[BB]: KOP info

[Foster]

I'd be interested in seeing a better cost breakdown, but my quick calc shows that the cost is about $1400 difference between the rookie kit and the veteran kit. I'd just as soon buy the rookie kit and have all the parts that I need rather than trying to order them À la carte and get zocked on shipping from lots of vendors.

[Vikesrock]

It will be interesting to see how the cost accounting section of the manual is going to be worded now. There will almost certainly have to be some extra words in there to deal with the discrepancies between kits.

[Brandon Holley]

I'm not really sure how to feel about this, obviously less money is a good thing. But there are some components missing there that we would definitely have to order more of to supplement the lack of them in the kit which seems a little backwards to me.

[Greg Needel]

Originally Posted by Foster

Ibut my quick calc shows that the cost is about $1400 difference between the rookie kit and the veteran kit.

I got a similar number, What annoys me is how much they publicized "we are decreasing the cost of registration"

From my standpoint the cost to teams actually went UP. For a $1000 decrease in registration teams (who want to keep a functioning robot) will now have to shell out $1400. That seems like an increase in cost.

Not to mention that while I am thankful many grants exist and are the lifeline for many teams, they mostly cover registration. So for example any team who was banking on a nasa grant* for their initial registration will now have to come up with 1400 more cash to cover the differences.

*this is not a stab at the grant process just an illustration on how this will effect many teams. We all appreciate that the grants exist and should never bite the hand that feeds, or any of another 100 or so sayings that could apply to this situation.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by Greg Needel

From my standpoint the cost to teams actually went UP. For a $1000 decrease in registration teams (who want to keep a functioning robot) will now have to shell out $1400. That seems like an increase in cost.

You only have to pay that extra $1400 if you choose not to pull last year's parts from last year's robot. For $1000 less than you paid for the 2009 registration, your veteran team will have everything that a 2010 rookie will. You just received some of it in the previous year's Kit of Parts instead of the current year's one.

[Travis Hoffman]

I got $2105. See attached.

For those who came up with the $1400-range estimates, where are the differences between your tally and mine?

My number also doesn't account for any shipping charges.

[Mark McLeod]

You didn't care about the two 20 cent standoffs?

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

My number also doesn't account for any shipping charges.

Just for yuks I took a look at the cost of shipping & handling for the 2 standoffs. Shipping them alone- as part of a larger order there wouldn't be any shipping cost, of course, but where's the fun in that?

For $.40 in parts, it'd cost $9.00 to have them shipped.

Okay, okay, local parts supply will have them too ....

P.S.
Remember too that plastic pneumatic fittings were not included in the KOP last year which I think makes it much harder on the rookies to even try pneumatics.

If you wanted to do a full accounting I noticed that there will be some additional costs for parts not mentioned, but that obviously won't be included in the kit either. Such as the pressure relief valve ($27.20) and the cRIO power connectors (not included BTW in our team's cRIO order).

[Madison]

I'm trying to leave a comment on Bill's Blog that is more substantive than, "you lie," but that's pretty well how I feel about how this "price reduction" has been handled.

FIRST really ought to own up to and explain the increased costs and challenges of operating in an economy that very nearly imploded or hire a better public relations person. They've done a poor job of making these changes seem like they're a good thing.

Is there anyone around here that can speak to how these changes will make the 2010 season significantly better for their team or region? I'm sure many, if not all, of the teams that are going to shell out the extra $2000 required for all of these omitted parts would HAPPILY pay an extra $1000 for registration and give the remaining $1000 to a team in need.

[IndySam]

Originally Posted by Madison

I'm trying to leave a comment on Bill's Blog that is more substantive than, "you lie," but that's pretty well how I feel about how this "price reduction" has been handled.

FIRST really ought to own up to and explain the increased costs and challenges of operating in an economy that very nearly imploded or hire a better public relations person. They've done a poor job of making these changes seem like they're a good thing.

Is there anyone around here that can speak to how these changes will make the 2010 season significantly better for their team or region? I'm sure many, if not all, of the teams that are going to shell out the extra $2000 required for all of these omitted parts would HAPPILY pay an extra $1000 for registration and give the remaining $1000 to a team in need.

I hate to use the word "lie" but the spin from FIRST might make us all very dizzy.

I understand cutting out something like the compressor (we have 8 and many teams never use them.) I understand (but don't like) not including a second cRio for veteran teams.

Cutting back on things like batteries and speed controllers is just wrong. These things are more like consumables that permanent control parts. How many of you are going to trust old batteries? How many of you have blown up speed controllers?

Don't make things more expensive for me and then tell me you cut my costs. That sounds way to much like congress.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Madison

I'm trying to leave a comment on Bill's Blog that is more substantive than, "you lie," but that's pretty well how I feel about how this "price reduction" has been handled.

I'm wondering if they're going to go ahead and play 'stupid' and assume veteran teams can't do simple math.

I'm pretty disappointed to see a lot of the stuff we won't be getting. Even the Axis camera..? (I'm gonna go ahead and assume we can use other types of USB cameras though)

No Victors..?'

1 battery..? (Not to mention a huge pile of batteries from the 08 season were from a bad batch that we had to throw out with leaking cells)

No compressor..? (Hoping we can just buy a 10 dollar one from HF)

Thanks FIRST, you're the best. (Reminisces about the trusty old IFI days)

[Dale]

Given the mountains of components we have gotten over the years in our KOP but never used, if FIRST needs to save money in a big way I'd rather the KOP just included donated items and a link to a well-documented website with items to buy separately. AndyMark would run such a thing, I'll bet. That would make sense to teams, of course, only if the registration fee dropped a lot more.

Since rookies wouldn't know what to order to get started, there would need to be a starter kit with a kit frame, motors, transmissions, etc. that would be enough to build a box on wheels. Perhaps there could be another kit available with a grab bag of interesting parts, like the current KOP, available for teams who want to buy one.

Personally, and for the sake of the planet, I'd rather just pay for what we need if the result was a much lower registration fee.

[IKE]

Originally Posted by Madison

Is there anyone around here that can speak to how these changes will make the 2010 season significantly better for their team or region? I'm sure many, if not all, of the teams that are going to shell out the extra $2000 required for all of these omitted parts would HAPPILY pay an extra $1000 for registration and give the remaining $1000 to a team in need.

Excellent Question Madison. I am going to take a stab at it.

One thing we should all keep in mind is that realistically we are all playing with donated money (some more than others). Some teams work really hard and sell things to fund their teams (or pay out of pocket), but then still go to a Regional that is not funded by registration fees, but by corporate sponsors directly through the Regional or indirectly subsidized through donations to FIRST.

My guess is where this "helps" most of us is it allows for the FRC to continue on in a reasonable fashion. Unlike other "fairness" rules and attempts that often have backfired, I think this was probably a legitimate compromise of trying to balance the FRC Budget. I know some folks are going to quote surplus budgets, but let's remember they are looking into the long term. If heating costs go up, and your paycheck goes down, do you continue to keep the house at 75F in December (and then freeze in Feb. when you run out of money), or do you drop the thermostat down to 68 and throw on a sweater?

(I understand that this is one of those government economics answers that would be excessively difficult to prove, but it is my gut feeling).

One of the great opportunities of a down economy are that for most of us, it helps us re-look at "needs" vs. "wants". While some "wants" have always been obvious (wanting to fly to Hawaii regional vs. driving to Detroit), others are less obvious. Your robot and thus your team "needs a control system". Teams "want to leave the old bot in tact".

Opportunities for this could be figuring out a design that is more transportable and more plug and play. I saw an interesting controls system "board" designed for OCCRA. The kids called it the "Brain Bucket". It was a plastic tub that had the IFI controller, and all the power electronics except the battery mounted to the bottom and sides. I think they re-used the "brain bucket" for years, and with about 50% of the wiring already done, it made wiring up a simple robot super quick and easy.

[Jack Jones]

Originally Posted by IKE

Excellent Question Madison. I am going to take a stab at it.

One thing we should all keep in mind is that realistically we are all playing with donated money (some more than others). Some teams work really hard and sell things to fund their teams (or pay out of pocket), but then still go to a Regional that is not funded by registration fees, but by corporate sponsors directly through the Regional or indirectly subsidized through donations to FIRST.

My guess is where this "helps" most of us is it allows for the FRC to continue on in a reasonable fashion. Unlike other "fairness" rules and attempts that often have backfired, I think this was probably a legitimate compromise of trying to balance the FRC Budget. I know some folks are going to quote surplus budgets, but let's remember they are looking into the long term. If heating costs go up, and your paycheck goes down, do you continue to keep the house at 75F in December (and then freeze in Feb. when you run out of money), or do you drop the thermostat down to 68 and throw on a sweater?

(I understand that this is one of those government economics answers that would be excessively difficult to prove, but it is my gut feeling).

One of the great opportunities of a down economy are that for most of us, it helps us re-look at "needs" vs. "wants". While some "wants" have always been obvious (wanting to fly to Hawaii regional vs. driving to Detroit), others are less obvious. Your robot and thus your team "needs a control system". Teams "want to leave the old bot in tact".

Opportunities for this could be figuring out a design that is more transportable and more plug and play. I saw an interesting controls system "board" designed for OCCRA. The kids called it the "Brain Bucket". It was a plastic tub that had the IFI controller, and all the power electronics except the battery mounted to the bottom and sides. I think they re-used the "brain bucket" for years, and with about 50% of the wiring already done, it made wiring up a simple robot super quick and easy.

I hear what you’re saying about the sustainability of FIRST, their surplus budget, and teams weighing their “wants” vs. “needs”. The two teams I mentor may want to do FIRST, but they don’t need to. They have no surplus budget. Which way do you think they will eventually go?

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

I agree it's been sold to teams inaccurately (it's not a price reduction), but if it saves money for some teams (i.e. if you don't need a compressor this year or don't ever demo your robot and can reuse the cRIO), then how is it a bad thing?

In short, that's how it can help teams.

The issue isnt that it isn't a price reduction for SOME people. The issue is that it is being sold as a wonderful thing for all teams when in reality it is only beneficial for a subset of teams. While this is a good thing for those teams it is a pain for teams that arent benefited by it. Additionally it allows FIRST to come out and say, "See look, we are saving you money, we are such great guys" Which is an incorrect statement and implies things that arent true, some of us have major issues with incorrect implications.

EDIT: Also, I suppose some people might be peeved that they arent saving money too.

[Madison]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

I agree it's been sold to teams inaccurately (it's not a price reduction), but if it saves money for some teams (i.e. if you don't need a compressor this year or don't ever demo your robot and can reuse the cRIO), then how is it a bad thing?

In short, that's how it can help teams.

That's why I'm curious to see how many teams this really affects. At first glance, this appears to penalize a great majority of teams -- in terms of cost or function -- for the benefit of comparably few. Maybe that's not true.

If 100 teams would have dropped out in 2010 were it not for the reduced registration fee and 101+ teams spend an extra $2000 to maintain their status quo, there's money wasted. Again, I can't speak for everyone, but my team would be happier giving $1000 to any other FIRST team than to a for-profit business.