So who's copping the 1000???

Thank you for that wonderful dissertation foo, and I can only wonder where you receieved your degree in economics to become so educated in the field as you are, I recieved mine from the University of Florida circa 1999. Not to mention being a bussiness owner of 10 years, I know a thing or two contrary to your claim of "funny how you speak of econ but have no firm grasp of basic business concepts."

Firstly, since your whole post is directed at me, I'm not sure wheather or not to assume this comment "#1 who cares what a piece of gear looks like, anyone who says "it looks better then X gear" immediatly has disqualified him/herself from the discussion. " is aimed at me. If it is, well wrongfully so since I never made any comments about the aesthetics of it, other than to say on a much earlier post that I didn't really like the colors. That said, if somebody else wants to not like the product because they don't think it looks nice, that's their perogotive, even if it means you disqualify them from the discussion.

Now, let me correct you on some of your flat out wrong statements.

Let's start with "YOU DONT RELASE A PEICE OF GEAR DESIGNED TO SUPPLANT YOUR 2 BIGGEST SELLERS< YOU RELEASE GEAR TO SUPPLANT THE COMPETITION. "


You've stated this same idea multple times in your "thesis" and while true, a company does not introduce a product that will kill an existing product seller, a concept known as cannabalism, it is a very common practice for a company to intorduce a new product, more scaled to the current market, to replace an older one. The new product, for whatever reason, might be more suited for a new market.

Now on to "keeping in mind this basic rule and that the USA is thier #1 market. Using different main components that are cheaper will cost akai money?"

Maybe I should have been a little clearer. Firslt, unlike what you said, I did not say that it WOULD cost more, that it COULD possibly cost more. And yes, if you have a designed internal structure for a piece of electronics such as an MPC, and you want to release a product that has a completely new design, so that you can use a different set of internal components, the money that goes into R&D to test and eventually pass this new equipment, could end up costing more. R&D is one of the most expensive parts of the process for electronics.

Next, " if you make something better and cheaper then what you are making now you have to find ways to move them into different markets so they dont directly compete with each other. what you are talking about would be like if the Triton LE was BETTER then the Triton and Triton Studio."

No, that's not what I am talking about. This harks back to the comment made at the beginning of this post. Sometimes, after a product line has run it's course, there is a need for a new product, and a new one is released. To use your example, one day in the not to distant future, when the Triton Studio is not selling so good anymore and people are ready for a new product, Korg will once again release a new product, that will in a sense surplant the Triton Studio. This is the way it is, has, and always will be. The MPC2000xl while once being a good seller, is hardly selling like it once was. If you want to know what I mean, call your local Sam Ash or Guitar Center and ask them how long they have been sitting on their current stock. Well guess what, when the get the 1000, they will be selling them a lot more, simply because it's a new product.





All this said, bare this in mind. I am not saying at all that everything that I typed above is fact. Indeed, the 1000 might not be intended to target the 2000xl market, but to state that as fact based on your faulty economic threory would be wrong. What we do know for a fact is that the 1000 will have features that the 2000xl simply does not. This is a specs fact, one that can't be argued with (except we 4000 owners know that Akai specs don't neccessarily mean anything ) Calling on those specs, we also know that it has some things that are less (i.e. the 4 outs only - although standard), but for you or I to assume we know what Korg's marketing is targeting without even having ever seen the product, is completely speculative.

ok. I dont care where you got your degree, I copped both of mine @ CAL, but my degree in NO WAY means that I know more or less then someone about business and econ, so why even bother to state it? does the fact that I went to cal and you to U of Florida mean I am smarter or better? no. So your statement that you got an econ degree form Florida is meaningless here. I too took many an econ and business class. so calm down. the theory of it can be gleaned by any person who can read. I know people who have no degree that know econ. inside and out better then my econ. 1 prof.

OK you said:
"You've stated this same idea multple times in your "thesis" and while true, a company does not introduce a product that will kill an existing product seller, a concept known as cannabalism, it is a very common practice for a company to intorduce a new product, more scaled to the current market, to replace an older one. The new product, for whatever reason, might be more suited for a new market. "
I say:
exactly, for NOOBS like I said all along. like I said, less outs, internal sounds, prolly worse d/a a/d converters (but well wait and see when it drops) its geared for a diff. market THE 325 market dominated by Yamaha/Roland, the 1000 is made to compete with the su700/mc303/sp808/asrX and Korg Es-1. NOT THE MPC line. Why cannibalize the 540 when you can simply force Mercedez out of your market. Basic business.

YOU said:

Maybe I should have been a little clearer. Firslt, unlike what you said, I did not say that it WOULD cost more, that it COULD possibly cost more. And yes, if you have a designed internal structure for a piece of electronics such as an MPC, and you want to release a product that has a completely new design, so that you can use a different set of internal components, the money that goes into R&D to test and eventually pass this new equipment, could end up costing more. R&D is one of the most expensive parts of the process for electronics.

ok, I musunderstood what you were saying.
YOU SAID
No, that's not what I am talking about. This harks back to the comment made at the beginning of this post. Sometimes, after a product line has run it's course, there is a need for a new product, and a new one is released. To use your example, one day in the not to distant future, when the Triton Studio is not selling so good anymore and people are ready for a new product, Korg will once again release a new product, that will in a sense surplant the Triton Studio. This is the way it is, has, and always will be. The MPC2000xl while once being a good seller, is hardly selling like it once was. If you want to know what I mean, call your local Sam Ash or Guitar Center and ask them how long they have been sitting on their current stock. Well guess what, when the get the 1000, they will be selling them a lot more, simply because it's a new product.

you also assume the mpc 2000xl has run its course,call akai and ask how many they ship of those compared to the other models you WILL be surprised. the 2000xl still sells well. not as well as when its the only one, but back to the niche market BMW analogy, the 5 series comes out, its the onlt one you can get, so it sells like hotcakes, but then you drop the 3 series geared to another group entirely. now the people who own 5 series, may now fall into this "new" 3 series target group and change to the 3 series. so sure, sales of the 5 series hurt, as users who really werent suited for it move to a more suitable product IE noobs and semi noobs move to the 1000. but that doesnt mean the market for the 5 series is gone, its just CHANGED> from a "universal" line to a more tailored line for pro's. why do you think its blue? so that it appeals to the peopel who care what it looks like (ie a NON pro user, what pro cares what it looks like, what pro would need "built in sounds?") again, this gives the illusion of choice, but really is just sorting consumers into product groups, which does several things, gives them a product and creates a visible "step up" line, for them to follow. use the noob one, then get a pro one, then get the super duper pro one when you are ready for all that. thus the reason they will sell more, besides it being new is that users who didnt really fit the 2000xl market, will now have a piece of gear that "fits" for them. these new purchases, al lot of them will be 2000/4000 users who find that the features of the 1000 fit a lot better for the level they are at making music. that is what will drive sales, people moving from the 5 to the 3 series, and noobs getiing into (or as I said Noobs and SEMI noobs) the same thing happened when BMW introduced the 5 and 3 and 7 series cars. similar markets with similar rules.
wrong, I can easily make an educated guess as to the marketing strategy based on how they promote it, what it looks like, what its features are. noobs NEED to integrate the kit with a PC, cuz most noobs nowdays are stepping over from a Pc, and will want to still use that with the kit, hence the usb, smartmedia etc. you can easily look and make educated guesses, thats the core of business, making your best guess as to what will sell and how to sell it to them.

yes the 1000 and 2000 will have different features if the 1000 is to replace the 2000 why not give the 1000 the same fetures then add some more? they didnt cuz the 20000 remains the bread and butter, just like KORG sells the triton still as its bread and butter, despite the fact that the triton studio does waaayy more. people remain loyal. look at techinics, they are still king of the hill with a product made in 1970. age dont mean it will become worthless (mpc 60/3000)

I am not stating "FACT" that what I said (my theory is just that, theory, but its based on good business sense and rules, thus is an "educated guess:" which is all we can do now, look at what it looks like, does and how they have hyped it so far and then look at the rest of the line and apply basic business rules, thus creating a theory with a reasonable % chance of being correct.) I am stating that the stuff I use to support my hypothesiszing is based on business rules and thus is as good an educated guess as anyone else working at a yamaha, roland etc. is making about the line as well.

oh and I think you mean AKAI features, korg dont make the MPC series dog.

oh and to have owned a busienss for 10 years and got a ba in 99. well class of 95, you started the busines in High school? or did you start college late?

Well obviously I meant Akai

Anyway, there are a bunch of points again that you made that I want to retort but it's become too much work. And some of them would just be repeating myself from my last post so I won't do it.

I will say this though. I find myself defending a position that I never really stated. I never came out and said that I think that the 1000 was meant to replace the 2000xl. You jumped into this discussion by questioning some of my very sound economic theory and I have been defending it, because it is not wrong. But I NEVER said before hand that I was so sure that the 1000 was designed as a replacement. It will undoubtedly eat into the 2000xl market, and Akai knows this but to what extent they expect it to, well you and I do not know their plan.

As to your question of my bussiness and when I started it. I started it as a college undergrad. I own and run a very successfull concert event and production company. I started it as an undergrad at UF, almost as a hobby, and it became quite lucrative and paid my way though school, including undergrad at Warrington school of bussiness at UF, and through to my MBA at UF in '99. 1993-present....

"I never came out and said that I think that the 1000 was meant to replace the 2000xl."

I will say it, err, rather think it. The price is just too close.

JusDaFied, still in FL?

Yeah, 3....Still kicking it in FL. Right now I reside in Winter Park.

is what I will be doing in November at Guitar Center.......

it will be whack. if you have a 2000 dont hawk it yet. anything made to make someone go "oooooh cool colors is a POS, a la the mpc4000. How long have they been promising os features? hahahah

oh and we can sit here and argue business principles all day long and I can pull out at least 5 texts that say your theory is flat out wrong, just like I have some that say what I said is wrong, we arent arguing economics per se, but business marketing theory based on economic prionciples.

all that aside, I would still lean towards the BMW analogy, why would BMW drop a huge part of its line, the 2000xl still sells well since: only a moron would use the 4000 live, and the 2000xl is rock solid in all aspects of its functionality. The reason GC has so many in stock is another business priciple (one wal mart ignores) when you have a popular item, it makes sense to stock more of them then say, a less popular item, say the DPS 12 (which I think is now discontinued- I guess a lot of people had problems with crashes and losing all thier data-I read that on synthsite.com under the reviews and on harmonycentral.com)

age still has nothing to do with how well it works and sells since if that was the case when vestax dropped its TT the 1200 should have goone the way of the dodo, yet this piece of 1970's kit still is the best selling TT in the world.

still a quick look at the features set of the 1000: 4 outs, (the filters look cool tho), cheezy blue color, built in sounds, man its for noobs. Its like zoom gear, sure its got mad features, mad modern stuff but the internals are a POS and nobody in thier right mind would use it for any "pro" or "semi pro" appliaction.

the 1000 is for noobs and they will be using it to rock Korg.yamaha.and roland. Look at that roland MPC. do you think its a conicidence that when akai decides to jump into the roland dominated end of the market Roland decides to jump in on the akai dominated end of the market?

like I said, cant be sure, but you can look at all the data and make an educated guess.

This is probably the same convo producers were having when the 2000 was released, its a toy, its for noobs, its not as good as the 3000, no Roger Linn, blah, blah, blah. Who gives a ****.

Anybody who reads Future Music magazine, they are going to review the 1000 next month. Check it out....

bla, bla, bla, is this a business battle or an mpc1000 convo? haha

I'd say this has got to be similar to when the 2000 came out which had new features, but cheaper than the 3000. Some people still prefer the 3000 over any of em. Same with the 60. The 2000xl is way overpriced for this day and age. Something thats 4 years old is going to be way outdated (and should cost a lot less to produce), so I'm suprised they still sell the 2000s at a pretty high price. I think they sell more off their reputation more than off their technology. Anybody know if they are going to continue making the 2000xl? Seems like a lot of shops are done selling that model and you can get the studio and studio plus for real cheap at the places that still do have em.

But the 1000 does appear to be a 2000xl software wise (with some added features) with some hardware differences (some gains some losses). Someone said the pads are the same earlier. I've seen quite a few pics on this and unless every one of them is skewed, they are definately rectangular. Might have the same width though. I think we are all anxiously awaiting the pdf manual though, right? Thats the best way to confirm features. I remember reading the whole damn 4000 manual. Never ended up buying it after finding out it didn't do what I needed. I'll buy the 1000 if it does what it says, but we'll just wait and see if Akai delivers on this.

McSmooth, I agree with you.
Maybe sould we just wait to know what's that 1000 really about before debating. Personally, I thought about all that again and, i might comtemplate gettin it if my 2kXL would krash suddenly, but before that I'd like to make sure that all my 2k files are compatible. Actually, the .mpc2000 sound files seem not to be readable by the 1000 and all my sounds are in this format.

We'll see.

COMPATIBILITY 
MPC2000XL SEQ, PGM (*), WAV 
MPC4000 SEQ, WAV (No PGM compatibility) 
MPC3000 No compatibility 
Z4/8 .WAV sample data only 
S5/6000 .WAV sample data only 
S1000/3000 No compatibility

(*) When PGM file is loaded, only pad assign is loaded. Other edit parameters are ignored

hmm could be. But you are right we will have to wait and see how akai prices the unit and drops the manual b4 all this, so this is really a moot point.

The price has already been released. The MSRP will be $999UDS, which means that the street/internet price will probably land at around $700 -$800 within the year.

I agree with you that the pads look rectangular ala this image.



But according to the Akai web page "As part of its lineage, the MPC1000 features the sixteen characteristic velocity and pressure sensitive pads that have been an established (and essential) component of the MPC series since its inception – arguably, they are the best pads on any drum machine past or present!"

By this comment, it would sure sound like they are the same pads. Would be a shame if they dared change them.

they look square to me, it could be that if the case is shaped diff. then the other MPC cases then the "perception" you get from looking at it top down is two of the sides of the pads are larger then the others.

dr.foo i still do not understand your hate for the 4000. i do not have one , still have my 2000xl.. my future plan is to spend like 200 on a sound module , either proteus , trinity or jv , i will take your suggestion on a 200 some dollar module but thats another topic..... then try to sell enough beats to get a 4000.. the 1000 would only get copped if i had a lot of cheese , the 1000 looks like the easy way out mp , it looks fun , i dont like it looking fun , i want it to look confusing and above all boring and basic , but looks are nothing sound and inner beauty are so deep..... i have been gone some bad ish happened but my setup is gonna be back up soon can't wait to share knowledge with my true mpc heads