Read it and Weep......

[Mauiwind]

Like others, I can only speculate as well, but to me it seems the biggest mistake was in the production of so many units. 100,000 units at a manufacturing cost of $750 each equals $75 million - 3/4 of the 100 million they raised. Had they not misjudged demand so badly, they'd likely have been able to weather the storm. The Solo is still a compelling, competitive platform even against the upcoming generation, despite what a few trolls might suggest.

The article states that they had smaller and larger versions planned, so they were on the right track in where the market interest was - larger could have been an Inspire competitor, and one only needs to look at the glowing press the Mavic is getting to see that a smaller one would have been popular.

The other issues could have gone both ways - releasing the Solo without the gimbal gave people the time to get used to the software/control system, and shake out any bugs. Maybe not the best choice, but that itself shouldn't have been, and I don't think was, a game-over type mistake.

Turning down DJI's offer? Maybe that would have made the investors happy to get a quick return on their investment, but it would have all but certainly ended everything. DJI's interest was likely a simple means of burying a competitor. They have their own flight controllers, and the open source nature of Arducopter wouldn't fit in there - the same issues that caused the split between them and DroneCode would have happened at DJI. So in the end, the investors would have made money, anything Solo related would have likely never seen the light of day, and we'd all be flying Phantoms. With that probable outcome, I think making an attempt at going it along was the right one. It didn't ultimately work, but not for the sole reason of having tried.

Anyway, as has been said... water under the bridge. Maybe you were saying it off handed, but simply purchasing a produce doesn't make one a stakeholder in a company in any legal sense, I just hope you weren't holding out for official company responses to your questions!

In all likelihood, the actual investors aren't even demanding questions. Investing is a risk, and they go into each one knowing it stands a decent chance of failing. The money to be made if just one out of 10 succeeds is sufficient to cover a loss on the others. Drones were all the rage, and investors were probably looking at it like the smartphone industry in the early days - thinking it would take off. When the FAA regulations threw a big pale of cold water on the industry, they probably chalked it up as a loss right there and forgot all about it.

I beg your pardon, investors take losing money very seriously..
And.. of course, Im not really a stakeholder. I did put my money on what is now a dead horse, though.
I suspect that 3dr didnt want a repeat of the "held hostage" to mfg. So they placed orders to free them for the future.We can only guess but those unsold units would have sold if DJI had not played a war of attrition. Still, didnt 3DR realize that DJI could afford to lose more money than 3DR? Question again...
Why didnt Mr. Anderson, (particulatly after the bow shot of a by out offer) realize what the next move by DJI had to be?

Like others, I can only speculate as well, but to me it seems the biggest mistake was in the production of so many units. 100,000 units at a manufacturing cost of $750 each equals $75 million - 3/4 of the 100 million they raised. Had they not misjudged demand so badly, they'd likely have been able to weather the storm. The Solo is still a compelling, competitive platform even against the upcoming generation, despite what a few trolls might suggest.

The article states that they had smaller and larger versions planned, so they were on the right track in where the market interest was - larger could have been an Inspire competitor, and one only needs to look at the glowing press the Mavic is getting to see that a smaller one would have been popular.

The other issues could have gone both ways - releasing the Solo without the gimbal gave people the time to get used to the software/control system, and shake out any bugs. Maybe not the best choice, but that itself shouldn't have been, and I don't think was, a game-over type mistake.

Turning down DJI's offer? Maybe that would have made the investors happy to get a quick return on their investment, but it would have all but certainly ended everything. DJI's interest was likely a simple means of burying a competitor. They have their own flight controllers, and the open source nature of Arducopter wouldn't fit in there - the same issues that caused the split between them and DroneCode would have happened at DJI. So in the end, the investors would have made money, anything Solo related would have likely never seen the light of day, and we'd all be flying Phantoms. With that probable outcome, I think making an attempt at going it along was the right one. It didn't ultimately work, but not for the sole reason of having tried.

Anyway, as has been said... water under the bridge. Maybe you were saying it off handed, but simply purchasing a produce doesn't make one a stakeholder in a company in any legal sense, I just hope you weren't holding out for official company responses to your questions!

In all likelihood, the actual investors aren't even demanding questions. Investing is a risk, and they go into each one knowing it stands a decent chance of failing. The money to be made if just one out of 10 succeeds is sufficient to cover a loss on the others. Drones were all the rage, and investors were probably looking at it like the smartphone industry in the early days - thinking it would take off. When the FAA regulations threw a big pale of cold water on the industry, they probably chalked it up as a loss right there and forgot all about it.

Yhorse, though.

 

[User Name]

I beg your pardon, investors take losing money very seriously..

Taking an investment seriously and understanding that X out of X number are likely to fail are not mutually exclusive.

 

[twitchyzero]

don't bother reasoning with the above user...he'll just put you on the ignore list when proved wrong after he calls you out.

I don't know if your questions are rhetorical...but Anderson is clearly an airhead. He should go running back to the Wired which wants to charge a subscription because they mad of ad-blocking, LOL

How WIRED Is Going to Handle Ad Blocking

 

[Mauiwind]

I shouldn't be so amazed. Companies come and go.Yet somehow, my sense is that there are others than myself, who simply feel crummy that their champion was defeated.
What was not smart about Mr. Anderson... He clearly understood that he didn't know much about certain aspects of what he was building. That's OK, but its not OK that as the Captain, his choice of some crewmembers proved to be woefully lame..
I apologise for striking out, but This company had me rootin' hard for em, and I don't like being made a fool of. On a bright note, none of that 100 million was mine to lose.

 

[Freebird32]

In perspective, this technology is in its infancy so I would expect major changes at least once every 12 months if not more frequently, kind of like Moore's law is for transistors. So even if 3DR had made all the right decisions and were able to compete, the change to what we see coming out would be radical over the next few years and beyond. The Solo would be surpassed/eclipsed by newer designs. Sorry that 3DR wasn't able to stay in, but I think we are the direct beneficiaries to this chain of events. We get amazing prices on 3DR Solo / bundles / spare gimbals / parts as they start to liquidate inventory. My oldest Solo is still flying GREAT, I just added the GPS m8 board and it locks up fast with more satellites than I can use. I am using an FPVLR antenna and next week I'll be installing the R11e wifi boards for even more solid range. The newer birds I have also fly great, no issues. So be happy we get such a great bargain on a really well engineered quadcopter/drone. I think we will also see more 3rd party add-ons, software and enhancements for this drone. Sad for 3DR but happy for us. Buy your own spares when the price is right! Solos will continue to fly without 3DR.

 

[Jubalr]

In perspective, this technology is in its infancy so I would expect major changes at least once every 12 months if not more frequently, kind of like Moore's law is for transistors. So even if 3DR had made all the right decisions and were able to compete, the change to what we see coming out would be radical over the next few years and beyond. The Solo would be surpassed/eclipsed by newer designs. Sorry that 3DR wasn't able to stay in, but I think we are the direct beneficiaries to this chain of events. We get amazing prices on 3DR Solo / bundles / spare gimbals / parts as they start to liquidate inventory. My oldest Solo is still flying GREAT, I just added the GPS m8 board and it locks up fast with more satellites than I can use. I am using an FPVLR antenna and next week I'll be installing the R11e wifi boards for even more solid range. The newer birds I have also fly great, no issues. So be happy we get such a great bargain on a really well engineered quadcopter/drone. I think we will also see more 3rd party add-ons, software and enhancements for this drone. Sad for 3DR but happy for us. Buy your own spares when the price is right! Solos will continue to fly without 3DR.

Well Said..

 

[User Name]

In perspective, this technology is in its infancy so I would expect major changes at least once every 12 months if not more frequently, kind of like Moore's law is for transistors. So even if 3DR had made all the right decisions and were able to compete, the change to what we see coming out would be radical over the next few years and beyond.

Totally agree with everything you said. While the semi-open nature of the Solo and it's on-board computer allow it's capabilities to be expanded more than others, I never believed, nor do I think even 3DR specifically intended the Solo to be capable of NEVER becoming obsolete. New features/technologies will come that can't easily be efficiently tacked onto an existing platform without compromising the overall package. As newer sensors/technologies become more mature, they'll be integrated into an overall platform, much as we see in the Mavic.

As you said, Solos continue to fly just fine with or without 3DR. I'll continue to enjoy mine, and they'll serve my needs for the next 1 to 3 generations of drones. At least one will likely still be flying when I do upgrade and I'll just repurpose it or give it away, as I do with all my old computers/smartphones/cameras/GPSs/you name it. That's how technology works, and Solo was never going to change that.

While I feel bad that our gain (cheap Solos) comes at 3DR's loss, it is what it is. 3DR might not survive and the Solo turned out to be a commercial failure, but they proved the usefulness of on-board processing and, no doubt, that will come to others in the future.

 

[rcglider]

Have been flying my new Solo this week, must say it's a great flyer, haven't flown one since December which was returned when the FAA registration debacle was enacted.

Too bad I fried the GP4. They said they'd sell me a new one for $300 in exchange, but I wish there was a cheap direct replacement brand x that makes use of the Solo camera modes.

As a pure flyer it kicks the crap out of my P4, just doesn't have the flight time.

 

[Mauiwind]

In perspective, this technology is in its infancy so I would expect major changes at least once every 12 months if not more frequently, kind of like Moore's law is for transistors. So even if 3DR had made all the right decisions and were able to compete, the change to what we see coming out would be radical over the next few years and beyond. The Solo would be surpassed/eclipsed by newer designs. Sorry that 3DR wasn't able to stay in, but I think we are the direct beneficiaries to this chain of events. We get amazing prices on 3DR Solo / bundles / spare gimbals / parts as they start to liquidate inventory. My oldest Solo is still flying GREAT, I just added the GPS m8 board and it locks up fast with more satellites than I can use. I am using an FPVLR antenna and next week I'll be installing the R11e wifi boards for even more solid range. The newer birds I have also fly great, no issues. So be happy we get such a great bargain on a really well engineered quadcopter/drone. I think we will also see more 3rd party add-ons, software and enhancements for this drone. Sad for 3DR but happy for us. Buy your own spares when the price is right! Solos will continue to fly without 3DR.

I love my solo(s) and its stuff too, but iI just looked at the functional capabilities of the DJI Mavik and its feeling to me like the mods we make to Solo are like retrofitting a 1950 Edsel. As a hobbyist, I so much enjoy the learning process and the comradery. but as a guy who is trying to create compelling aerial video, I'm beginning to question the Solo path for it. (only beginning, mind you....)

Can we talk about the fundamental nature and architecture of Solo (particularly with its now inherent developmental challenges) and what is out there now and what Solo can, and can not be? No bashing... just well considered dialogue.

 

[Marich]

I love my solo(s) and its stuff too, but iI just looked at the functional capabilities of the DJI Mavik and its feeling to me like the mods we make to Solo are like retrofitting a 1950 Edsel. As a hobbyist, I so much enjoy the learning process and the comradery. but as a guy who is trying to create compelling aerial video, I'm beginning to question the Solo path for it. (only beginning, mind you....)

Can we talk about the fundamental nature and architecture of Solo (particularly with its now inherent developmental challenges) and what is out there now and what Solo can, and can not be? No bashing... just well considered dialogue.

Umm... I'm not sure your premise is correct. To exactly what Mavic abilities are you referring?

 

[User Name]

but as a guy who is trying to create compelling aerial video, I'm beginning to question the Solo path for it.

If your primary interest is in compelling aerial video, exactly what is it about the Mavic that impresses you?

It's tiny, so it'll be far more susceptible to being blown around by the wind.
It has no autonomous smart shots, so all your flying will be manual.
It has no ease in/out of camera movements, so you'll have to do that manually.

Solo lacks collision avoidance, but since you're open to so much manual control on the Mavic, I'm not sure why manually avoiding obstacles would be a big deal.

Solo has shorter flight time, but if aerial video is your interest, the ability to save/reload smart shots negates that - spend an entire battery setting up the shot, land, throw on a new battery and then execute it as many times as you want, that day, the next, the following week, month or year. Each time, the shot will be near identical. Impossible with the Mavic, or Phantom and Karma for that matter.

The only advantage I see for the Mavic is it's portability.

I just don't get it when people say their main interest is exactly what the Solo does so well - better than others, yet they're looking to jump from Solo to one of these others. Makes no sense.

 

[Marich]

If your primary interest is in compelling aerial video, exactly what is it about the Mavic that impresses you?

It's tiny, so it'll be far more susceptible to being blown around by the wind.
It has no autonomous smart shots, so all your flying will be manual.
It has no ease in/out of camera movements, so you'll have to do that manually.

Solo lacks collision avoidance, but since you're open to so much manual control on the Mavic, I'm not sure why manually avoiding obstacles would be a big deal.

Solo has shorter flight time, but if aerial video is your interest, the ability to save/reload smart shots negates that - spend an entire battery setting up the shot, land, throw on a new battery and then execute it as many times as you want, that day, the next, the following week, month or year. Each time, the shot will be near identical. Impossible with the Mavic, or Phantom and Karma for that matter.

The only advantage I see for the Mavic is it's portability.

I just don't get it when people say their main interest is exactly what the Solo does so well - better than others, yet they're looking to jump from Solo to one of these others. Makes no sense.

Very well said!

 

[twitchyzero]

exactly what is it about the Mavic that impresses you?

It's tiny, so it'll be far more susceptible to being blown around by the wind.

Mavic has a very comparable wingspan to Phantom/Solo

Mavic ~30cm, Solo ~32cm

does User Name ever post facts or does he simply just assert biased perceptions?

 

[User Name]

Mavic has a very comparable wingspan to Phantom/Solo

Mavic ~30cm, Solo ~32cm

does User Name ever post facts or does he simply just assert biased perceptions?

There's more to how susceptible these would be to wind than wingspan. Mass is key: Mavic weighs 1.6 lbs, Solo weighs 3.9 lbs.

Does Twitchy here have any concept of even rudimentary physics, or does he simply assert based on his own biased opinions?

But now that I think of it, go ahead and dump the Solo for the Mavic. It'll reduce the competition for those of us interested in landing commercial aerial video work.

 

[Mauiwind]

Umm... I'm not sure your premise is correct. To exactly what Mavic abilities are you referring?

Let's see, off the top of my head:
range, return to home accuracy, size(portability), weight, stability in the air,object avoidance. and..... it's not a limited supply (as of yet.)
Of course, presently, Solo has much more robust software capabilities. But come on boys and girls, does anyone imagine that cable, line, orbit, etc. capabilities won't be written into their software?

At what point are you going to admit that your Solo is a dinosaur?

Look I love my Solos. dinosaur or not I know what they do and I work it. I'm just not going to be delusional about it.

 

[pyrate]

your kidding about sighting weight and stability in the air in the same sentence right?
does your new toy have two computers, so in effect the new toy is not as sophisticated as an almost two year old solo. Yeah they fake smart shots, but compare the MPCC side to side with your technically advanced new toy
you are the second person who tried to paint the folks who are not jumping to the new platforms as delusional because we don't agree with you.
didn't work out well for the last guy.
but what ever, enjoy your new toy.

 

[Marich]

Let's see, off the top of my head:
range, return to home accuracy, size(portability), weight, stability in the air,object avoidance. and..... it's not a limited supply (as of yet.)
Of course, presently, Solo has much more robust software capabilities. But come on boys and girls, does anyone imagine that cable, line, orbit, etc. capabilities won't be written into their software?

At what point are you going to admit that your Solo is a dinosaur?

Look I love my Solos. dinosaur or not I know what they do and I work it. I'm just not going to be delusional about it.

Ok, thanks for letting me know you aren't to be taken seriously.

 

[User Name]

return to home accuracy
size(portability)
weight
object avoidance.

None of which aid your stated goal of creating compelling aerial video.

Range,
stability in the air

Solo is entirely stable in the air, more than the Mavic due to it's light weight. Solo weighs about a 1/2 lb more than DOUBLE the Mavic. Regardless of people's "gut feeling", physics is physics - an object of equal size but increased mass will better resist forces applied to it. Simple, proven physics.

But come on boys and girls, does anyone imagine that cable, line, orbit, etc. capabilities won't be written into their software?.

What allows Solo to be so smooth in it's movements is the on-board computer which calculates all the easing and feeds that to the flight controller in real time. Phantom doesn't have on-board processing, Mavic doesn't, and unless it was left out for some reason, Karma doesn't either, so all those calculations would need to be done on the ground. Trying to feed that kind of real-time data from the controller over a wireless data connection, so far, hasn't been accomplished, and it's been tried with the Phantom 4 and the apps which control it.

I'm just not going to be delusional about it.

I don't think any of us are delusional about it either. The simple fact is that no other drone on the market or upcoming has the key capabilities of on-the-fly flight path creation with smooth easing in and out of waypoints and camera angles or free-look modes.

I'm not saying the Mavic isn't exceeding the Solo in the ways you list, it absolutely is, but those things don't aid capturing smooth aerial video. That's why your premise seems wrong. It's like saying "My goal is professional still photography. I have a DSLR, but I'm thinking of replacing it with the newest point-and-shoot camera because it has geo-tagging and built-in Instagram filters". Those are snazzy features, but they don't aid professional still photography. It just seems you're blinded by the snazzy features of the Mavic.

But hey, if you want to buy a Mavic, go for it, it looks like a great machine. Your mind seems made up and you're just disagreeing with anyone who disagrees with you. Buy the Mavic and be happy... I mean that sincerely. If it does it for you, more power to you. I'd buy one myself if I thought it would aid my interests in flying these things.

 

[Mauiwind]

None of which aid your stated goal of creating compelling aerial video.



Solo is entirely stable in the air, more than the Mavic due to it's light weight. Solo weighs about a 1/2 lb more than DOUBLE the Mavic. Regardless of people's "gut feeling", physics is physics - an object of equal size but increased mass will better resist forces applied to it. Simple, proven physics.



What allows Solo to be so smooth in it's movements is the on-board computer which calculates all the easing and feeds that to the flight controller in real time. Phantom doesn't have on-board processing, Mavic doesn't, and unless it was left out for some reason, Karma doesn't either, so all those calculations would need to be done on the ground. Trying to feed that kind of real-time data from the controller over a wireless data connection, so far, hasn't been accomplished, and it's been tried with the Phantom 4 and the apps which control it.



I don't think any of us are delusional about it either. The simple fact is that no other drone on the market or upcoming has the key capabilities of on-the-fly flight path creation with smooth easing in and out of waypoints and camera angles or free-look modes.

I'm not saying the Mavic isn't exceeding the Solo in the ways you list, it absolutely is, but those things don't aid capturing smooth aerial video. That's why your premise seems wrong. It's like saying "My goal is professional still photography. I have a DSLR, but I'm thinking of replacing it with the newest point-and-shoot camera because it has geo-tagging and built-in Instagram filters". Those are snazzy features, but they don't aid professional still photography. It just seems you're blinded by the snazzy features of the Mavic.

But hey, if you want to buy a Mavic, go for it, it looks like a great machine. Your mind seems made up and you're just disagreeing with anyone who disagrees with you. Buy the Mavic and be happy... I mean that sincerely. If it does it for you, more power to you. I'd buy one myself if I thought it would aid my interests in flying these things.

Golly, you guys are missing my point completely. I dont have $1K today to buy a Mavik and if I did you can be sure that I'd be buying two Solos and a used GP4S. My point is this:
In spite of my loyalty to Solo, technology continues getting more capable and cheaper at the same time. Nothing new.

Most of us here. (Including me) have more skin in the Solo experiment than money. That is to say. Our guts are in it.
Really, that situation is only about half our own fault. Besides being the kind of "never say die" kind of people we are. we were targeted by a very treacherously clever ad campaign that appealed to our sense of the possible. The call to dream big and dare to believe..... thats why you're a Soloist. Your passion for an exciting tomorrow is why you are here reading this.

So, here we are, strung out on a concept that as of right now, still rings true in our hearts. What Im saying is that we shouldn't let go of that faith in possibilities. What I'm trying to say is that our fearless leader has been vanquished, and we shouldnt kill ourselves over it. (or mulling over a dead horse.) Rather, we who have been abandoned, must look to the future knowing that what is actually left is we who have cared and fought and survived. Our collective power remains unstoppable. We are still great warriors for sky high dreams and we are deserving of courageous, commited and brilliant leadership.

As the great and honorable rabbit once said,
"Thats all folks."

 

[User Name]

What I'm trying to say is that our fearless leader has been vanquished, and we shouldnt kill ourselves over it. (or mulling over a dead horse.) Rather, we who have been abandoned, must look to the future knowing that what is actually left is we who have cared and fought and survived. Our collective power remains unstoppable. We are still great warriors for sky high dreams and we are deserving of courageous, commited and brilliant leadership. ."

Perhaps the misunderstanding is that, not being emotionally attached to the Solo or 3DR, I'm simply looking it from a standpoint of "I have these specific needs, at this point in time, Solo has the specific features to accomplish those needs, and none of the others do". That's it. That's literally, honestly, it. Aside from not wanting to drop another grand on these things at the moment, if the Mavic had the smart shot capabilities of the Solo, I'd be all over it. I do a lot of hiking and it'd be great having such a small setup.

Not being emotional about the whole thing means I don't see it as "my team got defeated by the OTHER team" or "My fearless leader has been vanquished, as you put it, but I plan to fight to the death".

I bought a product.
It still works.
It still does things others don't.
I specifically want those things it does that others don't.
So I'm going to keep using it.

Until all the other drones on the market have the capabilities the Solo has PLUS all those fancy new things like object avoidance, Solo isn't a dinosaur, and I'm simply not going to say or agree that it is. This is like the film vs. digital debate of years past. In the beginning, the digital adopters criticized the film people for using hopelessly outdated technology. But the fact is that film WAS better than the early digital cameras. Even if the handwriting was on the wall, and film WAS an ancient technology, the fact is that it DID produce a better image than the early film cameras for some time. That's where we are with the Solo - new technology is out, but the Solo still produces a better image, and the best image is what's going to land me paying work, not object avoidance, not being able to put the drone in my pocket, not being able to return to centimeters from where it took off. Those are nice, but they won't help me capture *the best* image.

And for what it's worth, I was one of the digital camera early adopters, but I didn't get wrapped up in the "film is dead" debate. I loved my first digital cameras because I was learning photography at the time and it allowed me to play with all the settings and see the effect immediately. The image quality might have been better with film, but the speed at which I was able to see what was working and what wasn't was of greater importance. So then, like now, I looked at things from a standpoint of "I have these specific needs, and I'll use whatever product best accomplishes them".

Don't get all emotional about products or corporations, because I can assure you, they're not all emotional about you. Their only goal is to make money, and if that means throwing customers under the bus, that's exactly what they'll do. Once you look at it that way, you can continue to enjoy a product that's been abandoned and who's creators have left you out in the cold as they headed for greener pastures.