On Saturday, May 2, 2015 at 9:46:08 PM UTC-7, Martin Eastburn wrote:
If you are talking about other companies they bought the last few years
then you have to understand what process that is. It takes time.
Managers leave or retire with golden parachutes leaving the bought out
company with few to manage in the merger or takeover. The buyers have
to come up to speed and move the financial facts into their sheets.
Often this is not understood or in such a bad way that it doesn't go easy..

I have been in those positions myself. Mergers is often tough. The
enemy has just killed your changes of moving up by dumping the board
and managers you know... Or double staffing and one takes a chance
that doesn't work. Maybe the guy on the takeover looks good on paper,
Ivy school and dresses well. But does not know the company. All sorts
of bumps along the way but the union is either killing off the 'other
guys' or it is acquiring designs or market-share.

It isn't simple as you might believe. It takes years. Some never get
merged in well and are often tossed out. Either given away, put out on
their own again or just dumped in mass and loss taken.

Business is complex and so is Finance. They seemed like less tech than
EE or Physics but once in the Big world of world wide companies you
understand there are many countries that have strange to us laws that
require certain process must be done, employees can't be laid off and
they can't work over 30 hours a week..... I was. The company I retired
from had manufacturing sites in 100 countries. That is big. The
company was an org chart of companies. Some many very large. Some
smaller ones are grouped into sub levels by themselves.
Being a Sr. Scientist, I worked with several different companies. Two
were as favors for long time friends and done during off clock time.
Not that I was ever on a clock, but one knows when you finally get to go
home to see family, eat and sleep it is your time.

Martin

On 5/2/2015 11:15 PM, jon_banquer wrote:
On Saturday, May 2, 2015 at 9:00:48 PM UTC-7, Martin Eastburn wrote:
Saying that Carbon3D is going to take the Market is naive. 3D-systems is
a very wide and deep company. They are constantly on the move and
expanding.

Suggest you read some of the replies below. It is a biased piece and
it suggests that the author only knows them on a surface level and a
Hodge-Podge of information. He is impressed on speed, not 70 microns..

Martin

On 5/2/2015 11:45 AM, jon_banquer wrote:
On Sunday, April 19, 2015 at 9:04:15 AM UTC-7, jon_banquer wrote:

http://seekingalpha.com/article/3116...efore-the-fall

"I believe that infant technologies like CLIP could change the dynamics of the market, and increase both demand and scalability of 3D printing. Because Carbon3D is a competitor to 3D Systems, it's hard to think of any alternative other than to short 3D Systems.

Not only has the business environment worsened, but the company doesn't have a viable business model any more. Management is more focused on reducing costs, while creating hype around stereolithography, which is almost due for a 30-year anniversary. The industry was ripe for disruption, and 3D Systems never came away with the breakthrough needed to take 3D printing from some niche opportunity into main stream. It lost.

I don't believe in comeback stories, as I'm fairly confident that the VC-backed Carbon3D is going to compete with the intent of taking the whole market over. They have the patents, and they are working with some of the finest VC guys in Silicon Valley. I also anticipate Carbon3D to utilize standard business practices to rapidly scale production for its 3D printer units. Carbon3D doesn't have to price products for profit maximization, so it has some flexibility to adjust price points to be more directly competitive with industry-stalwarts. Needless to say, DDD has really high gross margins, so there's plenty of room for Carbon3D to fight with pricing."


What's naive is your understanding of 3D Systems and how poorly they have done with the Hodge-podge of technology they have acquired.


3D Systems has no idea how to manage many of their CADCAM acquisitions.

They have done nothing with Alibre and many Alibre users are looking to switch or have already switched. The same will be true with Cimatron and Gibbscam.

I would not be surprised to see 3D Systems go bust.