Flesh Sensing Kapex, Track Saws, Domino ??

On 7/8/2017 8:31 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
> @swbelldotnet says...
>>
>> On 7/8/2017 12:32 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
>>> @swbelldotnet says...
>>>>
>>>> On 7/5/2017 9:45 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.protoolreviews.com/news/festool-buys-sawstop/31523/
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
>>>> Gass seriously.
>>>>
>>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
>>>> this type technology. IIRC the current Festool jigsaw was delayed
>>>> because of a feature that was not right for the American consumer.
>>>>
>>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
>>>
>>> Once the Germans get sick of Gass and give him the sack I might consider
>>> buying one. But not until Gass is out of the company.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Feeling emotional today?
>
> Grow up.
>
>
If you make your decisions based on emotion, maybe you should grow up.

On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 14:45:12 +0000, Spalted Walt
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>https://www.protoolreviews.com/news/festool-buys-sawstop/31523/

Oh, crap! Now I'm going to have to sell all my Festools! ;-)

On 7/9/2017 9:26 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>>
>> On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 5:44:38 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>
>>>> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
>>>>> Gass seriously.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
>>>>> this type technology.
>>>>>
>>>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
>>>>
>>>> Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass, never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I don't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements, but it could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it. While furthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars into defending the blade stop patents.
>>>>
>>>> A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology as they have aggressively done with their own products.
>>>>
>>>> My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the technology and its ancillary developments.
>>>
>>> He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a bizarre
>>> royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if most of the
>>> industry adopted the technology.
>>>
>>>> With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no
>>>> doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the technology
>>>> until they no longer can.
>>>
>>> I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly altruistic
>>> with regard to safety technologies.
>>>
>>
>> Just a question, not an attack:
>>
>> If Festool is indeed altruistic regarding the technology and allows other to incorporate
>> it in their own tools - at what you would consider a fair royalty arrangement - would you
>> still refuse to buy Festool products based solely on the fact that Gass is part of the company?
>
> As long as he personally was profiting from the purchase, yes. The sort of
> behavior in which he has engaged should not be encouraged.
>
> If Festool does as Mercedes did with four-wheel electronically controlled
> anti-skid and makes it available to the industry at no charge then I would
> consider such a tool.

Agreed that Mercedes has shared some safety technologies. BUT I
recently was doing some research on a few Mercedes models. They state
that they have hundreds of safety patents. I read that as safety
features that they are not willing to share freely. So like ANY
business there is a limit as to what they are willing to share.

On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 10:26:36 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,=20
> [email protected] says...
> >=20
> > On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 5:44:38 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> > > In article <[email protected]>,=
=20
> > > [email protected] says...
> > > >=20
> > > > On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> > > > =20
> > > > > Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology=
took=20
> > > > > Gass seriously.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might =
have=20
> > > > > this type technology. =20
> > > > >=20
> > > > > This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology =
also.
> > > >=20
> > > > Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know G=
ass, never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I d=
on't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements, but i=
t could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it. While fu=
rthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars in=
to defending the blade stop patents. =20
> > > >=20
> > > > A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new id=
eas and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar com=
pany with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology as the=
y have aggressively done with their own products.
> > > >=20
> > > > My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the =
technology and its ancillary developments.
> > >=20
> > > He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a bizarr=
e=20
> > > royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if most o=
f the=20
> > > industry adopted the technology.
> > >=20
> > > > With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, =
no=20
> > > > doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the techno=
logy=20
> > > > until they no longer can.
> > >=20
> > > I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly altru=
istic=20
> > > with regard to safety technologies.
> > > =20
> >=20
> > Just a question, not an attack:
> >=20
> > If Festool is indeed altruistic regarding the technology and allows oth=
er to incorporate=20
> > it in their own tools - at what you would consider a fair royalty arran=
gement - would you=20
> > still refuse to buy Festool products based solely on the fact that Gass=
is part of the company?
>=20
> As long as he personally was profiting from the purchase, yes. The sort =
of=20
> behavior in which he has engaged should not be encouraged.

"Personally" may be for a long time. Even if he moves on, there may very we=
ll=20
be contractual obligations to continue to pay him.

Heck, even if he dies, there may very well be contractual obligations to
continue to pay his estate. Of course, that wouldn't be "personal". You=20
can't blame his family for his greedy ways, can you.? ;-)

>=20
> If Festool does as Mercedes did with four-wheel electronically controlled=
=20
> anti-skid and makes it available to the industry at no charge then I woul=
d=20
> consider such a tool.
>=20
> Understand, my problem with Gass is that he has been seeking a government=
-
> imposed non-regulated monopoly. This is just plain not acceptable.

On Tue, 11 Jul 2017 19:58:05 -0400, "J. Clarke"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
>@swbelldotnet says...
>>
>> On 7/10/2017 9:45 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>> > On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 10:26:36 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>> >> In article <[email protected]>,
>> >> [email protected] says...
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 5:44:38 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>> >>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> >>>> [email protected] says...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
>> >>>>>> Gass seriously.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
>> >>>>>> this type technology.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass, never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I don't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements, but it could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it. While furthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars into defending the blade stop patents.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology as they have aggressively done with their own products.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the technology and its ancillary developments.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a bizarre
>> >>>> royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if most of the
>> >>>> industry adopted the technology.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no
>> >>>>> doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the technology
>> >>>>> until they no longer can.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly altruistic
>> >>>> with regard to safety technologies.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Just a question, not an attack:
>> >>>
>> >>> If Festool is indeed altruistic regarding the technology and allows other to incorporate
>> >>> it in their own tools - at what you would consider a fair royalty arrangement - would you
>> >>> still refuse to buy Festool products based solely on the fact that Gass is part of the company?
>> >>
>> >> As long as he personally was profiting from the purchase, yes. The sort of
>> >> behavior in which he has engaged should not be encouraged.
>> >
>> > "Personally" may be for a long time. Even if he moves on, there may very well
>> > be contractual obligations to continue to pay him.
>> >
>> > Heck, even if he dies, there may very well be contractual obligations to
>> > continue to pay his estate. Of course, that wouldn't be "personal". You
>> > can't blame his family for his greedy ways, can you.? ;-)
>>
>> If you make you decisions based on emotion, yes, you can let the blame
>> go on and on.
>
>Sez the guy with a garage full of Festools.

So Leon doesn't get emotional about Gass and you (and I) think he's a
scumbag (emotional). What does a "garage full of Festools" have to do
with it?

Disclosure: I have my share of Festools, too (no SawStop).

Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>
> Yeah there is that. And I wonder what the issue with a dado blade is
> with the EU regulation. But with that knowledge I think it is more
> about stacking blades than cutting dado's. If the arbor oscillated
> like a spindle sander does a single blade could be used.
> As for as the EU is concerned I do not think a dado blade is the issue
> as you can get dado blades that are fixed width. I really think it is
> about the multiple stacked blades that is the issue. I think with so
> many surfaces touching each other extra pressure is needed to prevent
> the mass from coming loose on the arbor. More than a simple single
> blade. I witnessed this once on my saw, I did not properly tighten
> the dado set and it had enough mass and momentum that the stack
> continued to spin well after the arbor stopped spinning. And on my
> right tilt saw it could have loosened the nut enough to fall off.
>

As I recall, and I haven't seen this discussed in years, it was spindown
time. Dado sets take longer to spin down than a normal blade, and
apparently European Regulators can't wait that long. Maybe the saw made
that whirring noise dado sets make and they need to change their pants?

Puckdropper
--
http://www.puckdroppersplace.us/rec.woodworking
A mini archive of some of rec.woodworking's best and worst!

On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 8:22:51 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
.=20
> I would say that Festool was pretty smart with the acquisition of SawStop=
.=20
> Obviously more costly than just buying a license to offer the technology
> but also an investment into remaining relevant.

While beloved by their fans, I think some people forget that TTS is a highl=
y successful, wholly owned company that does as they please. No stockholde=
rs, no huge investment groups, no one to answer to in order to beat the las=
t gasp out of a dollar to get profits maximized at the cost of quality. Th=
ey are a manufacturing company specializing in the innovation (did you know=
that one of the companies in their lineage developed the orbital sander an=
d the track saw?), engineering and development of hand held tools.

I was surprised that no on raised an eyebrow when TTS/Festool announced a l=
oose partnership with 3M to cash in on the ever increasing auto repair mark=
et. Festool will be developing new lines of sanders (no doubt highlighting=
dust collection) and metal working tools for the industry as well as new t=
echnologies for sheet metal finishing using 3M's expertise in this field.

The point being that Festool is a billion dollar company that is moving for=
ward and there is no telling what Festool will be doing with the SS technol=
ogy. They have a lot of irons in the fires, and no doubt we know of only a=
few. No doubt they have their eye on the future of their business, and no=
doubt they are going to try to maintain their reputation as quality builde=
rs of innovative machines.

Robert

On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 23:11:25 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:

>On 7/9/2017 5:13 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 01:09:28 -0700 (PDT), "[email protected]"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>>>
>>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
>>>> Gass seriously.
>>>>
>>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
>>>> this type technology.
>>>>
>>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
>>>
>>> Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass, never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I don't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements, but it could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it. While furthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars into defending the blade stop patents.
>>>
>>> A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology as they have aggressively done with their own products.
>>>
>>> My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the technology and its ancillary developments. With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the technology until they no longer can.
>>>
>>> We may see something else that performs the same task, but I would readily bet we don't see the SawStop technology outside of the TTS stable of products.
>>
>> My take on it is that the SawStop patents are about to run out and
>> Festool just picked up another good product line, probably on the
>> cheap (because of the above).
>>
>I think patents have been on going.

Sure but the key patents are about to lapse. These are first patents
that block other implementations. The rest are just that,
implementations and relatively easy to work around.

On 7/9/2017 2:02 PM, dpb wrote:
> On 07/09/2017 11:23 AM, Leon wrote:
> ...
>
>> My guess is that Festool would/could probably introduce this technology
>> to their Kapex, maybe their planers... I doubt that they would want to
>> start making a Festool TS with this feature since they now own a company
>> that does make TS's. Festool seems, at least here, to focus on the
>> portable power tools. The TS is less portable with the exception of the
>> job site contractors saw.
>> I guess Festool could share technologies and maybe offer a better fence
>> other than the Beis clone. Something like the old Delta Unifence comes
>> to mind. Maybe not a wobble but perhaps an oscillating blade option for
>> dados.
>
> I can't see much need at all on planer unless you're thinking of
> handheld jobbers (which I guess is all Festool would have, anyway) so
> maybe.

Yeah, the Festool hand held planer.


>
> I think the biggest safety spot albeit not so much in use any more w/
> the advent of the larger router is the spindle shaper (or the router
> mounted as a shaper). There's a chunk of spinning steel that can do
> some major damage in a hurry. I doubt it could meet the proposed CPSC
> spec, but it could minimize the trauma otherwise.

I wonder if the shapers, and mostly because they spin at a relative low
RPM compared to a TS blade, if they could make an electromagnetic brake
much like cordless drills use.

>
> Festool'll have to stay out of the equation on the TS from the EU
> regulation standpoint or there will be no dado head of any type; EU
> reg's prohibit them and I think enforce user compliance by not allowing
> an arbor shaft long enough to mount one...

Yeah there is that. And I wonder what the issue with a dado blade is
with the EU regulation. But with that knowledge I think it is more
about stacking blades than cutting dado's. If the arbor oscillated like
a spindle sander does a single blade could be used.
As for as the EU is concerned I do not think a dado blade is the issue
as you can get dado blades that are fixed width. I really think it is
about the multiple stacked blades that is the issue. I think with so
many surfaces touching each other extra pressure is needed to prevent
the mass from coming loose on the arbor. More than a simple single
blade. I witnessed this once on my saw, I did not properly tighten the
dado set and it had enough mass and momentum that the stack continued to
spin well after the arbor stopped spinning. And on my right tilt saw it
could have loosened the nut enough to fall off.

Check out this Felder dado blade. Actually stacked but only two really
wide dado blades that engage on the arbor and two dowels that lock the
blades to prevent slipping between each blade.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06PzXIqzQXM

On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 7:58:12 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
> @swbelldotnet says...
> >=20
> > On 7/10/2017 9:45 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> > > On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 10:26:36 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> > >> In article <[email protected]>,
> > >> [email protected] says...
> > >>>
> > >>> On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 5:44:38 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> > >>>> In article <[email protected]>=
,
> > >>>> [email protected] says...
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> > >>>>> =20
> > >>>>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technolog=
y took
> > >>>>>> Gass seriously.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might=
have
> > >>>>>> this type technology.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology=
also.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know=
Gass, never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I=
don't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements, but=
it could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it. While =
furthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars =
into defending the blade stop patents.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new =
ideas and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar c=
ompany with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology as t=
hey have aggressively done with their own products.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing th=
e technology and its ancillary developments.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a biz=
arre
> > >>>> royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if mos=
t of the
> > >>>> industry adopted the technology.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plan=
s, no
> > >>>>> doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the tec=
hnology
> > >>>>> until they no longer can.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly al=
truistic
> > >>>> with regard to safety technologies.
> > >>>> =20
> > >>>
> > >>> Just a question, not an attack:
> > >>>
> > >>> If Festool is indeed altruistic regarding the technology and allows=
other to incorporate
> > >>> it in their own tools - at what you would consider a fair royalty a=
rrangement - would you
> > >>> still refuse to buy Festool products based solely on the fact that =
Gass is part of the company?
> > >>
> > >> As long as he personally was profiting from the purchase, yes. The =
sort of
> > >> behavior in which he has engaged should not be encouraged.
> > >=20
> > > "Personally" may be for a long time. Even if he moves on, there may v=
ery well
> > > be contractual obligations to continue to pay him.
> > >=20
> > > Heck, even if he dies, there may very well be contractual obligations=
to
> > > continue to pay his estate. Of course, that wouldn't be "personal". Y=
ou
> > > can't blame his family for his greedy ways, can you.? ;-)
> >=20
> > If you make you decisions based on emotion, yes, you can let the blame=
=20
> > go on and on.
>=20
> Sez the guy with a garage full of Festools.

What does owning a particular brand of (quality) tools have to do with it?

Where's the "emotional" comparison between your feelings about Gass and som=
eone
else's choice of manufacturer?

On 7/9/2017 9:12 AM, Brewster wrote:
> On 7/9/17 7:22 AM, Leon wrote:
>
>> I would say that Festool was pretty smart with the acquisition of
>> SawStop.
>> Obviously more costly than just buying a license to offer the technology
>> but also an investment into remaining relevant.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> So Leon, are you ready for your next Domino to have a steel spike
> explosively shoot into the motor armature and the bit get vaporized by a
> laser when your finger gets too close to the cutter? 8^)

LOL. It would probably be beneficial but not so much as with a TS or BS.

The design of plate joiners and the Domino make them pretty safe.
BUT the Kapex could certainly benefit.


>
>
> I'll be very interested if Festool does come out with a table saw. Not
> necessarily to buy one, but to see what innovative features they might
> come up with. The TS has not changed much in the past century beyond a
> raise/tilt system and a fence, what truly game changing feature could
> possibly be next (besides more safety stuff)?
>
> -BR
>

My guess is that Festool would/could probably introduce this technology
to their Kapex, maybe their planers... I doubt that they would want to
start making a Festool TS with this feature since they now own a company
that does make TS's. Festool seems, at least here, to focus on the
portable power tools. The TS is less portable with the exception of the
job site contractors saw.
I guess Festool could share technologies and maybe offer a better fence
other than the Beis clone. Something like the old Delta Unifence comes
to mind. Maybe not a wobble but perhaps an oscillating blade option for
dados.

DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 5:44:38 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> [email protected] says...
>>>
>>> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>>>
>>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
>>>> Gass seriously.
>>>>
>>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
>>>> this type technology.
>>>>
>>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
>>>
>>> Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass,
>>> never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I
>>> don't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements,
>>> but it could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it.
>>> While furthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours
>>> and dollars into defending the blade stop patents.
>>>
>>> A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas
>>> and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar
>>> company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology
>>> as they have aggressively done with their own products.
>>>
>>> My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the
>>> technology and its ancillary developments.
>>
>> He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a bizarre
>> royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if most of the
>> industry adopted the technology.
>>
>>> With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no
>>> doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the technology
>>> until they no longer can.
>>
>> I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly altruistic
>> with regard to safety technologies.
>>
>
> Just a question, not an attack:
>
> If Festool is indeed altruistic regarding the technology and allows other to incorporate
> it in their own tools - at what you would consider a fair royalty arrangement - would you
> still refuse to buy Festool products based solely on the fact that Gass
> is part of the company?
>

Some will always make decisions based on non pertinent emotions. It's the
only way they know how to choose.

The cost to offer a feature on a product is inconsequential if your
customer is willing to pay for it. Proven time and again with the success
of each new line of saws that SS has introduced.

Given SS's success and dominance, in a relative short amount of time, and
the obvious disappearance of some brands and their respective models in
woodworking businesses, I would say that not paying for the licenses and
offering their customers a choice to to buy this safety technology was far
more costly than the license.

Before SS I recall being able to touch and feel, at local stores, the
larger DeWalt hybrid TS's, Hitachi contractor saws, Powermatic contractor
saws, Delta Unisaws and contractor saws, ShopSmith multifunction machines,
Steel City table saws. Today in the our country's 4th largest city/metro
area your obvious choices have shrunk to SawStop, Powermatic, and Jet if
you want to touch and feel a non bench top sized TS.


In the past 15 or so years, with the introduction of each new model/class
of TS, those brands/models listed above have one by one disappeared from
local retailers floors.

I would say that Festool was pretty smart with the acquisition of SawStop.
Obviously more costly than just buying a license to offer the technology
but also an investment into remaining relevant.

On 7/9/2017 3:24 PM, Puckdropper wrote:
> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>>
>> Yeah there is that. And I wonder what the issue with a dado blade is
>> with the EU regulation. But with that knowledge I think it is more
>> about stacking blades than cutting dado's. If the arbor oscillated
>> like a spindle sander does a single blade could be used.
>> As for as the EU is concerned I do not think a dado blade is the issue
>> as you can get dado blades that are fixed width. I really think it is
>> about the multiple stacked blades that is the issue. I think with so
>> many surfaces touching each other extra pressure is needed to prevent
>> the mass from coming loose on the arbor. More than a simple single
>> blade. I witnessed this once on my saw, I did not properly tighten
>> the dado set and it had enough mass and momentum that the stack
>> continued to spin well after the arbor stopped spinning. And on my
>> right tilt saw it could have loosened the nut enough to fall off.
>>
>
> As I recall, and I haven't seen this discussed in years, it was spindown
> time. Dado sets take longer to spin down than a normal blade, and
> apparently European Regulators can't wait that long. Maybe the saw made
> that whirring noise dado sets make and they need to change their pants?
>
> Puckdropper
>

Spin down time would not seem to be so as they do allow large massive
dado blades.

On 7/11/2017 3:37 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 7/11/2017 1:57 PM, Leon wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I see your point but have you heard of Hammer, Atendorf? While not
>> brands we often see, any of us have heard of them. With Youtube and
>> the demo's I suspect that woodworkers every where are familiar with
>> the SawStop brand. And I would be surprised if SawStop was not
>> already available in Europe, Australia, ect.
>
> I doubt it is available in Australia. The blades turn in the opposite
> direction there and the brake cartridge flips the blade up higher. I'm
> pretty sure they use the fence on the opposite side too.

Yeah, I had not thought of that. ;~)

In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
@swbelldotnet says...
>
> On 7/5/2017 9:45 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
> >
> > https://www.protoolreviews.com/news/festool-buys-sawstop/31523/
> >
>
> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
> Gass seriously.
>
> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
> this type technology. IIRC the current Festool jigsaw was delayed
> because of a feature that was not right for the American consumer.
>
> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.

Once the Germans get sick of Gass and give him the sack I might consider
buying one. But not until Gass is out of the company.

In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
@swbelldotnet says...
>
> On 7/8/2017 12:32 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
> > @swbelldotnet says...
> >>
> >> On 7/5/2017 9:45 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
> >>>
> >>> https://www.protoolreviews.com/news/festool-buys-sawstop/31523/
> >>>
> >>
> >> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
> >> Gass seriously.
> >>
> >> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
> >> this type technology. IIRC the current Festool jigsaw was delayed
> >> because of a feature that was not right for the American consumer.
> >>
> >> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
> >
> > Once the Germans get sick of Gass and give him the sack I might consider
> > buying one. But not until Gass is out of the company.
> >
> >
>
> Feeling emotional today?

Grow up.

In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
@swbelldotnet says...
>
> On 7/8/2017 8:31 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
> > @swbelldotnet says...
> >>
> >> On 7/8/2017 12:32 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> >>> In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
> >>> @swbelldotnet says...
> >>>>
> >>>> On 7/5/2017 9:45 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://www.protoolreviews.com/news/festool-buys-sawstop/31523/
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
> >>>> Gass seriously.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
> >>>> this type technology. IIRC the current Festool jigsaw was delayed
> >>>> because of a feature that was not right for the American consumer.
> >>>>
> >>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
> >>>
> >>> Once the Germans get sick of Gass and give him the sack I might consider
> >>> buying one. But not until Gass is out of the company.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Feeling emotional today?
> >
> > Grow up.
> >
> >
> If you make your decisions based on emotion, maybe you should grow up.

Interesting that you found it appropriate to change the conversation from
Sawstop to me. Do you have a crush on me or something?

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>
> > Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
> > Gass seriously.
> >
> > I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
> > this type technology.
> >
> > This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
>
> Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass, never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I don't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements, but it could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it. While furthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars into defending the blade stop patents.
>
> A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology as they have aggressively done with their own products.
>
> My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the technology and its ancillary developments.

He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a bizarre
royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if most of the
industry adopted the technology.

> With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no
> doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the technology
> until they no longer can.

I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly altruistic
with regard to safety technologies.

> We may see something else that performs the same task, but I would readily bet we don't see the SawStop technology outside of the TTS stable of products.
>
> Robert

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 5:44:38 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] says...
> > >
> > > On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> > >
> > > > Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
> > > > Gass seriously.
> > > >
> > > > I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
> > > > this type technology.
> > > >
> > > > This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
> > >
> > > Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass, never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I don't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements, but it could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it. While furthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars into defending the blade stop patents.
> > >
> > > A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology as they have aggressively done with their own products.
> > >
> > > My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the technology and its ancillary developments.
> >
> > He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a bizarre
> > royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if most of the
> > industry adopted the technology.
> >
> > > With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no
> > > doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the technology
> > > until they no longer can.
> >
> > I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly altruistic
> > with regard to safety technologies.
> >
>
> Just a question, not an attack:
>
> If Festool is indeed altruistic regarding the technology and allows other to incorporate
> it in their own tools - at what you would consider a fair royalty arrangement - would you
> still refuse to buy Festool products based solely on the fact that Gass is part of the company?

As long as he personally was profiting from the purchase, yes. The sort of
behavior in which he has engaged should not be encouraged.

If Festool does as Mercedes did with four-wheel electronically controlled
anti-skid and makes it available to the industry at no charge then I would
consider such a tool.

Understand, my problem with Gass is that he has been seeking a government-
imposed non-regulated monopoly. This is just plain not acceptable.

In article <968229027.521296539.111193.lcb11211-
[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 5:44:38 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> >> In article <[email protected]>,
> >> [email protected] says...
> >>>
> >>> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
> >>>> Gass seriously.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
> >>>> this type technology.
> >>>>
> >>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
> >>>
> >>> Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass,
> >>> never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I
> >>> don't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements,
> >>> but it could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it.
> >>> While furthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours
> >>> and dollars into defending the blade stop patents.
> >>>
> >>> A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas
> >>> and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar
> >>> company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology
> >>> as they have aggressively done with their own products.
> >>>
> >>> My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the
> >>> technology and its ancillary developments.
> >>
> >> He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a bizarre
> >> royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if most of the
> >> industry adopted the technology.
> >>
> >>> With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no
> >>> doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the technology
> >>> until they no longer can.
> >>
> >> I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly altruistic
> >> with regard to safety technologies.
> >>
> >
> > Just a question, not an attack:
> >
> > If Festool is indeed altruistic regarding the technology and allows other to incorporate
> > it in their own tools - at what you would consider a fair royalty arrangement - would you
> > still refuse to buy Festool products based solely on the fact that Gass
> > is part of the company?
> >
>
> Some will always make decisions based on non pertinent emotions. It's the
> only way they know how to choose.
>
> The cost to offer a feature on a product is inconsequential if your
> customer is willing to pay for it. Proven time and again with the success
> of each new line of saws that SS has introduced.
>
> Given SS's success and dominance, in a relative short amount of time, and
> the obvious disappearance of some brands and their respective models in
> woodworking businesses, I would say that not paying for the licenses and
> offering their customers a choice to to buy this safety technology was far
> more costly than the license.
>
> Before SS I recall being able to touch and feel, at local stores, the
> larger DeWalt hybrid TS's, Hitachi contractor saws, Powermatic contractor
> saws, Delta Unisaws and contractor saws, ShopSmith multifunction machines,
> Steel City table saws. Today in the our country's 4th largest city/metro
> area your obvious choices have shrunk to SawStop, Powermatic, and Jet if
> you want to touch and feel a non bench top sized TS.
>
>
> In the past 15 or so years, with the introduction of each new model/class
> of TS, those brands/models listed above have one by one disappeared from
> local retailers floors.
>
> I would say that Festool was pretty smart with the acquisition of SawStop.
> Obviously more costly than just buying a license to offer the technology
> but also an investment into remaining relevant.

Why? The only market in which SawStop has made any inroads is table saws.
Festool does not make table saws, so they don't even try to play in that
particular market.

It is more likely that they have decided to expand their product line to
include stationary tools than it is that they thought they needed to
"remain relevant".

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> On 07/09/2017 11:23 AM, Leon wrote:
> ...
>
> > My guess is that Festool would/could probably introduce this technology
> > to their Kapex, maybe their planers... I doubt that they would want to
> > start making a Festool TS with this feature since they now own a company
> > that does make TS's. Festool seems, at least here, to focus on the
> > portable power tools. The TS is less portable with the exception of the
> > job site contractors saw.
> > I guess Festool could share technologies and maybe offer a better fence
> > other than the Beis clone. Something like the old Delta Unifence comes
> > to mind. Maybe not a wobble but perhaps an oscillating blade option for
> > dados.
>
> I can't see much need at all on planer unless you're thinking of
> handheld jobbers (which I guess is all Festool would have, anyway) so maybe.
>
> I think the biggest safety spot albeit not so much in use any more w/
> the advent of the larger router is the spindle shaper (or the router
> mounted as a shaper). There's a chunk of spinning steel that can do
> some major damage in a hurry. I doubt it could meet the proposed CPSC
> spec, but it could minimize the trauma otherwise.
>
> Festool'll have to stay out of the equation on the TS from the EU
> regulation standpoint or there will be no dado head of any type; EU
> reg's prohibit them and I think enforce user compliance by not allowing
> an arbor shaft long enough to mount one...

Check again. EU regs require that the saw spin down in 10 seconds or less,
usually accomplished with a brake of some kind. Since the manufacturer
usually wants to use the cheapest brake that will do the job, they barely
put in enough brake to spin down a regular blade in that time, so put a
dado on it and it runs over. The manufacturers address this by putting a
short spindle on the saw so a dado can't be attached. One suspects that
Festool, being Festool, would just stick the brakes off a Mercedes on the
thing.

In article <i%[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> On 7/9/2017 12:28 PM, Leon wrote:
> > On 7/9/2017 9:26 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> >> In article <[email protected]>,
> >> [email protected] says...
> >>>
> >>> On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 5:44:38 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> >>>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>>> [email protected] says...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> >>>>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology
> >>>>>> took
> >>>>>> Gass seriously.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
> >>>>>> this type technology.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology
> >>>>>> also.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know
> >>>>> Gass, never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive
> >>>>> behavior. I don't see much commentary about the actual
> >>>>> technological achievements, but it could be he has taken this as
> >>>>> far as his own talent can take it. While furthering his own agenda
> >>>>> he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars into defending the
> >>>>> blade stop patents.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new
> >>>>> ideas and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion
> >>>>> dollar company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop
> >>>>> technology as they have aggressively done with their own products.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the
> >>>>> technology and its ancillary developments.
> >>>>
> >>>> He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a bizarre
> >>>> royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if most
> >>>> of the
> >>>> industry adopted the technology.
> >>>>
> >>>>> With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no
> >>>>> doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the
> >>>>> technology
> >>>>> until they no longer can.
> >>>>
> >>>> I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly
> >>>> altruistic
> >>>> with regard to safety technologies.
> >>>
> >>> Just a question, not an attack:
> >>>
> >>> If Festool is indeed altruistic regarding the technology and allows
> >>> other to incorporate
> >>> it in their own tools - at what you would consider a fair royalty
> >>> arrangement - would you
> >>> still refuse to buy Festool products based solely on the fact that
> >>> Gass is part of the company?
> >>
> >> As long as he personally was profiting from the purchase, yes. The
> >> sort of
> >> behavior in which he has engaged should not be encouraged.
> >>
> >> If Festool does as Mercedes did with four-wheel electronically controlled
> >> anti-skid and makes it available to the industry at no charge then I
> >> would
> >> consider such a tool.
> >
> > Agreed that Mercedes has shared some safety technologies. BUT I
> > recently was doing some research on a few Mercedes models. They state
> > that they have hundreds of safety patents. I read that as safety
> > features that they are not willing to share freely. So like ANY
> > business there is a limit as to what they are willing to share.
> >
> >
> I have to wonder, not that I'm cynical. . .
> We have this patent, but is it not a very good one and we could lose a
> court battle, so instead, lets give it away and get a lot of free
> publicity as an industry leader.

Could be, however earlier Volvo did the same with the three-point seat
belt.

In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
@swbelldotnet says...
>
> On 7/9/2017 3:57 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> >>
> >> On 07/09/2017 11:23 AM, Leon wrote:
> >> ...
> >>
> >>> My guess is that Festool would/could probably introduce this technology
> >>> to their Kapex, maybe their planers... I doubt that they would want to
> >>> start making a Festool TS with this feature since they now own a company
> >>> that does make TS's. Festool seems, at least here, to focus on the
> >>> portable power tools. The TS is less portable with the exception of the
> >>> job site contractors saw.
> >>> I guess Festool could share technologies and maybe offer a better fence
> >>> other than the Beis clone. Something like the old Delta Unifence comes
> >>> to mind. Maybe not a wobble but perhaps an oscillating blade option for
> >>> dados.
> >>
> >> I can't see much need at all on planer unless you're thinking of
> >> handheld jobbers (which I guess is all Festool would have, anyway) so maybe.
> >>
> >> I think the biggest safety spot albeit not so much in use any more w/
> >> the advent of the larger router is the spindle shaper (or the router
> >> mounted as a shaper). There's a chunk of spinning steel that can do
> >> some major damage in a hurry. I doubt it could meet the proposed CPSC
> >> spec, but it could minimize the trauma otherwise.
> >>
> >> Festool'll have to stay out of the equation on the TS from the EU
> >> regulation standpoint or there will be no dado head of any type; EU
> >> reg's prohibit them and I think enforce user compliance by not allowing
> >> an arbor shaft long enough to mount one...
> >
> > Check again. EU regs require that the saw spin down in 10 seconds or less,
> > usually accomplished with a brake of some kind. Since the manufacturer
> > usually wants to use the cheapest brake that will do the job, they barely
> > put in enough brake to spin down a regular blade in that time, so put a
> > dado on it and it runs over. The manufacturers address this by putting a
> > short spindle on the saw so a dado can't be attached. One suspects that
> > Festool, being Festool, would just stick the brakes off a Mercedes on the
> > thing.
> >
> >
> But dado's are being put on the Euro saws. LARGE massive dado's.
>
> This German saw will cut up to 20 mm dado's. Check the specs.

Leon, nobody said that it was impossible to stop a dado in 10 seconds.
Only that it takes more than a bargain-basement brake. That saw you're
looking at costs about three times as much as a maxed-out Sawstop so has it
occurred to you that it might have just a _little_ better brake than, say,
a $500 buck Axminster?

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> Some quick GoogleFu reveals that the knot of patents that cover different aspects of the current SawStop device expire anywhere from 4 to 7 years, but there is even a lot of uncertainty of the actual expirations. With the Gass' interlocking his patents, no telling when the actual expiration date would be. Since I have read at other sources (than the internet!) that Gass has deliberately intertwined his patents and innovations to protect them as long as possible, no
telling when the actual technology would fall into public domain.
>
> I still think that Festool has a deeper business plan, one that will use the current technology (and anything ancillary Gass has been working on) to develop other tools and markets. If they are working on a new large wheel buffer (don't just think cars size) that has a large spinning head, wouldn't it be nice to have it cut off immediately if a shirt or glove was caught in it? How nice would it be to have a blade stop technology on a joiner?

But will Sawstop technology work on a buffer? And on a jointer I think it
would have to react a lot faster than it does on a table saw.

> Not thinking they have purchased the company and its technology to simply give it away to be popular with their own competition. TTS already owns a diverse set of companies that they have integrated some aspects like the Systainers built by Tanos and their high tech shop vac built by Cleantec into their catalogue. Doubtful this is a Christmas gift for all Festool's competition and us.
>
> Probably just a smart move from a very well run company.
>
> Robert

In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
@swbelldotnet says...
>
> On 7/10/2017 9:45 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 10:26:36 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> >> In article <[email protected]>,
> >> [email protected] says...
> >>>
> >>> On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 5:44:38 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> >>>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>>> [email protected] says...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
> >>>>>> Gass seriously.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
> >>>>>> this type technology.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass, never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I don't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements, but it could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it. While furthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars into defending the blade stop patents.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology as they have aggressively done with their own products.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the technology and its ancillary developments.
> >>>>
> >>>> He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a bizarre
> >>>> royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if most of the
> >>>> industry adopted the technology.
> >>>>
> >>>>> With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no
> >>>>> doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the technology
> >>>>> until they no longer can.
> >>>>
> >>>> I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly altruistic
> >>>> with regard to safety technologies.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Just a question, not an attack:
> >>>
> >>> If Festool is indeed altruistic regarding the technology and allows other to incorporate
> >>> it in their own tools - at what you would consider a fair royalty arrangement - would you
> >>> still refuse to buy Festool products based solely on the fact that Gass is part of the company?
> >>
> >> As long as he personally was profiting from the purchase, yes. The sort of
> >> behavior in which he has engaged should not be encouraged.
> >
> > "Personally" may be for a long time. Even if he moves on, there may very well
> > be contractual obligations to continue to pay him.
> >
> > Heck, even if he dies, there may very well be contractual obligations to
> > continue to pay his estate. Of course, that wouldn't be "personal". You
> > can't blame his family for his greedy ways, can you.? ;-)
>
> If you make you decisions based on emotion, yes, you can let the blame
> go on and on.

Sez the guy with a garage full of Festools.

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 7:58:12 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
> > @swbelldotnet says...
> > >
> > > On 7/10/2017 9:45 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 10:26:36 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> > > >> In article <[email protected]>,
> > > >> [email protected] says...
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 5:44:38 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> > > >>>> In article <[email protected]>,
> > > >>>> [email protected] says...
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
> > > >>>>>> Gass seriously.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
> > > >>>>>> this type technology.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass, never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I don't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements, but it could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it. While furthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars into defending the blade stop patents.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology as they have aggressively done with their own products.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the technology and its ancillary developments.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a bizarre
> > > >>>> royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if most of the
> > > >>>> industry adopted the technology.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no
> > > >>>>> doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the technology
> > > >>>>> until they no longer can.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly altruistic
> > > >>>> with regard to safety technologies.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Just a question, not an attack:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> If Festool is indeed altruistic regarding the technology and allows other to incorporate
> > > >>> it in their own tools - at what you would consider a fair royalty arrangement - would you
> > > >>> still refuse to buy Festool products based solely on the fact that Gass is part of the company?
> > > >>
> > > >> As long as he personally was profiting from the purchase, yes. The sort of
> > > >> behavior in which he has engaged should not be encouraged.
> > > >
> > > > "Personally" may be for a long time. Even if he moves on, there may very well
> > > > be contractual obligations to continue to pay him.
> > > >
> > > > Heck, even if he dies, there may very well be contractual obligations to
> > > > continue to pay his estate. Of course, that wouldn't be "personal". You
> > > > can't blame his family for his greedy ways, can you.? ;-)
> > >
> > > If you make you decisions based on emotion, yes, you can let the blame
> > > go on and on.
> >
> > Sez the guy with a garage full of Festools.
>
> What does owning a particular brand of (quality) tools have to do with it?
>
> Where's the "emotional" comparison between your feelings about Gass and someone
> else's choice of manufacturer?

Also an emotional decision. For most purposes most Festools aren't any
better than the competition in the same price range.

On 7/9/2017 4:43 PM, dpb wrote:
> On 07/09/2017 2:27 PM, Leon wrote:
> ...
>
>>
>> I wonder if the shapers, and mostly because they spin at a relative low
>> RPM compared to a TS blade, if they could make an electromagnetic brake
>> much like cordless drills use.
> ...
>
> All the shapers I've got are 3X or so the rpm of of TS...even the low
> range on the 2-speed is 7,000 rpm. A 10" TS manufacturer's max tip
> speed will limit RPM to something under 5,000 to 5,500 iirc w/o looking
> up specific numbers.

OH! Nevermind. I was under the impression that they ran really slow,
not just much slower than a router. Thanks for pointing that out.




>
> Anyways, shapers run at quite a lot higher rpm than do TS's owing to the
> tip diameter of cutters being smaller so need it for the tip speed.
>
> Think routers; 20 to 27,000 ain't unusual for the same reason; the
> router bit diameter is much smaller so needs to spin faster to compensate.


Yeah I remember that now, IIRC I mentioned on a post, several posts ago,
that tip speed was important on any tool/cutter. IIRC the discussion
was why you could not put a router bit in a drill press and get
satisfactory results.


>
> There's quite a lot of mass on a 1" shaper spindle w/ a 6" panel-raiser
> on it...it'd take a sizeable EM to shut it down quickly enough to make
> and difference on the accident scenario methinks... :)
>
> --
Totally agreed! Your lights would dim, probably. ;~)

On 7/9/2017 6:15 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 08:12:29 -0600, Brewster <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 7/9/17 7:22 AM, Leon wrote:
>>
>>> I would say that Festool was pretty smart with the acquisition of SawStop.
>>> Obviously more costly than just buying a license to offer the technology
>>> but also an investment into remaining relevant.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> So Leon, are you ready for your next Domino to have a steel spike
>> explosively shoot into the motor armature and the bit get vaporized by a
>> laser when your finger gets too close to the cutter? 8^)
>>
>>
>> I'll be very interested if Festool does come out with a table saw. Not
>> necessarily to buy one, but to see what innovative features they might
>> come up with. The TS has not changed much in the past century beyond a
>> raise/tilt system and a fence, what truly game changing feature could
>> possibly be next (besides more safety stuff)?
> \
> Why would Festool come out with a table saw. They like SawStop so
> much that they bought the company. They don't need to develop
> anything.
>

If the have a strong hold and name recognition in a particular market
they will just re-brand the SawStop. Labels are cheap.

On 7/11/2017 11:44 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 7/10/2017 11:42 PM, Leon wrote:
>> On 7/10/2017 5:59 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 14:09:48 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 7/9/2017 6:15 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 08:12:29 -0600, Brewster <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/9/17 7:22 AM, Leon wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would say that Festool was pretty smart with the acquisition of
>>>>>>> SawStop.
>>>>>>> Obviously more costly than just buying a license to offer the
>>>>>>> technology
>>>>>>> but also an investment into remaining relevant.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So Leon, are you ready for your next Domino to have a steel spike
>>>>>> explosively shoot into the motor armature and the bit get
>>>>>> vaporized by a
>>>>>> laser when your finger gets too close to the cutter? 8^)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'll be very interested if Festool does come out with a table saw.
>>>>>> Not
>>>>>> necessarily to buy one, but to see what innovative features they
>>>>>> might
>>>>>> come up with. The TS has not changed much in the past century
>>>>>> beyond a
>>>>>> raise/tilt system and a fence, what truly game changing feature could
>>>>>> possibly be next (besides more safety stuff)?
>>>>> \
>>>>> Why would Festool come out with a table saw. They like SawStop so
>>>>> much that they bought the company. They don't need to develop
>>>>> anything.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If the have a strong hold and name recognition in a particular market
>>>> they will just re-brand the SawStop. Labels are cheap.
>>>
>>> Prezactly. Maybe paint it green.
>>>
>>
>> I suspect that SawStop holds it's own and would not need to be renamed.
>
> It does here, but what about in Romania? That is where rebadging may
> make sense if the Festool name is well recognized there.


I see your point but have you heard of Hammer, Atendorf? While not
brands we often see, any of us have heard of them. With Youtube and the
demo's I suspect that woodworkers every where are familiar with the
SawStop brand. And I would be surprised if SawStop was not already
available in Europe, Australia, ect.

On 7/10/2017 9:45 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 10:26:36 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> [email protected] says...
>>>
>>> On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 5:44:38 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>>
>>>>> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
>>>>>> Gass seriously.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
>>>>>> this type technology.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
>>>>>
>>>>> Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass, never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I don't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements, but it could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it. While furthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars into defending the blade stop patents.
>>>>>
>>>>> A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology as they have aggressively done with their own products.
>>>>>
>>>>> My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the technology and its ancillary developments.
>>>>
>>>> He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a bizarre
>>>> royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if most of the
>>>> industry adopted the technology.
>>>>
>>>>> With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no
>>>>> doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the technology
>>>>> until they no longer can.
>>>>
>>>> I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly altruistic
>>>> with regard to safety technologies.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Just a question, not an attack:
>>>
>>> If Festool is indeed altruistic regarding the technology and allows other to incorporate
>>> it in their own tools - at what you would consider a fair royalty arrangement - would you
>>> still refuse to buy Festool products based solely on the fact that Gass is part of the company?
>>
>> As long as he personally was profiting from the purchase, yes. The sort of
>> behavior in which he has engaged should not be encouraged.
>
> "Personally" may be for a long time. Even if he moves on, there may very well
> be contractual obligations to continue to pay him.
>
> Heck, even if he dies, there may very well be contractual obligations to
> continue to pay his estate. Of course, that wouldn't be "personal". You
> can't blame his family for his greedy ways, can you.? ;-)

If you make you decisions based on emotion, yes, you can let the blame
go on and on.

On 7/10/2017 5:59 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 14:09:48 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 7/9/2017 6:15 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 08:12:29 -0600, Brewster <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 7/9/17 7:22 AM, Leon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I would say that Festool was pretty smart with the acquisition of SawStop.
>>>>> Obviously more costly than just buying a license to offer the technology
>>>>> but also an investment into remaining relevant.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So Leon, are you ready for your next Domino to have a steel spike
>>>> explosively shoot into the motor armature and the bit get vaporized by a
>>>> laser when your finger gets too close to the cutter? 8^)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'll be very interested if Festool does come out with a table saw. Not
>>>> necessarily to buy one, but to see what innovative features they might
>>>> come up with. The TS has not changed much in the past century beyond a
>>>> raise/tilt system and a fence, what truly game changing feature could
>>>> possibly be next (besides more safety stuff)?
>>> \
>>> Why would Festool come out with a table saw. They like SawStop so
>>> much that they bought the company. They don't need to develop
>>> anything.
>>>
>>
>> If the have a strong hold and name recognition in a particular market
>> they will just re-brand the SawStop. Labels are cheap.
>
> Prezactly. Maybe paint it green.
>

I suspect that SawStop holds it's own and would not need to be renamed.

On 7/9/2017 7:38 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 10:35:54 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> In article <968229027.521296539.111193.lcb11211-
>> [email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>>>
>>> DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 5:44:38 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
>>>>>>> Gass seriously.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
>>>>>>> this type technology.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass,
>>>>>> never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I
>>>>>> don't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements,
>>>>>> but it could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it.
>>>>>> While furthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours
>>>>>> and dollars into defending the blade stop patents.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas
>>>>>> and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar
>>>>>> company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology
>>>>>> as they have aggressively done with their own products.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the
>>>>>> technology and its ancillary developments.
>>>>>
>>>>> He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a bizarre
>>>>> royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if most of the
>>>>> industry adopted the technology.
>>>>>
>>>>>> With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no
>>>>>> doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the technology
>>>>>> until they no longer can.
>>>>>
>>>>> I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly altruistic
>>>>> with regard to safety technologies.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just a question, not an attack:
>>>>
>>>> If Festool is indeed altruistic regarding the technology and allows other to incorporate
>>>> it in their own tools - at what you would consider a fair royalty arrangement - would you
>>>> still refuse to buy Festool products based solely on the fact that Gass
>>>> is part of the company?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Some will always make decisions based on non pertinent emotions. It's the
>>> only way they know how to choose.
>>>
>>> The cost to offer a feature on a product is inconsequential if your
>>> customer is willing to pay for it. Proven time and again with the success
>>> of each new line of saws that SS has introduced.
>>>
>>> Given SS's success and dominance, in a relative short amount of time, and
>>> the obvious disappearance of some brands and their respective models in
>>> woodworking businesses, I would say that not paying for the licenses and
>>> offering their customers a choice to to buy this safety technology was far
>>> more costly than the license.
>>>
>>> Before SS I recall being able to touch and feel, at local stores, the
>>> larger DeWalt hybrid TS's, Hitachi contractor saws, Powermatic contractor
>>> saws, Delta Unisaws and contractor saws, ShopSmith multifunction machines,
>>> Steel City table saws. Today in the our country's 4th largest city/metro
>>> area your obvious choices have shrunk to SawStop, Powermatic, and Jet if
>>> you want to touch and feel a non bench top sized TS.
>>>
>>>
>>> In the past 15 or so years, with the introduction of each new model/class
>>> of TS, those brands/models listed above have one by one disappeared from
>>> local retailers floors.
>>>
>>> I would say that Festool was pretty smart with the acquisition of SawStop.
>>> Obviously more costly than just buying a license to offer the technology
>>> but also an investment into remaining relevant.
>>
>> Why? The only market in which SawStop has made any inroads is table saws.
>> Festool does not make table saws, so they don't even try to play in that
>> particular market.
>
> Until now.
>>
>> It is more likely that they have decided to expand their product line to
>> include stationary tools than it is that they thought they needed to
>> "remain relevant".
>
> Perhaps not "remain relevant", rather "grow". What further portable
> (hand operated) power tools can they make that they don't now?
>

I think remain relevant for some. Is Delta or Steel City relevant any more?

On 7/9/2017 5:13 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 01:09:28 -0700 (PDT), "[email protected]"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>>
>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
>>> Gass seriously.
>>>
>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
>>> this type technology.
>>>
>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
>>
>> Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass, never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I don't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements, but it could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it. While furthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars into defending the blade stop patents.
>>
>> A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology as they have aggressively done with their own products.
>>
>> My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the technology and its ancillary developments. With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the technology until they no longer can.
>>
>> We may see something else that performs the same task, but I would readily bet we don't see the SawStop technology outside of the TTS stable of products.
>
> My take on it is that the SawStop patents are about to run out and
> Festool just picked up another good product line, probably on the
> cheap (because of the above).
>
I think patents have been on going.

On 7/9/2017 7:51 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
> @swbelldotnet says...
>>
>> On 7/9/2017 3:57 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>>>>
>>>> On 07/09/2017 11:23 AM, Leon wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> My guess is that Festool would/could probably introduce this technology
>>>>> to their Kapex, maybe their planers... I doubt that they would want to
>>>>> start making a Festool TS with this feature since they now own a company
>>>>> that does make TS's. Festool seems, at least here, to focus on the
>>>>> portable power tools. The TS is less portable with the exception of the
>>>>> job site contractors saw.
>>>>> I guess Festool could share technologies and maybe offer a better fence
>>>>> other than the Beis clone. Something like the old Delta Unifence comes
>>>>> to mind. Maybe not a wobble but perhaps an oscillating blade option for
>>>>> dados.
>>>>
>>>> I can't see much need at all on planer unless you're thinking of
>>>> handheld jobbers (which I guess is all Festool would have, anyway) so maybe.
>>>>
>>>> I think the biggest safety spot albeit not so much in use any more w/
>>>> the advent of the larger router is the spindle shaper (or the router
>>>> mounted as a shaper). There's a chunk of spinning steel that can do
>>>> some major damage in a hurry. I doubt it could meet the proposed CPSC
>>>> spec, but it could minimize the trauma otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> Festool'll have to stay out of the equation on the TS from the EU
>>>> regulation standpoint or there will be no dado head of any type; EU
>>>> reg's prohibit them and I think enforce user compliance by not allowing
>>>> an arbor shaft long enough to mount one...
>>>
>>> Check again. EU regs require that the saw spin down in 10 seconds or less,
>>> usually accomplished with a brake of some kind. Since the manufacturer
>>> usually wants to use the cheapest brake that will do the job, they barely
>>> put in enough brake to spin down a regular blade in that time, so put a
>>> dado on it and it runs over. The manufacturers address this by putting a
>>> short spindle on the saw so a dado can't be attached. One suspects that
>>> Festool, being Festool, would just stick the brakes off a Mercedes on the
>>> thing.
>>>
>>>
>> But dado's are being put on the Euro saws. LARGE massive dado's.
>>
>> This German saw will cut up to 20 mm dado's. Check the specs.
>
> Leon, nobody said that it was impossible to stop a dado in 10 seconds.
> Only that it takes more than a bargain-basement brake. That saw you're
> looking at costs about three times as much as a maxed-out Sawstop so has it
> occurred to you that it might have just a _little_ better brake than, say,
> a $500 buck Axminster?
>


I was responding to this suggestion

Festool'll have to stay out of the equation on the TS from the EU
regulation standpoint or there will be no dado head of any type; EU
reg's prohibit them and I think enforce user compliance by not allowing
an arbor shaft long enough to mount one...

On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 08:12:29 -0600, Brewster <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 7/9/17 7:22 AM, Leon wrote:
>
>> I would say that Festool was pretty smart with the acquisition of SawStop.
>> Obviously more costly than just buying a license to offer the technology
>> but also an investment into remaining relevant.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>So Leon, are you ready for your next Domino to have a steel spike
>explosively shoot into the motor armature and the bit get vaporized by a
>laser when your finger gets too close to the cutter? 8^)
>
>
>I'll be very interested if Festool does come out with a table saw. Not
>necessarily to buy one, but to see what innovative features they might
>come up with. The TS has not changed much in the past century beyond a
>raise/tilt system and a fence, what truly game changing feature could
>possibly be next (besides more safety stuff)?
\
Why would Festool come out with a table saw. They like SawStop so
much that they bought the company. They don't need to develop
anything.

On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 5:44:38 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,=20
> [email protected] says...
> >=20
> > On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> > =20
> > > Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology too=
k=20
> > > Gass seriously.
> > >=20
> > > I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have=
=20
> > > this type technology. =20
> > >=20
> > > This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also=
.
> >=20
> > Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass,=
never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I don't=
see much commentary about the actual technological achievements, but it co=
uld be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it. While furthe=
ring his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars into d=
efending the blade stop patents. =20
> >=20
> > A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas =
and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar company=
with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology as they ha=
ve aggressively done with their own products.
> >=20
> > My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the tech=
nology and its ancillary developments.
>=20
> He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a bizarre=20
> royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if most of th=
e=20
> industry adopted the technology.
>=20
> > With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no=
=20
> > doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the technology=
=20
> > until they no longer can.
>=20
> I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly altruisti=
c=20
> with regard to safety technologies.
> =20

Just a question, not an attack:

If Festool is indeed altruistic regarding the technology and allows other t=
o incorporate=20
it in their own tools - at what you would consider a fair royalty arrangeme=
nt - would you=20
still refuse to buy Festool products based solely on the fact that Gass is =
part of the company?

On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 10:35:54 -0400, "J. Clarke"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <968229027.521296539.111193.lcb11211-
>[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>>
>> DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 5:44:38 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>> >> In article <[email protected]>,
>> >> [email protected] says...
>> >>>
>> >>> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
>> >>>> Gass seriously.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
>> >>>> this type technology.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
>> >>>
>> >>> Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass,
>> >>> never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I
>> >>> don't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements,
>> >>> but it could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it.
>> >>> While furthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours
>> >>> and dollars into defending the blade stop patents.
>> >>>
>> >>> A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas
>> >>> and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar
>> >>> company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology
>> >>> as they have aggressively done with their own products.
>> >>>
>> >>> My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the
>> >>> technology and its ancillary developments.
>> >>
>> >> He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a bizarre
>> >> royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if most of the
>> >> industry adopted the technology.
>> >>
>> >>> With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no
>> >>> doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the technology
>> >>> until they no longer can.
>> >>
>> >> I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly altruistic
>> >> with regard to safety technologies.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Just a question, not an attack:
>> >
>> > If Festool is indeed altruistic regarding the technology and allows other to incorporate
>> > it in their own tools - at what you would consider a fair royalty arrangement - would you
>> > still refuse to buy Festool products based solely on the fact that Gass
>> > is part of the company?
>> >
>>
>> Some will always make decisions based on non pertinent emotions. It's the
>> only way they know how to choose.
>>
>> The cost to offer a feature on a product is inconsequential if your
>> customer is willing to pay for it. Proven time and again with the success
>> of each new line of saws that SS has introduced.
>>
>> Given SS's success and dominance, in a relative short amount of time, and
>> the obvious disappearance of some brands and their respective models in
>> woodworking businesses, I would say that not paying for the licenses and
>> offering their customers a choice to to buy this safety technology was far
>> more costly than the license.
>>
>> Before SS I recall being able to touch and feel, at local stores, the
>> larger DeWalt hybrid TS's, Hitachi contractor saws, Powermatic contractor
>> saws, Delta Unisaws and contractor saws, ShopSmith multifunction machines,
>> Steel City table saws. Today in the our country's 4th largest city/metro
>> area your obvious choices have shrunk to SawStop, Powermatic, and Jet if
>> you want to touch and feel a non bench top sized TS.
>>
>>
>> In the past 15 or so years, with the introduction of each new model/class
>> of TS, those brands/models listed above have one by one disappeared from
>> local retailers floors.
>>
>> I would say that Festool was pretty smart with the acquisition of SawStop.
>> Obviously more costly than just buying a license to offer the technology
>> but also an investment into remaining relevant.
>
>Why? The only market in which SawStop has made any inroads is table saws.
>Festool does not make table saws, so they don't even try to play in that
>particular market.

Until now.
>
>It is more likely that they have decided to expand their product line to
>include stationary tools than it is that they thought they needed to
>"remain relevant".

Perhaps not "remain relevant", rather "grow". What further portable
(hand operated) power tools can they make that they don't now?

On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
=20
> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took=20
> Gass seriously.
>=20
> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have=20
> this type technology. =20
>=20
> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.

Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass, nev=
er met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I don't see=
much commentary about the actual technological achievements, but it could =
be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it. While furthering=
his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars into defen=
ding the blade stop patents. =20

A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas and =
energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar company wit=
h a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology as they have a=
ggressively done with their own products.

My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the technolo=
gy and its ancillary developments. With their teams of patent attorneys an=
d the own marketing plans, no doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect=
and hoard the technology until they no longer can.

We may see something else that performs the same task, but I would readily =
bet we don't see the SawStop technology outside of the TTS stable of produc=
ts.

Robert

Some quick GoogleFu reveals that the knot of patents that cover different a=
spects of the current SawStop device expire anywhere from 4 to 7 years, but=
there is even a lot of uncertainty of the actual expirations. With the Ga=
ss' interlocking his patents, no telling when the actual expiration date wo=
uld be. Since I have read at other sources (than the internet!) that Gass =
has deliberately intertwined his patents and innovations to protect them as=
long as possible, no telling when the actual technology would fall into pu=
blic domain.

I still think that Festool has a deeper business plan, one that will use th=
e current technology (and anything ancillary Gass has been working on) to d=
evelop other tools and markets. If they are working on a new large wheel bu=
ffer (don't just think cars size) that has a large spinning head, wouldn't =
it be nice to have it cut off immediately if a shirt or glove was caught in=
it? How nice would it be to have a blade stop technology on a joiner?

Not thinking they have purchased the company and its technology to simply g=
ive it away to be popular with their own competition. TTS already owns a d=
iverse set of companies that they have integrated some aspects like the Sys=
tainers built by Tanos and their high tech shop vac built by Cleantec into =
their catalogue. Doubtful this is a Christmas gift for all Festool's compe=
tition and us.

Probably just a smart move from a very well run company.

Robert

On 7/10/2017 11:42 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 7/10/2017 5:59 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 14:09:48 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/9/2017 6:15 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 08:12:29 -0600, Brewster <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/9/17 7:22 AM, Leon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I would say that Festool was pretty smart with the acquisition of
>>>>>> SawStop.
>>>>>> Obviously more costly than just buying a license to offer the
>>>>>> technology
>>>>>> but also an investment into remaining relevant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So Leon, are you ready for your next Domino to have a steel spike
>>>>> explosively shoot into the motor armature and the bit get vaporized
>>>>> by a
>>>>> laser when your finger gets too close to the cutter? 8^)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll be very interested if Festool does come out with a table saw. Not
>>>>> necessarily to buy one, but to see what innovative features they might
>>>>> come up with. The TS has not changed much in the past century beyond a
>>>>> raise/tilt system and a fence, what truly game changing feature could
>>>>> possibly be next (besides more safety stuff)?
>>>> \
>>>> Why would Festool come out with a table saw. They like SawStop so
>>>> much that they bought the company. They don't need to develop
>>>> anything.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If the have a strong hold and name recognition in a particular market
>>> they will just re-brand the SawStop. Labels are cheap.
>>
>> Prezactly. Maybe paint it green.
>>
>
> I suspect that SawStop holds it's own and would not need to be renamed.

It does here, but what about in Romania? That is where rebadging may
make sense if the Festool name is well recognized there.

On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 14:09:48 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 7/9/2017 6:15 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 08:12:29 -0600, Brewster <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/9/17 7:22 AM, Leon wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would say that Festool was pretty smart with the acquisition of SawStop.
>>>> Obviously more costly than just buying a license to offer the technology
>>>> but also an investment into remaining relevant.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So Leon, are you ready for your next Domino to have a steel spike
>>> explosively shoot into the motor armature and the bit get vaporized by a
>>> laser when your finger gets too close to the cutter? 8^)
>>>
>>>
>>> I'll be very interested if Festool does come out with a table saw. Not
>>> necessarily to buy one, but to see what innovative features they might
>>> come up with. The TS has not changed much in the past century beyond a
>>> raise/tilt system and a fence, what truly game changing feature could
>>> possibly be next (besides more safety stuff)?
>> \
>> Why would Festool come out with a table saw. They like SawStop so
>> much that they bought the company. They don't need to develop
>> anything.
>>
>
>If the have a strong hold and name recognition in a particular market
>they will just re-brand the SawStop. Labels are cheap.

Prezactly. Maybe paint it green.

On 7/11/2017 1:57 PM, Leon wrote:

>
>
> I see your point but have you heard of Hammer, Atendorf? While not
> brands we often see, any of us have heard of them. With Youtube and the
> demo's I suspect that woodworkers every where are familiar with the
> SawStop brand. And I would be surprised if SawStop was not already
> available in Europe, Australia, ect.

I doubt it is available in Australia. The blades turn in the opposite
direction there and the brake cartridge flips the blade up higher. I'm
pretty sure they use the fence on the opposite side too.

On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 01:09:28 -0700 (PDT), "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>
>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
>> Gass seriously.
>>
>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
>> this type technology.
>>
>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.
>
>Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know Gass, never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive behavior. I don't see much commentary about the actual technological achievements, but it could be he has taken this as far as his own talent can take it. While furthering his own agenda he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars into defending the blade stop patents.
>
>A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new ideas and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion dollar company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop technology as they have aggressively done with their own products.
>
>My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the technology and its ancillary developments. With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the technology until they no longer can.
>
>We may see something else that performs the same task, but I would readily bet we don't see the SawStop technology outside of the TTS stable of products.

My take on it is that the SawStop patents are about to run out and
Festool just picked up another good product line, probably on the
cheap (because of the above).

On 7/9/2017 12:28 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 7/9/2017 9:26 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> [email protected] says...
>>>
>>> On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 5:44:38 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>>
>>>>> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 7:18:54 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>>>>>> Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology
>>>>>> took
>>>>>> Gass seriously.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
>>>>>> this type technology.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology
>>>>>> also.
>>>>>
>>>>> Probably a couple of different things at play here. I don't know
>>>>> Gass, never met him, but he has a reputation for his abrasive
>>>>> behavior. I don't see much commentary about the actual
>>>>> technological achievements, but it could be he has taken this as
>>>>> far as his own talent can take it. While furthering his own agenda
>>>>> he has no doubt sunk countless hours and dollars into defending the
>>>>> blade stop patents.
>>>>>
>>>>> A fresh infusion of money, a team of exacting engineers with new
>>>>> ideas and energy could be a real boon to SawStop. Plus, a billion
>>>>> dollar company with a hard of lawyers will be defending the SawStop
>>>>> technology as they have aggressively done with their own products.
>>>>>
>>>>> My hope was that Gass would run out of gas and start licensing the
>>>>> technology and its ancillary developments.
>>>>
>>>> He was always happy to license it. The trouble is he wanted a bizarre
>>>> royalty arrangement--3% of wholesale initially, going to 8% if most
>>>> of the
>>>> industry adopted the technology.
>>>>
>>>>> With their teams of patent attorneys and the own marketing plans, no
>>>>> doubt in my mind that TTS will guard, protect and hoard the
>>>>> technology
>>>>> until they no longer can.
>>>>
>>>> I dunno. European companies have a reputation for being fairly
>>>> altruistic
>>>> with regard to safety technologies.
>>>
>>> Just a question, not an attack:
>>>
>>> If Festool is indeed altruistic regarding the technology and allows
>>> other to incorporate
>>> it in their own tools - at what you would consider a fair royalty
>>> arrangement - would you
>>> still refuse to buy Festool products based solely on the fact that
>>> Gass is part of the company?
>>
>> As long as he personally was profiting from the purchase, yes. The
>> sort of
>> behavior in which he has engaged should not be encouraged.
>>
>> If Festool does as Mercedes did with four-wheel electronically controlled
>> anti-skid and makes it available to the industry at no charge then I
>> would
>> consider such a tool.
>
> Agreed that Mercedes has shared some safety technologies. BUT I
> recently was doing some research on a few Mercedes models. They state
> that they have hundreds of safety patents. I read that as safety
> features that they are not willing to share freely. So like ANY
> business there is a limit as to what they are willing to share.
>
>
I have to wonder, not that I'm cynical. . .
We have this patent, but is it not a very good one and we could lose a
court battle, so instead, lets give it away and get a lot of free
publicity as an industry leader.

On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 13:02:00 -0700 (PDT), "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 8:22:51 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>.
>> I would say that Festool was pretty smart with the acquisition of SawStop.
>> Obviously more costly than just buying a license to offer the technology
>> but also an investment into remaining relevant.
>
>While beloved by their fans, I think some people forget that TTS is a highly successful, wholly owned company that does as they please. No stockholders, no huge investment groups, no one to answer to in order to beat the last gasp out of a dollar to get profits maximized at the cost of quality. They are a manufacturing company specializing in the innovation (did you know that one of the companies in their lineage developed the orbital sander and the track saw?), engineering and development of hand held tools.
>
>I was surprised that no on raised an eyebrow when TTS/Festool announced a loose partnership with 3M to cash in on the ever increasing auto repair market. Festool will be developing new lines of sanders (no doubt highlighting dust collection) and metal working tools for the industry as well as new technologies for sheet metal finishing using 3M's expertise in this field.
>
>The point being that Festool is a billion dollar company that is moving forward and there is no telling what Festool will be doing with the SS technology. They have a lot of irons in the fires, and no doubt we know of only a few. No doubt they have their eye on the future of their business, and no doubt they are going to try to maintain their reputation as quality builders of innovative machines.

What he said. Grow or die.

On 7/5/2017 9:45 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
>
> https://www.protoolreviews.com/news/festool-buys-sawstop/31523/
>

Looks like one of the competitors that appreciates the technology took
Gass seriously.

I'm betting that we might see more tools from Festool that might have
this type technology. IIRC the current Festool jigsaw was delayed
because of a feature that was not right for the American consumer.

This all assuming that they bought the rights to this technology also.