Night Vision Flir ots is done

[shoobe01]

I don't think you have to go to conspiracies past somewhat-evil business mode. For example, why buy Armasight? To kill them (utterly, hence the fully bringing them into the fold then killing the division) before they became a competitor to the core business. Seen it before. Will see it again.

As far as (if true, no idea if so) banning showing active hunting: same thing. If the core market is government sales, then they want to stick to that in every way possible, to make the marketing message pure and clear.


If you need, an opposite example (no government, all commercial/consumer) is Garmin. They explicitly do not make units for the military, so they don't get associated with any particular government, as they like having import licenses literally everywhere. US and Russia. Israel and KSA. Etc. No favors to anyone so dominate that market everywhere, which is not just sales today, but assures there's no competitors that arise somewhere else to take advantage of their absence.

 

[Stooxie]

Your assumptions don't line up with how companies work or how companies that do business with the Federal government work. It's a pretty long topic, but the decision to buy Armasight was not to kill them. The decision was made to try to jumpstart their commercial lines and tap into the broader market. The problem is that often those acquisitions don't get full steam from the company and revenues are expected to appear too quickly. So within a year someone has already decided that "it's not working" when they barely gave it a chance. That is what you're seeing (and I've see it, too, dozens of times in companies I work for). It's like uprooting a tree to move somewhere else. Looks easy from the outside but it's going to take a lot of TLC before that tree looks healthy again.

Regarding the public sector the challenge there is lots of nasty rules in the FARs, like the government demanding that they ALWAYS receive the most preferential pricing. Federal employees love to think corps are evil just like corps love to think feds are lazy tax wasters. Some of that is true on both sides. So if FLIR has a commercial side all the government accountability folks would be up their asses making sure that the thermal Joe Hunter just bought, which functions mostly like the super expensive ones the DoD just bought, didn't pay less than they did. Oversimplified but just making the point.

Add in to that the fact that it's very easy to go back to the government for more money when they ask for obnoxious shit. Change order after change order. Again, sometimes well warranted, sometimes not. Consumers, though? They want everything covered with lengthy lifetime warranties, etc.

Now, as a consumer, I do too! When I bought my thermal I took a hard look at FLIR, read the forms, and compared to Pulsar, IRD, etc. What was very clear was that some of those companies were not consumer oriented. Having to send the unit back to HQ for a firmware upgrade? YGBFKM. $8k for a midrange hunting thermal? Same. You can't ignore that stuff and then hope they'll come through later when you need them.

-Stooxie

 

[WhereNow&How]

Their investor presentations have shown for years that the commerical business unit was not a viable part of the company. That's been plainly obvious to anyone who looked. It is very common for companies doing most of their business for the public sector to be designed to do business with the public sector. That makes it difficult for them to do business with the commercial sector.

Dig into that if you want to cook up the conspiracy theories. Government claims a fair and open process. Anyone who is even remotely involved in federal sales knows how patently false that claim is.

You state: “Their investor presentations have shown for years that the commerical business unit was not a viable part of the company. That's been plainly obvious to anyone who looked.”

So, if your statement above is correct, that begs a host of questions.

A. Is Flir upper management so stupid and incompetent as to pay $41 million for Armasight (a commercial business) knowing they would lose their ass financially per their investor presentations showing such for years that you set forth?

B. Or did Flir buy Armasight to put them out of business because they were scared, Armasight would compete with their Military and LEO sales of Thermal Weapon Sights?

C. Or did Flir buy Armasight because some of the Flir Upper management had cut a deal with Armasight upper management to get a kick back (Bonus) for buying them out? DEFINITELY A REMOTE CONSPIRACY THEORY HERE

D. Or did Flir buy Armasight because the ultimate goal was to destroy that company so that good quality durable Thermal Weapon Sight availability to civilians could ultimately be reduced?

E. Or has outside influences convinced Flir upper management to discontinue sales of Thermal Weapon Sights to civilians?

As soon as Flir purchased Armasight they discontinued production and sales of a huge percentage of the Armasight products. That is a fact. Now we see that within a short period of time they ultimately extinguish the sale (to civilians) the rest of all the products with Cross Hairs in them.

So, which one of the host of questions above would it be that is the most correct answer?



Now on to your statement:

"Dig into that if you want to cook up the conspiracy theories. Government claims a fair and open process. Anyone who is even remotely involved in federal sales knows how patently false that claim is."

Your statement is factually incorrect. I have personally signed my name to 10’s of millions of dollars of Federal Contracts over a 33 year period working relationship with the Government, so I am very familiar with the process and understand the FAR system to a fairly high level. I can assure you that it is not always as fair and open process as you claim.

I have also been sitting in a Contracting Officer’s office at 2.00 pm on a Friday afternoon when the Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee (arguably the most powerful position in Government) wherein Government can pass any law or program it wants (but until its funded) it ain’t sh^t, wherein, said Chairman directed said Contracting Officer to award a Contract to do a favor for one of said Chairman’s hometown buddies he grew up with. Said Contracting Officer also grew up in the same town as said Chairman so all 3 were old friends.

So that is the “real apples” of what can and does occur out there in the “fair and open process” you so emphatically set forth.

Now, lest you dismiss my above brief dissertation, please educate yourself to the real facts that sometimes occurs. This lady (in the link below) was basically (sent to the basement) when she refused to award a non competitive multi billion dollar Contract to Halliburton. Dick Chaney has some stroke.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/post/whistleblower-bunny-greenhouse-wins-settlement-near-1-million/2011/04/15/gIQANfFAbI_blog.html

Now in conclusion, I do not know the real answer's as to why FlIR made this decision, but I can speculate and read between the lines sometimes and my hunches (based on deductive reasoning of observations over time) have proved out to be somewhat correct. Your mileage may vary.

As usual, I for one, cherish anybody's thoughts and "inside information" such that it can be considered for thought. That is how we expand our thinking process.

 

[Stooxie]

You state: “Their investor presentations have shown for years that the commerical business unit was not a viable part of the company. That's been plainly obvious to anyone who looked.”

So, if your statement above is correct, that begs a host of questions.

A. Is Flir upper management so stupid and incompetent as to pay $41 million for Armasight (a commercial business) knowing they would lose their ass financially per their investor presentations showing such for years that you set forth?

B. Or did Flir buy Armasight to put them out of business because they were scared, Armasight would compete with their Military and LEO sales of Thermal Weapon Sights?

C. Or did Flir buy Armasight because some of the Flir Upper management had cut a deal with Armasight upper management to get a kick back (Bonus) for buying them out? DEFINITELY A REMOTE CONSPIRACY THEORY HERE

D. Or did Flir buy Armasight because the ultimate goal was to destroy that company so that good quality durable Thermal Weapon Sight availability to civilians could ultimately be reduced?

E. Or has outside influences convinced Flir upper management to discontinue sales of Thermal Weapon Sights to civilians?

As soon as Flir purchased Armasight they discontinued production and sales of a huge percentage of the Armasight products. That is a fact. Now we see that within a short period of time they ultimately extinguish the sale (to civilians) the rest of all the products with Cross Hairs in them.

So, which one of the host of questions above would it be that is the most correct answer?



Now on to your statement:

"Dig into that if you want to cook up the conspiracy theories. Government claims a fair and open process. Anyone who is even remotely involved in federal sales knows how patently false that claim is."

Your statement is factually incorrect. I have personally signed my name to 10’s of millions of dollars of Federal Contracts over a 33 year period working relationship with the Government, so I am very familiar with the process and understand the FAR system to a fairly high level. I can assure you that it is not always as fair and open process as you claim.

I have also been sitting in a Contracting Officer’s office at 2.00 pm on a Friday afternoon when the Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee (arguably the most powerful position in Government) wherein Government can pass any law or program it wants (but until its funded) it ain’t sh^t, wherein, said Chairman directed said Contracting Officer to award a Contract to do a favor for one of said Chairman’s hometown buddies he grew up with. Said Contracting Officer also grew up in the same town as said Chairman so all 3 were old friends.

So that is the “real apples” of what can and does occur out there in the “fair and open process” you so emphatically set forth.

Now, lest you dismiss my above brief dissertation, please educate yourself to the real facts that sometimes occurs. This lady (in the link below) was basically (sent to the basement) when she refused to award a non competitive multi billion dollar Contract to Halliburton. Dick Chaney has some stroke.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/post/whistleblower-bunny-greenhouse-wins-settlement-near-1-million/2011/04/15/gIQANfFAbI_blog.html

Now in conclusion, I do not know the real answer's as to why FlIR made this decision, but I can speculate and read between the lines sometimes and my hunches (based on deductive reasoning of observations over time) have proved out to be somewhat correct. Your mileage may vary.

As usual, I for one, cherish anybody's thoughts and "inside information" such that it can be considered for thought. That is how we expand our thinking process.

Dude, you totally misread what I wrote. Half your post addresses something I didn't say. I said the Fed procurement process is NOT as fair and open is it claims to be. So we agree on that. But you sure took me to task....

-Stooxie

 

[WhereNow&How]

Dude, you totally misread what I wrote. Half your post addresses something I didn't say. I said the Fed procurement process is NOT as fair and open is it claims to be. So we agree on that. But you sure took me to task....

-Stooxie

I interpreted your statement different than you meant it (as to me) it was not clearly set forth the way you are stating it now. My apologies for not understanding what you were trying to say.

Anyways, one thing I know for sure. FlIR's decision SUCKS.

 

[Stooxie]

I interpreted your statement different than you meant it (as to me) it was not clearly set forth the way you are stating it now. My apologies for not understanding what you were trying to say.

Anyways, one thing I know for sure. FlIR's decision SUCKS.

All good, brother, these are touchy subjects. Definitely agree on your last part!

-Stooxie

 

[ss go devil]

FLIR should be required to do a buyback program. I hope FLIR loses all their government bids to foreign competitors. F FLIR.

 

[shields shtr]

Well, interestingly enough, the second PTS 536 I ordered through Flir WAS CANCELLED. This is contrary to the Flir FB post that was displayed earlier. I am disappointed, my PTS 536 has worked really well so far and I thought it was a pretty good value for the money. Hopefully they will continue to honor their warranty as they stated.

 

[WhereNow&How]

Well, interestingly enough, the second PTS 536 I ordered through Flir WAS CANCELLED. This is contrary to the Flir FB post that was displayed earlier. I am disappointed, my PTS 536 has worked really well so far and I thought it was a pretty good value for the money. Hopefully they will continue to honor their warranty as they stated.

Yep, we just lowly Mole's now as far as Flir is concerned. It SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS.

 

[TheGerman]

Gov contracts are all fun and games until you get your ass handed to you by better/cheaper/more connected competition out of nowhere and go from making a ton of money to selling shit off to stave off bankruptcy.

Ironically, one of the largest reasons this ends up happening is that you focus on what the gov/mil wants and don't develop/refine other things; because the absolute worst entity in the universe of telling you one thing and doing something else is gov/DoD procurement. I've seen the end effects of this numerous times where they push for something, have everyone focus on it, change the scope 15 times and then when its exactly what they say they wanted, go a different direction because reasons. Look no further than Colt, Beretta, KAC (in some capacity), Leupold, etc even though these actually kept a commercial side (until Colt did the same bullshit as FLIR, and ironically, will have the same end).


I don't think FLIR has ever been accused of having smart business practices. Focusing on only mil/DoD is shortsighted, especially when you end up making everyone else go from tolerating you, to just outright disowning you. Truth be told, I don't think FLIR is doing this because they want to, I think they're doing it because everything on the consumer side has been a complete flaming dumpster fire. They're indirectly doing everyone a favor at this point.

P.S. - I'm going to just LOL at anyone who thinks their FLIR 'warranty' is going to be anything other than an exercise in patience and dealing with incompetence.

 

[223Pete]

TheGerman is right on. Thelatenightvision channel put up a video a few days ago that talked about Flir. It was interesting to me. I agree with all TheGerman said above.

 

[shields shtr]

P.S. - I'm going to just LOL at anyone who thinks their FLIR 'warranty' is going to be anything other than an exercise in patience and dealing with incompetence.

I have no illusions that they will honor anything. Sounds like they were marginal at best even when they actually were in the business. My buddy bought a Command series monocular and it lasted about 3 hrs before it shit the bed. He is sending it back in a week or so. Interested to see how that whole thing transpires.