Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

Equipment Discussions >> Cats & Casses

Pages: << 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | >> (show all)
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: Spacetravelerx]
      #5962180 - 07/09/13 01:17 PM

Andrew,

Put the bacon down and smell the coffee. There are no sales "Waiting in the wings." They don't have money for capital. Getting another $900K in sales, of which maybe $200k could be net income isn't going to help. You could do TEN TIMES that business and still not be half way to looking healthy instead of having the $3.7 million shortfall. 50 or 100 people buyng 14" scopes just aren't going to close that gap (and the total market for those things is about that).

Set the kool-aid pitcher down. Getting the LX800, LX80, and LX600 out on a timely basis without problems required a big block of cash they didn't have. Somewhat optimistically I am thinking they were in a position to get one (1) of those right, and there just wasn't enough potential income there to float the company.

If they had had three dream products dropped on them at zero development cost, superb margins, perfect startup from manufacturing, quick introduction to the market, and flawless launches, then maybe they'd be almost breaking even. That's how bad the picture Edd just painted is.

-Rich

Quote:

Quote:

If you want to consider what is being bought; here is the Fiscal Year Ending February 28, 2013:

Total Revenue - $17,400,000
And be aware Meade lost $3,700,000 during this period.

Advanced Astronomical Telescopes – 33% of revenues - $5,742,000
Entry-Level Telescopes – 41% of revenues - $7,134,000
Sport Optics – 7% of revenues - $1,218,000
Weather Stations and Digital Clocks – 4% of revenues - $696,000
Accessories – 11% of revenues – $1,914,000
Other – 4% of revenues - $696,000

As a new owner, what segments would you keep, and which would be dumped??

If you dumped everything except the Advanced Astronomical Telescopes and their portion of the Accessories revenues, you might plan on having a revenue stream of, say, $5,500,000 going forward. You’d have to do this with 22-25 employees total.

How would you finance R&D?? Meade spent $2,000,000 for R&D in 2 years developing the now new products. The product was late, and still had teething problems. You would have to do a lot better with less money.

Maybe some creative writing would convince a crusty old banker to approve a line-of-credit. Or, convince some adventurous venture capital group to buy in ??

Best let JOC do its stuff.

edit: One bright spot while skimming the financials, Meade has a huge tax loss carry forward. Merging that with a profitable entity might have some value. Not being a CPA, I don't know if this is possible, but worth asking the question.






One thing to note on the Advanced Astronomical Telescope category, is this figure is low due to the hold back of the release of the LX850 and LX600, plus issues with the LX80. So a lot of high margin sales (for Meade) were sitting in the wings - and money was going into R&D fixing the problems, not sales of a completed product. So let's say Meade sells 100 LX850s (and it looks like they are at a minimum, and would do more without the drama), and average sales are around $9k (it seems most folks are leaping to the 14"). This means add $900k in Advanced Astronomical Telescopes sales for this one product alone. And with a telescope purchase, people buy accessories. No telescope purchases - much lower rate of accessory sales. It will become quickly apparent that had the LX850/LX800 come out the gate on time, correctly, LX600 came out and the LX80 came out without teething pains, this sales picture would be VERY different.

Oh, and keep the LXD75 too - another loss of sales. I am certain folks would have purchased the LXD75, if there were problems with the LX80. Meade left a vacuum in this category.

Meade is selling product now (yes, in fact they are!). I am still seeing posts of people receiving their LX850 and LX600, so this tells me something!




Edited by Starhawk (07/09/13 01:19 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: rmollise]
      #5962190 - 07/09/13 01:23 PM

Quote:

Once again, my pore old buddy Jon has got the cart before the dadgum horse.

Why do you think Criterion started making SCTs?

And don't you dare go talking to my sawbones abut me giving up the caffeine!




Criterion made the same mistake Meade did, the marketing department and stockholders took control, the corporate headquarters made the decisions based on Madison Ave hype-think and the rest is history...

Enough is enough. Criterion tried to hop on the SCT Bandwagon and didn't make it. Maybe if they had waited a few years for the Dobsonian to become popular, they would have been in their element. Back to the topic at hand...

Successful small companies are almost always run by someone who is actually an amateur astronomer. The vision of the company is closely tied to vision of the staff or the leader... Whether it's Roland Christen at A-P or David at Optismart, there is someone who knows...

There is a transition when a company grows, retaining that vision or having a wise vision is can be a problem. Companies the size of Meade risk being run by people who are not close to the hobby, who themselves do not have a sense of what the hobby is about...

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: Calypte]
      #5962195 - 07/09/13 01:26 PM

Quote:


In 1986 I got to visit the Meade factory (then in Costa Mesa) and chat with John Diebel in his wood-panelled office. He told me SCTs were out-selling Newt 10 to 1. SCTs were a big success for Meade.




I am sure they were... A stroll through the now-defunct Scope City would show the lack of popularity of those big old Newtonians.

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
EddWen
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 04/26/08

Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5962318 - 07/09/13 02:43 PM

Andrew, et al, a few points.

Introducing a new product cannibalizes some existing sales, so you cannot factor in the full sales revenues of a new product.

I do not know what the LXD75 line is, but if it was dropped from the product catalog it is very possible that it was not profitable and they made the right decision.

And, it is possible that nothing in their catalog is profitable. They did burn through $3,700,000 while generating the $17,400,000 revenues.

JOC will be trying to figure this out doing their due diligence. Scott Roberts is probably being grilled every day about his assessment, and the chances for success by JOC financial people. Lot of what-ifs being run through spread sheets. JOC can back out of the proposed merger without penalties, if I read the Merger Agreement correctly. JOC does have the upper hand in this situation as MIT Cap does not have access to Meade financial data.

So we await an announcement from JOC. Thumbs up or thumbs down. I really don’t expect an announcement from MIT Cap that they have gained proxy of 51% of shares.

Jon, Meade CEO seems to be the only Officer with a background in amateur astronomy, having started with Coulter in 1986. He has been at Meade for some time. Maybe longer than Roberts was.

And, finally, Luck or good fortune is, in my mind, always present to a large degree in business success. But there is no way to factor that into a spread sheet.

True story. Many years ago, one of our competitors went belly up. I was wandering through the swap meet at the Orange County Fair Grounds and came across a booth with some interesting stuff. Our competitor’s products. The people cleaning out the leased building were told they could have whatever they wanted. I bought a souvenir.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
McUH
member


Reged: 05/29/13

Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5962320 - 07/09/13 02:44 PM

Ok, let me imagine to be a shareholder. If I read the Board recommendation correctly, I have two options (if I decide to sell at all):

1. JOC 3.45$/share guaranteed
2. MITC 3.65$/share promised but not guaranteed, they can back off any moment without any penalty

In this case it is really only question whether I trust the Board. If so, then option 1. is clearly the sensible one. The MITC offer is only slightly better (5,8%) but there is big unknown/risk associated with it, not worth it in my opinion, especially if I'm doing salvage operation. If the MITC offer was guaranteed, it would be another story - but the price difference is still so small, that I would not decide on price alone.

But then again, I am not a capitalist, I do not eat children .


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
EddWen
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 04/26/08

Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: McUH]
      #5962335 - 07/09/13 02:55 PM

McUH, the JOC offer is negotiable pending their findings through due diligence.

The MIT Cap offer is contingent on their getting a majority of voting stock.

Regardless the Meade BoD, as a shareholder, if a deal is done, your shares are paid for and go away. You will have no piece of Meade after that.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Spacetravelerx
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 12/23/12

Loc: New Mexico
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: Starhawk]
      #5962417 - 07/09/13 03:53 PM

Quote:

Andrew,

Put the bacon down and smell the coffee. There are no sales "Waiting in the wings." They don't have money for capital. Getting another $900K in sales, of which maybe $200k could be net income isn't going to help. You could do TEN TIMES that business and still not be half way to looking healthy instead of having the $3.7 million shortfall. 50 or 100 people buyng 14" scopes just aren't going to close that gap (and the total market for those things is about that).

Set the kool-aid pitcher down. Getting the LX800, LX80, and LX600 out on a timely basis without problems required a big block of cash they didn't have. Somewhat optimistically I am thinking they were in a position to get one (1) of those right, and there just wasn't enough potential income there to float the company.

If they had had three dream products dropped on them at zero development cost, superb margins, perfect startup from manufacturing, quick introduction to the market, and flawless launches, then maybe they'd be almost breaking even. That's how bad the picture Edd just painted is.

-Rich






Well one truism is evident - Rich and I never agree on anything. The corollary to this is Rich is not a fan of bacon.

First, I was referencing JUST LX850 sales. I think if all the product releases were good out the gate this conversation would be very different. However my point is the sales figures does not include the LX850, LX600 and likely depressed LX80 sales. Add to this the drama the LX800/LX80 caused it further impacted sales. Add to that the added shipping due to returns and the added R&D to correct the first iteration and the costs build up quickly - and it explains the loss in sales. A quick back of the envelop check shows this does turn around the $3.7M shortfall quickly.

Meade is still selling products, though I can imagine sales are depressed due to many folks holding back and all the chatter on CN. But they are selling products and shipping them including the LX850, LX600. Heck, I just purchased another telescope today from them (back home finally and ordered the 80mm APO - yes, I know, the dark side: a refractor!). It should arrive later this week. Yes, they sell AND ship product! Next up - the SolarMax II 90mm. With all the systems being sold since that report I would be very curious about their sales figures now.

Also, I contend had the R&D/Engineering/Marketing/Planning been done correctly out the gate the LX800 and LX80 would have been fine. Meade WISELY held back on the LX600 until the LX800 was resolved.

Anyways, folks are still buying Meade products.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bicparker
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 02/07/05

Loc: Texas Hill Country
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: Spacetravelerx]
      #5962544 - 07/09/13 04:53 PM

Are folks really buying products from Meade? Doesn't really look like it to me.

I'm looking at their web site and most of the advanced telescope products are either on backorder or preorder status. I think whatever is being sold is already at the retailers (and most of them are showing similar stock status). It has been this way for several months now.

In reality, I don't think they have that much inventory left to sell anymore.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Spacetravelerx
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 12/23/12

Loc: New Mexico
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: bicparker]
      #5962573 - 07/09/13 05:03 PM

Quote:

Are folks really buying products from Meade? Doesn't really look like it to me.

I'm looking at their web site and most of the advanced telescope products are either on backorder or preorder status. I think whatever is being sold is already at the retailers (and most of them are showing similar stock status). It has been this way for several months now.

In reality, I don't think they have that much inventory left to sell anymore.





Well that is weird then.

Someone just got their 14" LX850 from Meade last week, and I swear I heard an LX600 was delivered last week too.

I guess I am getting an imaginary APO from Meade. And UPS is shipping an empty box. For the record folks, Meade has all three APOs in stock.

My experience with the LX850 has been it is always "out of stock/pre-order/backorder", but in fact you can order it. For these higher end units it is best likely to work with Meade and/or the Dealer network.

BTW - it is comments like this that hurt Meade's sales, and put them in the death spiral.

I would like to get my LX850 out, however the Monsoons here are not letting me.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bicparker
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 02/07/05

Loc: Texas Hill Country
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: Spacetravelerx]
      #5962638 - 07/09/13 05:25 PM

The refractors are in stock, but not much else.
All of their new models appear to not be available. I think anything being delivered now is just what may be in dealer stock. Meade is not showing available those products you mentioned (LX850 and 600). So I reiterate that folks aren't buying Meade... not because they don't want to, but they really can't.

As per the Meade online store:
All 850's are listed as backordered
All 600's are listed as pre-order
LX200ACF All models except for the 14" are on backorder
LX90 8" and 12" in stock, no 10"
LX80 all backorder
LS 6" in stock
LS 8" ACF backorder
LS 8" classic OTA in stock

If my comments are putting Meade in a death spiral, then I must have an amazing amount of marketing power on this board. However, I think that is very doubtful. Hey, I'm not saying anything that you can't already look up elsewhere.

Edited by bicparker (07/09/13 05:26 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: bicparker]
      #5962643 - 07/09/13 05:26 PM

Andrew,

Seriously? The data doesn't support anything you're saying. Mind you, they aren't $3.7 million short on sales. If we posit a 20% average margin, they are $18.5 million short on sales to make up the $3.7 mil they were missing on $17.4 million in sales. That would mean adding a 106.3% increase in sales JUST TO BREAK EVEN, assuming a profit margin on sales they don't currently have.

What math do you have showing anything remotely similar to that is plausible, much less the current record? Meade's May 30 report didn't mention seeing a miracle in action like that.

I don't understand why you're making stuff like this up. It really seems completely pointless at this stage.

I don't think anyone ever said they didn't think it would better if the development/ marketing/ production/ etc. of the LX80, LX800, and LX600 had been done correctly. That's why so many of us have been pushing back on folks saying those were just the last, desperate, dying gasp.

You keep espousing conclusions which read a lot more like propaganda than any serious attempt at rational analysis. And I just don't understand why.

-Rich


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
derangedhermit
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 10/07/09

Loc: USA
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: McUH]
      #5962676 - 07/09/13 05:46 PM

Quote:

Ok, let me imagine to be a shareholder. If I read the Board recommendation correctly, I have two options (if I decide to sell at all):

1. JOC 3.45$/share guaranteed
2. MITC 3.65$/share promised but not guaranteed, they can back off any moment without any penalty

In this case it is really only question whether I trust the Board. If so, then option 1. is clearly the sensible one. The MITC offer is only slightly better (5,8%) but there is big unknown/risk associated with it, not worth it in my opinion, especially if I'm doing salvage operation. If the MITC offer was guaranteed, it would be another story - but the price difference is still so small, that I would not decide on price alone.



Option 3 is to put in a sell order with your broker at whatever price you like. You can do it now online or in the morning on the phone. It's a publicly traded stock. Whoever wants it can buy it. 30k shares were traded yesterday.

Once you sell your stock, you have no further risk.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
EddWen
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 04/26/08

Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: derangedhermit]
      #5962712 - 07/09/13 06:11 PM

MuCH, I should have mentioned this earlier. This does not matter to you as an imaginary Meade shareholder, but it might important to others.

If you hold Meade shares, and elect to not sell them to JOC, they will be cancelled as per the Merger Agreement.

No free riders on the JOC train, if it does pull out of the station.


Quote:

Quote:

Ok, let me imagine to be a shareholder. If I read the Board recommendation correctly, I have two options (if I decide to sell at all):

1. JOC 3.45$/share guaranteed
2. MITC 3.65$/share promised but not guaranteed, they can back off any moment without any penalty

In this case it is really only question whether I trust the Board. If so, then option 1. is clearly the sensible one. The MITC offer is only slightly better (5,8%) but there is big unknown/risk associated with it, not worth it in my opinion, especially if I'm doing salvage operation. If the MITC offer was guaranteed, it would be another story - but the price difference is still so small, that I would not decide on price alone.



Option 3 is to put in a sell order with your broker at whatever price you like. You can do it now online or in the morning on the phone. It's a publicly traded stock. Whoever wants it can buy it. 30k shares were traded yesterday.

Once you sell your stock, you have no further risk.




Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: EddWen]
      #5962717 - 07/09/13 06:14 PM

Well, there's a cute little Easter egg. So, you absolutely have to do something. And assuredly the end of the line for any current investors. But the MITC bid doesn't cause that, does it?

-Rich

Quote:

MuCH, I should have mentioned this earlier. This does not matter to you as an imaginary Meade shareholder, but it might important to others.

If you hold Meade shares, and elect to not sell them to JOC, they will be cancelled as per the Merger Agreement.

No free riders on the JOC train, if it does pull out of the station.


Quote:

Quote:

Ok, let me imagine to be a shareholder. If I read the Board recommendation correctly, I have two options (if I decide to sell at all):

1. JOC 3.45$/share guaranteed
2. MITC 3.65$/share promised but not guaranteed, they can back off any moment without any penalty

In this case it is really only question whether I trust the Board. If so, then option 1. is clearly the sensible one. The MITC offer is only slightly better (5,8%) but there is big unknown/risk associated with it, not worth it in my opinion, especially if I'm doing salvage operation. If the MITC offer was guaranteed, it would be another story - but the price difference is still so small, that I would not decide on price alone.



Option 3 is to put in a sell order with your broker at whatever price you like. You can do it now online or in the morning on the phone. It's a publicly traded stock. Whoever wants it can buy it. 30k shares were traded yesterday.

Once you sell your stock, you have no further risk.







Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gmartin02
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 04/11/05

Loc: Santa Clarita, CA
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: Spacetravelerx]
      #5962762 - 07/09/13 06:45 PM

Quote:


BTW - it is comments like this that hurt Meade's sales, and put them in the death spiral.




A few posts on an astronomy forum don't put a company with worldwide sales into a death spiral. This isn't Facebook or YouTube with hundreds of millions of users.

They did that to themselves over the last couple of years. If a company stops selling products that actually work (LXD75) and release new products that don't work as advertised or at all after months of delays (LX800, LX80), now THAT will put your company into a death spiral.

The comments on Cloudy Nights are not the cause of Meade's demise, but are a result of Meade's implosion.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gmartin02
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 04/11/05

Loc: Santa Clarita, CA
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: gmartin02]
      #5962813 - 07/09/13 07:18 PM

I remember seeing the LX80 & LX800 at PATS in 2011 and was really excited. I was going to buy an LX80 after it was released, specifically for astrophotography.

Note: After my horrible LXD55 experience back in 2002 (bad mount to tripod casting, defective polar scope, completely out of adjustment internal gears and motors, puny tripod legs, and generally overall poor design, engineering, and quality control), I would never buy a Meade mount again until other people were the Guinea Pigs.

After the continued delays of the LX80 release, I decided to get a CGEM instead for AP, and boy am I glad (now, see below) I made that choice.

I don't have allegiance to any particular company - just look at my list of scope stuff in my signature (the only reason I have 2 Celestron mounts is that I don't have the astro funds allocated to buy Losmandy, Takahashi, or Astro-Physics mounts right now).

Some (or at least one) here have accused me of being a Meade hater/basher.

This is not the case. My first "big" scope was a Meade Starfinder EQ 8" that I purchased new in 1992. This was a good scope for the price with very god optics, and I used it for 12 years before selling it in 2004.

I currently own a PST which I bought in 2011, and I love it. I also currently own a Meade Series 5000 SWA 28mm eyepiece - it was a pretty decent eyepiece for the price (although I don't use it any more after buying a Pentax XW 30mm, which completely smokes the Meade eyepiece by comparison).

I give praise where praise is due, but don't cut any slack when products are poor - in other words, I am not subject to Reality Distortion Fields or participate in fanboyism - just give me a product that is engineered well, works as advertised, and I can go on my merry way.

Example: Although I really like both of my Celestron mounts, I was REALLY UPSET with Celestron after buying the CGEM specifically for astrophotography and discovering the problem with Dec guiding. I ranted on the TeamCelestron forums and sent a threatening letter to Celestron management (along with others that did the same). Luckily, Celestron provided a firmware fix for this (still in Beta) that eliminates the problem, so I am happy with the mount and Celestron again (for now).



Greg


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Calypte
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 03/20/07

Loc: Anza, California
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: Spacetravelerx]
      #5962828 - 07/09/13 07:27 PM

Quote:

BTW - it is comments like this that hurt Meade's sales, and put them in the death spiral.



Most astronomy enthusiasts I know never look at this forum.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Spacetravelerx
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 12/23/12

Loc: New Mexico
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: gmartin02]
      #5962842 - 07/09/13 07:34 PM

Quote:

Quote:


BTW - it is comments like this that hurt Meade's sales, and put them in the death spiral.




A few posts on an astronomy forum don't put a company with worldwide sales into a death spiral. This isn't Facebook or YouTube with hundreds of millions of users.

They did that to themselves over the last couple of years. If a company stops selling products that actually work (LXD75) and release new products that don't work as advertised or at all after months of delays (LX800, LX80), now THAT will put your company into a death spiral.

The comments on Cloudy Nights are not the cause of Meade's demise, but are a result of Meade's implosion.







Well I am working away, and I will have more responses, BUT I have to say respond to this.

YES - Issues of the LX800, LX80 DID NOT HELP. This was VERY expensive to Meade in poor sales/no sales, repairs and of course poor PR.

BUT PLEASE DO NOT KID YOURSELF. CN and the web has a powerful influence on buying.

Of course CN is not Facebook or YouTube. There are also not hundreds of millions of astronomical buyers either.

Let me give you an example.

Most users of CN likely use Google for searches. And my guess is most buyers of astronomical products also use google. Many people now a days are pretty smart folks, and review products and user experiences of others via the web. Not all, but most people looking to drop some change on astro gear do.

So I Google Meade LX600 Review. First up - CN. Yeah....
Google LX850 review. First up - CN. Yeah....
Google LX80 (no review). 9th item on first page - CN. Yeah...
Google meade series 5000 uwa. 2nd item on first page - CN. Yeah...

My point is shoppers are and can be influenced by what is written online. Sometimes by one or two prominent folks, sometimes by the masses. However it is highly clear CN lurks at or near the top of all searches and reviews. Other review sites do pop up too.

If you really think what you post online has no influence or no one reads them, you are truly gravely mistaken (as is bicparker). Do you still read news papers?

Let me take a different angle here. Meade has many great products and many successes. However, if there are overwhelming complaints on a couple of key items (i.e. LX800 or LX80), or folks are just shouting out "stop buying Meade", and someone Googles Meade, most of the tone will be negative. Yes, Meade made its bed with the LX800 and LX80. Other products are fine - and they make a lot of different products. But they get lost in the noise. No need to stop buying their products. The LX850 is wonderful; eyepieces, wonderful. But if a shopper is googling and seeing bad stuff, it likely will impact a shoppers decision.

(Most manufacturers in our hobby you will find now a days DO PAY ATTENTION TO CN. You want to get a response? Post a huge complaint about their product you just got. I bet top dollar you will get a response [I think I saw this with an AP mount, if I recall, for example]. They want to minimize the damage ASAP.)

So if there are 2 of us saying buy Meade, and 10 saying no including some of the influential folks, this will in fact impact sales.

So in conclusion:
-- CN does have influence
-- Our comments are read by folks.
-- LX800/LX80 is influencing the bad word online
-- Anti-Meade folks do have influence
-- Saying to stop buying Meade does have an impact.

If you truly do not believe in the power of the internet, then you must work for a newspaper and live in denial.

Oh, Bicparker. I agree, Meade does not have all products available, and doesn't have the factory cranking all goods. All the other astro-manufacturers do not have products on back order or pre-order, except for Celestron, Astrophysics, SkyFi, Explore Scientific...never mind.

Message to Meade - you have sinned a great sin. Thou shalt not back order, Thou shalt no list pre-order, Thou shalt hide all goods, Lest ye experience the power of the holy hand grenade...


Back to work...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Spacetravelerx
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 12/23/12

Loc: New Mexico
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: gmartin02]
      #5962844 - 07/09/13 07:37 PM

Quote:



Example: Although I really like both of my Celestron mounts, I was REALLY UPSET with Celestron after buying the CGEM specifically for astrophotography and discovering the problem with Dec guiding. I ranted on the TeamCelestron forums and sent a threatening letter to Celestron management (along with others that did the same). Luckily, Celestron provided a firmware fix for this (still in Beta) that eliminates the problem, so I am happy with the mount and Celestron again (for now).



Greg




WOW,

You just proved my point. The power of the internet!

Q.E.D.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
derangedhermit
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 10/07/09

Loc: USA
Re: The plot thickens (Meade takeover) [Re: EddWen]
      #5962846 - 07/09/13 07:39 PM

Quote:

If you hold Meade shares, and elect to not sell them to JOC, they will be cancelled as per the Merger Agreement.



Then it seems that it would be in an individual investor's interest to sell their Meade stock to *anyone* willing to buy at any price above the current JOC offer, unless you think JOC will sweeten the pot.

After the Meade statement, it seems unlikely to me that JOC will feel the need to increase their offer unless MITC acts or the trading volume spikes.

It's interesting to read that MITC was making offers back before the JOC offer. My guess is that at least one person in Meade upper management or on the BoD made sure that ES knew about the existing MITC offer when it became absolutely clear that the Meade Board would have to accept the MITC offer very soon. (Taking Meade into bankruptcy when there is a cash offer on the table and you've already publicly stated that you won't return to break-even any time soon is IMHO a blatant abdication of fiduciary responsibility and Meade management and BoD would not escape getting burned for it.)

ES management probably wants very much to give it a shot, and persuaded JOC management to back an offer. It's 4.5 MUSD plus some operating cash, say a agreed combined 10 MUSD over 6 quarters (until after Christmas 2014) to get the financials turned around.

I can't see where the cash flow money would come from though, since if I was JOC mgmt I would want it coming out of ES, and I find it hard to believe that ES currently generates 1 MUSD a quarter that can be put into Meade.

If ES has convinced JOC to put $10M non-ES money into Meade, that's a pretty impressive internal sales job.

The tax loss thing won't help until someone's making a profit, right?

Lee


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: << 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | >> (show all)


Extra information
5 registered and 17 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Starman27, kkokkolis 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 64032

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics