Extreme RIP OFF

[Firestarter]

You are correct about that hull, It is one of Roarks first designs.
I really do not know what is involved in the bottom design protection. But what I can say is that, it is not like a regular patent, BK, has written on this before, if she has botherd to follow any of this she might enlighten you.

I am pretty sure STV was the first, but buy no means did Brad Collins ever copy any feature of an STV. They are VERY VERY different boats.

Really go take a look, and then try and get a ride.

RT

[Barney]

Can I add a ski bottom from here?

[Liqui-Fly]

Meant that I could measure up an STV and a Mirage and see more similarites between the two than say a Stoker, Laser, Sleek or whatever. Whoever built the second of the two was definitely interested in the design aspects of the first.....so which was it....STV or Mirage....or perhaps there is another builder out there. LF

[Liqui-Fly]

Hard to believe that is what all the sniveling is about. LF

[Sam Baker]

What Barney has there is a Lightning/QuarterShot 3 seater. Jack still builds that boat (bottom is different now) calling it the T3.

Sam

[BK]

Actually, Mod-VP boats are second generation, derived from a class known as VP (Vee Production). This class was meant to allow regular family ski boats (Like Avenger. etc) with full upholstered seating for 5, to compete in a special class. The Lake Havasu Classic was where I first saw these family boats run. They were to have a VEE design.

But one year, they allowed an Eliminator tunnel to compete. This boat had pickle forks, but the rule stated it must have a center pod. Allowing a "pickle fork" tunnel design to run in a VEE Bottom class sent all the V designers scurrying to build "THE NEW MODVP" . (not a copy, but a SIMILAR design).

STV was probably the first to offer a production MODVP pickle fork, but Mirage was designing at the same time but ran into a hang up -- Louis Collins' design - a guy named Cullen as partner - tooled completely FROM SCRATCH by David Lee. It probably took more than five attempts - and TENS OF THOUSANDS of dollars --- to find the perfect design to mold. The partnership disolved, and Mirage was reborn in Texas, tooled up by famous wood builder Tom Drozd. And now you can add more costs to that research and development column.

What Barney has is a copy of the Collins/Lee/Cullen boat from the mid 1980s.

To "copy" a boat probably shaves $35,000 to $60,000 off the builders research and engineering development stages -- big amounts of expenses, time and money. A copy-cat simply by-passes the most critical and expensive parts of hi-performance tunnel boat building.

Developing a product that runs as great as you want sometimes takes YEARS to accomplish. But a copy-cat just simply greases up an existing boat and copies it -- he can begin production immediately, with NO money forked out for plug building, plug testing, research or engineering expenses.
That's why it is so wrong. I'm sure everyone can see that.

[Liqui-Fly]

I guess I look at boat building from a different perspective. I'm a sharing type of guy. I find it hard to believe anyone would put all their eggs in one basket for any reason other than the pursuit of a passion. One should know the market is small as it is so I look at a racing boat design from a bragging standpoint. How much money is lost to copies? It can't be all that much...plus I'm a consumer so I like the best boat for the dollar whatever it may be. Business is a tough world...if you are counting on one hull to keep you afloat (hehe) you are going to be in trouble. Now if someone splashes your entire line....well then maybe you got something. Me personally if I built a kick ass boat...I'd be happy to sell just one..but I'd never dream of making a living off it. If you want to do that you'd better build bass boats and Bayliners. I've never seen a case where splashing has hurt another company.
LF

[BK]

LOL!

SO... you say you'll spend a year designing a single model, starting with a pile of WOOD, paying someone to build you a plug, testing it day after day, month after month -- making changes and tweaking it -- then finally, months later, build a mold to begin production ............. spending tens of the thousands of dollars.....

A year later, after you have finally have worked all the bugs out -- and unveil your newest creation ---

and the guy next door greases it up and molds it, simply to suck a profit from all the sweat and work that YOU did.

You honestly think the original guy should be humble and say, "Oh, It's ok -- I like to share"?

[Raceman]

Fly, I gotta tell ya, I've owned 1 Mirage (Jag) and 2 STV's now, and to say the two are identical is about like sayin all cars are the same. When I sold the Mirage in favor of the second STV, it took over a day to put the STV on the non adjustable trailer the Mirage had been on. The bottoms are totally, and I mean TOTALLY different, and I'm not just talkin' about the pad. There's a huge difference in the way the boats behave. The Mirage could be slammed and never get out until top end, with no porpoise. I always felt like it was flightier than my other boats though and drove a local one that was the later model and it felt so flighty I wouldn't get back in it. On the negative side of the STV's, mine both go through a mid range porpoise that I don't have the courage to drive it through without lifting, but once through that, when it lays over, it's a lot more comfortable feeling than the Mirage, at least to me.

The point is, both builders, as well as others have expended considerable resources, and don't forget risk, to develop workable products, and I find it incredible that there's not more protection. Hell we give a newspaper article or TV news report more protecton with copywrite laws than we do boat builders.

[Techno]

If I write a song, make a copyright, build a better mousetrap, write a great book- whatever. This Allows anyone to just take the sweat of my brow and sell it as their own? I don't think so.
It doesn't matter if it is cheaper or it's a "special" item, it was stolen. The entire reason for patents was to allow the developer to gain from the idea or product. If this wasn't done then there is no reason for anyone to improve on anything and we wouldn't have what we have. This country was one of the first to protect the rights of an inventor or other for something new, and look how many things have sprung from such a simple concept.

A few other things about splashing.
Was the mold built so it doesn't warp?
Was the boat built properly? the correct material and layup schedule?
Did the copy cat know how to do it and what to do with it.
Is the material that was used true? or was it covered up to make it look like it was built right with kevlar, or not a chopper gun?
When the boat fails to perform or just fails does it count against the out of busness copy cat or the copied company?

If you wanted to start in making boats how many models do you think you would offer at first? ONE! A mold cost one hell of a lot of money and thats after you have spent countless time and money to finalize on the production design.
Then you market it and on-and on to build your comapany and someone comes along and steals it! Even if you only make one model why should you have to protect yourself from theft? Making more than one model can work against your marketing scheme.

It's not the hull they stole.
BUT
The hours that went into the design and concept
The hours spent in proving and testing
The hours in producing a plug
The hours in producing a mold
The hours in producing the boats
The hours in marketing
The hours in forming a company
The paycheck from the workers.
For every boat they sell guess who doesn't sell one.

The cost of anything is the time and materials to build it. But R&D too has to be absorbed. Along with any tooling and equipment. And a profit if there wasn't a profit there wouldn't be any reason for doing it. If it wsn't done then there wouldn't be anything to splash.

Would you by a Rolex for $15 on a street corner (A Rolex splash)

I am always amazed when a law is broken but it's broken in an "undefined" field. IF you break the law on the internet They have to have new laws to cover it. It's not enough that something was stolen but it was stolen in a way that was --- What?
So recently they made it against the law to "splash" a boat and sell it. Was thier really a need to make a new law to enforce a blantant form of theft?

You work in plastics, What do Kevlar, Teflon, Gortex and such mean. Are they trade names or are they chemical names?

[Liqui-Fly]

It is a boat, a freaking toy, nothing more. It doesn't matter it means nothing and does nothing for most of the population. Patents should be used to encourage development in areas that normally would not be tapped into because the cost of R&D. The Mirage, STV or whatever hasn't made anyones life any better. It did not fill a void or start anything revolutionary. It hasn't saved a life or fed a child. I can't believe for the life of me that you all feel so passionaltely about this and it keeps coming up over and over again. Once again when has a splash ever hurt the original designer and how? If you want to be a lucrative boat builder...build pontoons and bass boats...if you want to build race boats...make em slow and no one will ever copy you. LF

[ProComp]

My STV has made my life better. Guess you've never driven one.

Guys, I don't think this guy is ever going to grasp the concept on this one. If you cannot think for yourself, take the easy way out and copy everyone else. Its a no brainer and nothing to be proud about.

[Firestarter]

Oh, how the education system has failed us.

RT

[Barney]

I learned to spell with phonics. You can't spell phonics phonetically, the phucking system does not work on itself yet our failing school system uses it!

phuck that!

Splash dat!

[Raceman]

Fly, I just cant follow your reasoning here, or rather the lack of it:

"Once again when has a splash ever hurt the original designer and how?"

Economics 101: I spend my time and money to develop a product. Doesn't matter if its a cow **** scooper, a cigar cutter, or a raceboat bottom. I also risk my own personal assets. If somebody cuts their foot off with my cow**** scooper, because he was drunk or whacked on drugs, or didn't follow the f#ckin' instructions, or I didn't make some idiot proof warning that stickin' his bare foot in the **** scooper while blindfolded might cause injury, it's real likely that some attorney, for a measley 40 to 50% of the total hiest is going to try and relieve me of all my personal assets. Now if I put up with all this development cost and risk, I have a reasonable expectation of some level of return on my investment. Now here comes some jerkoff that copies my design. He doesn't have any engineers. He hasn't done any development work and probably as such is not even as financially sound as my business is. So he builds his cow **** scooper. His copy is not as good in the first place, because in that he was not involved in the development phase, he doesn't realize that the hinge pins in the **** scooper must be heat treated to be durable. So his product failes. People see the similarites to the designs and think both designs are flawed, so they buy neither, going back to the old shovel method instead.

So here's the harm this copy of my cow **** scooper has done me: I've lost sales of legitimate customers who've liked the design, but opted for a cheaper albeit inferior copy. Some potential customers have based their evaluation of the product's suitabiltiy for them on performance of a similar but inferior product. So, I've lost sales for one of the two reasons. Lost sales equals lost profit. That's how I'm harmed. I can think of a whole 'nother paragraph on how the consumer's harmed, but I doubt you'll agree with any of this anyway and I'm not gonna bore any other poor sucker who waste's his time readin' this crap.

There ain't but one reason to build a copy or a counterfiet anything. To build it cheaper. I don't think you'll ever see a boat ad that says, "this is a copy of an Allison and it's only 20% more."

By the way, Barney and I are patenting the cow **** scooper, so don't even think about splashin' it.