the kit was shipped early but with a combination lock on it, and the code for the lock was give out after the broadcast, similarly to the game manual password? Just an idea. Good luck with your new team!

Not a bad idea. My only problem with this is that some teams might be accused of using bolt cutters to prematurely open the kit. I'd have to have yet another controversy about something as silly as this.

The manual password is different because the only way around it is brute force, which is near impossible given the time frame between when the manual is released and when the password is released.

[ctt956]

Originally Posted by ollien

Not a bad idea. My only problem with this is that some teams might be accused of using bolt cutters to prematurely open the kit. I'd have to have yet another controversy about something as silly as this.

The manual password is different because the only way around it is brute force, which is near impossible given the time frame between when the manual is released and when the password is released.

I considered this, but maybe if the locking part was hidden inside the box it would discourage cutting the lock. A barrel-type lock might work if those exist with combos, as the only way to break in would be drilling, and that would run a high risk of damaging something in the kit. The possibility of damaging kit contents and reusability of the tote should discourage cutting the plastic.

[gblake]

Originally Posted by ctt956

I considered this, but maybe if the locking part was hidden inside the box it would discourage cutting the lock. A barrel-type lock might work if those exist with combos, as the only way to break in would be drilling, and that would run a high risk of damaging something in the kit. The possibility of damaging kit contents and reusability of the tote should discourage cutting the plastic.

There would be no need to defeat the lock explicitly.

Just cut a hole in the side of the box, or take apart the hinges, or ...

[ctt956]

Originally Posted by gblake

There would be no need to defeat the lock explicitly.

Just cut a hole in the side of the box, or take apart the hinges, or ...

Yes, but if the contents are packed very tightly, you would run a very high risk of damaging them by cutting into the box. It would also limit the ability to reuse the box for storing the kit items or storing other things. I don't think this risk would be worth it, since you wouldn't really know what you should do with the parts until Kickoff.

[Ari423]

Originally Posted by ctt956

Yes, but if the contents are packed very tightly, you would run a very high risk of damaging them by cutting into the box. It would also limit the ability to reuse the box for storing the kit items or storing other things. I don't think this risk would be worth it, since you wouldn't really know what you should do with the parts until Kickoff.

Originally Posted by gblake

There would be no need to defeat the lock explicitly.

Just cut a hole in the side of the box, or take apart the hinges, or ...

Originally Posted by ctt956

I considered this, but maybe if the locking part was hidden inside the box it would discourage cutting the lock. A barrel-type lock might work if those exist with combos, as the only way to break in would be drilling, and that would run a high risk of damaging something in the kit. The possibility of damaging kit contents and reusability of the tote should discourage cutting the plastic.

Originally Posted by ollien

Not a bad idea. My only problem with this is that some teams might be accused of using bolt cutters to prematurely open the kit. I'd have to have yet another controversy about something as silly as this.

The manual password is different because the only way around it is brute force, which is near impossible given the time frame between when the manual is released and when the password is released.

Originally Posted by ctt956

What if the kit was shipped early but with a combination lock on it, and the code for the lock was give out after the broadcast, similarly to the game manual password? Just an idea. Good luck with your new team!

I think you're thinking too hard about this. Instead of creating an impenetrable box, FIRST should de-incentivise breaking into them.

FIRST already trusts us with a lot of the rules of the game. Bag and tag is all on the team's honor to uphold the rules. There are many rules that teams could violate and get away with; I'm sure most teams have come across a few of them and hopefully they made the right choice. FIRST even allows some people to see the field elements and game pieces before kickoff to set up kickoff locations.

At a certain point, FIRST has to trust teams to do the right thing. If they aren't in a trusting mood, they could write up some kind of contract that teams' who get early kits must sign similar to the NDAs kickoff-builders might sign.

[ollien]

Originally Posted by Ari423

At a certain point, FIRST has to trust teams to do the right thing. If they aren't in a trusting mood, they could write up some kind of contract that teams' who get early kits must sign similar to the NDAs kickoff-builders might sign.

At least in the United States, minors cannot be bound by NDAs. There could be some kind of disqualification involved, but then we would get into a hairy mess of refunds, cancelled travel plans, etc. Even then, how would they determine who actually broke into the box? I think it gets too thorny to be worth it.

Come to think of it, what's the deal with teams who host kickoffs in the United States? Kits come to the kickoffs before Christmas. Is there any kind of NDA there? I should probably know this, as the president of a team who is hosting a kickoff...

[Ari423]

Originally Posted by ollien

At least in the United States, minors cannot be bound by NDAs. There could be some kind of disqualification involved, but then we would get into a hairy mess of refunds, cancelled travel plans, etc. Even then, how would they determine who actually broke into the box? I think it gets too thorny to be worth it.

Come to think of it, what's the deal with teams who host kickoffs in the United States? Kits come to the kickoffs before Christmas. Is there any kind of NDA there? I should probably know this, as the president of a team who is hosting a kickoff...

I would check out this thread from a few weeks ago if you want to know more about FIRST's NDAs for kickoffs.