Dynon Certified Marketing Survey

[Rick Ludtke]

4 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:

I mention this before, the price of the Dynon vs G3X is basically the same ...10” full functionality (magnetometer, autopilot, etc) with 130 hours of labor (Dynon estimates are 90-150 hours) is $37,000 assuming $90/hr labor rate.
The G3X with G5 and 3 servo GFC 500 would be about the same.

You’re not going to save any money unless you can do installation yourself, which is more likely possible with the Dynon.

So it’s not a question of price it’s more of a question of which functionality you prefer. Of course if there is no autopilot, that question is easy to answer.

Hi Art,

I would like to clarify a few things. Dynon takes pride in being the "Opposite of Garmin". We believe that doing so separates us in the marketplace. We offer real customer service. We don't charge for database and software updates, which usually includes new functionality. We also do not require customers to have the installations performed by a dealer. The part 23 airplane owner can purchase directly from Dynon, and any individual with the correct credentials may accomplish the installation. This gives the owner the freedom to shop installers for best service and /or price. It doesn't matter to Dynon if your installer works for a major FBO with glossy letterhead, or works out of the trunk of their car. In addition, feedback from our installers (and yes, we have a list of preferred Dynon Authorized Installation Centers (DIAC) who have proven their experience with our products) who also are Garmin dealers, who report that the Dynon installations take less time, because of the simplicity and plug and play nature of the equipment. 

And finally, costs. It is true, that for minimum equipment required by the STCs Garmin's G3X has an advantage over Dynon's certified product, the SkyView HDX. But few customers only purchase the minimum equipment. When one begins increasing the list of options desired, one quickly notices that the Garmin prices really begin to ramp up. When one compares the same list of desired functionality with what SkyView HDX provides, you will find that Dynon can provide the functionality for less money. 

So as you can see, trying to compare Dynon to Garmin is a bit like comparing oranges to apples. Dynon offers an alternative to Garmin's methods which is attractive to many. Dynon also offers lower cost options for installation and to purchase- if you desire more than the minimum. 

The best way to determine if Dynon Skyview HDX, and the FlyDynon way is right for you, is to have a discussion with our sales team. We even offer a free service that allows you to schedule a one on one zoom meeting session with our sales staff using a real simulator that allows every SkyView HDX feature and function to be demonstrated to your satisfaction, in an environment that feeds it real (simulated) information using off the shelf flight simulators. 

If you would like to learn more about the FlyDynon way, simply call +1 (425) 402-0433.

Edited March 3, 2021 by Rick Ludtke

[chriscalandro]

15 minutes ago, Rick Ludtke said:

Hi Art,

I would like to clarify a few things. Dynon takes pride in being the "Opposite of Garmin". We believe that doing so separates us in the marketplace. We offer real customer service. We don't charge for database and software updates, which often included new functionality. We also do not require customers to have the installations performed by a dealer. The part 23 airplane owner can purchase directly from Dynon, and any individual with the correct credentials may accomplish the installation. This gives the owner the freedom to shop installers for best service and /or price. It doesn't matter to Dynon if your installer works for a major FBO with glossy letterhead, or works out of the trunk of their car. In addition, feedback from our installers (and yes, we have a list of preferred Dynon Authorized Installation Centers (DIAC) who have proven their experience with our products) who also are Garmin dealers, who report that the Dynon installations take less time, because of the simplicity and plug and play nature of the equipment. 

And finally, costs. It is true, that for minimum equipment required by the STCs Garmin's G3X has an advantage over Dynon's certified product, the SkyView HDX. But few customers only purchase the minimum equipment. When one begins increasing the list of options desired, one quickly notices that the Garmin prices really begin to ramp up. When one compares the same list of desired functionality with what SkyView HDX provides, you will find that Dynon can provide the functionality for less money. 

So as you can see, trying to compare Dynon to Garmin is a bit like comparing oranges to apples. Dynon offers an alternative to Garmin's methods which is attractive to many. Dynon also offers lower cost options for installation and to purchase- if you desire more than the minimum. 

The best way to determine if Dynon Skyview HDX, and the FlyDynon way is right for you, is to have a discussion with our sales team. We even offer a free service that allows you to schedule a one on one zoom meeting session with our sales staff using a real simulator that allows every SkyView HDX feature and function to be demonstrated to your satisfaction, in an environment that feeds it real (simulated) information using off the shelf flight simulators. 

If you would like to learn more about the FlyDynon way, simply call +1 (425) 402-0433.

Again, the major draw was the path to autopilot. And while optimism is great, you just alienated and disqualified 50-75% of interested parties on paper. 
 

this AFTER putting the baron in front of the Mooney on the schedule. 
 

Now. 
 

I have talked to the FSDO about a field approval, and I’ve been told it’s possible to do a one time STC for installation. 
 

is Dynon willing to share their data and support these efforts?  Once the first one is done, the others become much easier. 

[spistora]

There is a lot I like about the Dynon product and I really like the Dynon installation approach.  Not having a realistic idea on when the autopilot will be available makes it a no-go for me. 

[carusoam]

10 hours ago, Rick Ludtke said:

Hi Art,

I would like to clarify a few things. Dynon takes pride in being the "Opposite of Garmin". We believe that doing so separates us in the marketplace. We offer real customer service. We don't charge for database and software updates, which usually includes new functionality. We also do not require customers to have the installations performed by a dealer. The part 23 airplane owner can purchase directly from Dynon, and any individual with the correct credentials may accomplish the installation. This gives the owner the freedom to shop installers for best service and /or price. It doesn't matter to Dynon if your installer works for a major FBO with glossy letterhead, or works out of the trunk of their car. In addition, feedback from our installers (and yes, we have a list of preferred Dynon Authorized Installation Centers (DIAC) who have proven their experience with our products) who also are Garmin dealers, who report that the Dynon installations take less time, because of the simplicity and plug and play nature of the equipment. 

And finally, costs. It is true, that for minimum equipment required by the STCs Garmin's G3X has an advantage over Dynon's certified product, the SkyView HDX. But few customers only purchase the minimum equipment. When one begins increasing the list of options desired, one quickly notices that the Garmin prices really begin to ramp up. When one compares the same list of desired functionality with what SkyView HDX provides, you will find that Dynon can provide the functionality for less money. 

So as you can see, trying to compare Dynon to Garmin is a bit like comparing oranges to apples. Dynon offers an alternative to Garmin's methods which is attractive to many. Dynon also offers lower cost options for installation and to purchase- if you desire more than the minimum. 

The best way to determine if Dynon Skyview HDX, and the FlyDynon way is right for you, is to have a discussion with our sales team. We even offer a free service that allows you to schedule a one on one zoom meeting session with our sales staff using a real simulator that allows every SkyView HDX feature and function to be demonstrated to your satisfaction, in an environment that feeds it real (simulated) information using off the shelf flight simulators. 

If you would like to learn more about the FlyDynon way, simply call +1 (425) 402-0433.

Rick,

Could you be kind enough to fill us in on the schedule details for the rest of the Mooney line up?

There are many Mooney Owners from M20A-Z that are looking to buy a Dynon auto pilot...

They are holding off from buying the GFC that is already available...

There are several Dynon Skyview customers around here...

Two have posted pics of the empty space where their Dynon AP is schedule to fit... the YouTube Chanel clearly says FlyDynon right on the instrument panel...

What could be better than showing how Dynon supports its customers than a schedule of STC releases for all Mooneys?

Especially the existing the customers with that sad empty space in their predominantly Dynon panel?

See if you can help put an end to the stress level the latest press release has caused...    

From a regulatory viewpoint each Mooney model is different...  

From a healthy autopilot builder viewpoint each Mooney just gets better than the next... all very related in design, construction, and flight qualities...

The competitor you mentioned has done a great job of communicating what to expect next with regards to their schedule...

We have seen one Mooney model after another work it’s way through the flight testing... Amazing how quickly they flew through the flight testing...

The side benefit for Dynon... somebody gets to do a fair amount of Mooney flying... 

Best regards,

-a-

[NotarPilot]

I’m a little concerned that Rick’s rather verbose post made no mention about an autopilot in the works for short or long body owners. 

[MIm20c]

Honestly, if I had a dynon system already installed, the only viable option going forward is to install a single g5 along with the gfc500.  For those who haven’t jumped yet the best investment would be a couple G5’s and the gfc500. Keep in mind both G5’s and all the wiring for the AP can be installed by the owner (IA sign off). Only requirement for “expensive” dealer work would be the AP install. 

[JoeM]

On 10/1/2020 at 3:16 PM, Rick Ludtke said:

Hello Mooney Owners, 

I represent Dynon, makers of the Dynon SkyView HDX integrated glass cockpit flight information system that is approved for nearly 600 Part 23 certified aircraft. SkyView HDX provides flight information, engine information, moving map navigation, ADS-B Traffic and Weather, integrated COM, integrated autopilot (for the aircraft that have been certified), and much much more.

We are considering the next airplanes to pursue for the certification of SkyView’s integrated autopilot, and wish to enlist your input. 

If you have any interest in updating your certified airplane with the SkyView HDX system either with or without an autopilot, we’d like to ask for a few minutes of your time to complete this survey: 

Dynon Certified Marketing Survey

Thank you for your participation in this discussion. Your opinions matter greatly to us.

Sincerely,

Rick Ludtke 

Marketing Product Analyst

Dynon

425-402-0433 Main 

www.dynon.aero

Dynon Certified | Affordable Avionics For Certified Aircraft

Rick;

Survey completed. I own an M20E with original panel and Brittain AP. I am ready to install Skyview now, but won't until the AP is approved for M20E. Will do a minor upgrade to bring my panel into the 90s, upgrade to IFD 440 and keep my  Brittain working as well as it can for now. I may be forced to go Garmin eventually but will wait for a while due to my preference for Dynon. 

[FlyingFool]

Completed my Survey. In need of an autopilot for this bird. 

 

[ohdub]

@Rick Ludtke, how much work would be involved in making an A/P adaptor that would allow the HDX to drive legacy A/P's like Aspen has? It might allow some people to go ahead with installing the system with their current A/P, with the intention of upgrading to the Dynon A/P once it's certified. 

[chriscalandro]

4 hours ago, MIm20c said:

Honestly, if I had a dynon system already installed, the only viable option going forward is to install a single g5 along with the gfc500.  For those who haven’t jumped yet the best investment would be a couple G5’s and the gfc500. Keep in mind both G5’s and all the wiring for the AP can be installed by the owner (IA sign off). Only requirement for “expensive” dealer work would be the AP install. 

Unless you can figure out where to put the G5, that’s not possible. 

[N9405V]

I’m a little concerned that Rick’s rather verbose post made no mention about an autopilot in the works for short or long body owners. 

He is in marketing, you wouldn’t really expect him to provide good information, would you?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rick Ludtke]

Hello Mooney-minded friends,

As all of you could probably imagine, the FAA is paying special attention to autopilot and flight control systems in the wake of the 737 Max accidents. This has presented Dynon’s Certification team with new challenges, which in turn has diminished our confidence in our earlier timetables. The result is the increased conservatism in our messaging.  

We’ve been successful in gaining approval of similar aircraft models in the past, namely the Bonanza P35-V35B, an approval based on our singular Bonanza V35B demonstrator. That continues to be our certification approach with the Mooney M20 series. However, given the FAA’s increasingly conservative stance as of late, the only certainty is that Dynon will present a 1979 M20J to the FAA for autopilot compliance-finding. We are very hopeful that our effort will result in the certification of the mid-fuselage aircraft, and potentially the short-fuselage aircraft as well. But, because of the above, and the fact that Dynon has no control over the FAA's decisions, we feel compelled to adjust our expectations and messaging. 

Some of you have requested schedules for the remaining Mooney autopilots. Our plan continues to include generating the evidence necessary to satisfy the FAA that the mid-, and short-fuselage Mooney models are similar, and could both be represented by our 1979 M20J demonstrator for certification. This plan has risk, but the worst predicted outcome when we initiated this plan would have been the rejection of the short-fuselage airplanes from the certification project. If that happens, we would likely react by circling back to certify the short-fuselage Mooney models at a later, yet to be determined date. Unfortunately we cannot promise any schedule for the remaining Mooney models at this moment. 

We hope this explanation helps you understand why our message has changed. We continue to be optimistic, and believe these obstacles will be overcome. But please, do not make your purchase decisions based upon a future that Dynon can not guarantee. This is the bottom line of our new message. We absolutely do not wish to disappoint anybody. We understand that some of you may already be disappointed, for this we apologize.

Sincerely,

Rick Ludtke 

Marketing Product Analyst

Dynon

425-402-0433 ext. 1152 

www.dynon.aero

Dynon Certified | Affordable Avionics For Certified Aircraft

Edited March 5, 2021 by Rick Ludtke

[MoonFlyer68]

3 hours ago, Rick Ludtke said:

Hello Mooney-minded friends,

As all of you could probably imagine, the FAA is paying special attention to autopilot and flight control systems in the wake of the 737 Max accidents. This has presented Dynon’s Certification team with new challenges, which in turn has diminished our confidence in our earlier timetables. The result is the increased conservatism in our messaging.  

We’ve been successful in gaining approval of similar aircraft models in the past, namely the Bonanza P35-V35B, an approval based on our singular Bonanza V35B demonstrator. That continues to be our certification approach with the Mooney M20 series. However, given the FAA’s increasingly conservative stance as of late, the only certainty is that Dynon will present a 1979 M20J to the FAA for autopilot compliance-finding. We are very hopeful that our effort will result in the certification of the mid-fuselage aircraft, and potentially the short-fuselage aircraft as well. But, because of the above, and the fact that Dynon has no control over the FAA's decisions, we feel compelled to adjust our expectations and messaging. 

Some of you have requested schedules for the remaining Mooney autopilots. Our plan continues to include generating the evidence necessary to satisfy the FAA that the mid-, and short-fuselage Mooney models are similar, and could both be represented by our 1979 M20J demonstrator for certification. This plan has risk, but the worst predicted outcome when we initiated this plan would have been the rejection of the short-fuselage airplanes from the certification project. If that happens, we would likely react by circling back to certify the short-fuselage Mooney models at a later, yet to be determined date. Unfortunately we cannot promise any schedule for the remaining Mooney models at this moment. 

We hope this explanation helps you understand why our message has changed. We continue to be optimistic, and believe these obstacles will be overcome. But please, do not make your purchase decisions based upon a future that Dynon can not guarantee. This is the bottom line of our new message. We absolutely do not wish to disappoint anybody. We understand that some of you may already be disappointed, for this we apologize.

Sincerely,

Rick Ludtke 

Marketing Product Analyst

Dynon

425-402-0433 ext. 1152 

www.dynon.aero

Dynon Certified | Affordable Avionics For Certified Aircraft

Rick,

As someone who flies a mid-body I am not in the same situation as many others are. But I just wanted to say you guys have an amazing product and I can't wait to have the full system installed with autopilot. Your product is worth the wait and having worked with the government before, I understand the frustration of dealing with big agencies (FAA).

 

Thank you for your efforts.

 

Dan Kelley

Mooney 3977N

1968 M20-F

[ZuluZulu]

Wait a minute.  "New challenges"?  The last 737MAX crash was a full two years ago.  Garmin pursued certification of the GFC 500 on multiple M20 fuselage lengths starting either right before the crashes, or in the immediate aftermath, and continuing through today.  You're making it sound like Dynon couldn't have possibly seen this coming, but the MAX didn't seem to slow Garmin down.  What's Dynon's excuse, why did it take two years to notice these "new challenges"?

[NJMac]

5 hours ago, ZuluZulu said:

Wait a minute.  "New challenges"?  The last 737MAX crash was a full two years ago.  Garmin pursued certification of the GFC 500 on multiple M20 fuselage lengths starting either right before the crashes, or in the immediate aftermath, and continuing through today.  You're making it sound like Dynon couldn't have possibly seen this coming, but the MAX didn't seem to slow Garmin down.  What's Dynon's excuse, why did it take two years to notice these "new challenges"?

I wanted to ask the same question 

[ZuluZulu]

17 minutes ago, NJMac said:

I wanted to ask the same question 

I have the GFC 500 already, I have no dog in this fight.  But that explanation really didn't make any sense to me.  I probably should have sat back and posted a popcorn gif, but then again I never learned when to shut my mouth...

[carusoam]

Stay focussed gents...

1) You have the ears of the Dynon company in the house...

2) They have delivered some terrible news that directly affects the people buying the Dynon AP product...

3) Poking fun of the guy, because you can... and it’s a Friday!... somewhat affects the people that are interested in buying the product...

4)There are various methods of getting approvals through the FAA...

5) The quick method... requires the manufacturer to invest a ton of resources to generate more work internally...

6) The usual method... saves money but takes a longer period of time...

7) Many people pursuing the Dynon product line appreciate the value of getting a good product and paying the lower price...

8) Open communication makes this system work really well...

9) Poking the vendor because you can on a Friday, won’t make you feel any better or more valuable later on...

10) We are in this fight together... there is work to be done...

Please keep the channels of communication open with the vendors...

PP thoughts only, not an avionics sales guy...

Best regards,

-a-

[NJMac]

12 minutes ago, carusoam said:

Stay focussed gents...

1) You have the ears of the Dynon company in the house...

2) They have delivered some terrible news that directly affects the people buying the Dynon AP product...

3) Poking fun of the guy, because you can... and it’s a Friday!... somewhat affects the people that are interested in buying the product...

4)There are various methods of getting approvals through the FAA...

5) The quick method... requires the manufacturer to invest a ton of resources to generate more work internally...

6) The usual method... saves money but takes a longer period of time...

7) Many people pursuing the Dynon product line appreciate the value of getting a good product and paying the lower price...

8) Open communication makes this system work really well...

9) Poking the vendor because you can on a Friday, won’t make you feel any better or more valuable later on...

10) We are in this fight together... there is work to be done...

Please keep the channels of communication open with the vendors...

PP thoughts only, not an avionics sales guy...

Best regards,

-a-

You deliver a scolding so eloquently. 

[spistora]

On 3/4/2021 at 1:49 PM, ohdub said:

@Rick Ludtke, how much work would be involved in making an A/P adaptor that would allow the HDX to drive legacy A/P's like Aspen has? It might allow some people to go ahead with installing the system with their current A/P, with the intention of upgrading to the Dynon A/P once it's certified. 

I'm curious also. 

[Will.iam]

On 10/1/2020 at 5:16 PM, Rick Ludtke said:

Hello Mooney Owners, 

I represent Dynon, makers of the Dynon SkyView HDX integrated glass cockpit flight information system that is approved for nearly 600 Part 23 certified aircraft. SkyView HDX provides flight information, engine information, moving map navigation, ADS-B Traffic and Weather, integrated COM, integrated autopilot (for the aircraft that have been certified), and much much more.

We are considering the next airplanes to pursue for the certification of SkyView’s integrated autopilot, and wish to enlist your input. 

If you have any interest in updating your certified airplane with the SkyView HDX system either with or without an autopilot, we’d like to ask for a few minutes of your time to complete this survey: 

Dynon Certified Marketing Survey

Thank you for your participation in this discussion. Your opinions matter greatly to us.

Sincerely,

Rick Ludtke 

Marketing Product Analyst

Dynon

425-402-0433 Main 

www.dynon.aero

Dynon Certified | Affordable Avionics For Certified Aircraft

Done. 

[dominikos]

On 3/2/2021 at 11:16 PM, chriscalandro said:

@Rick Ludtke  You got some explaining to do.

If the C is not to be included as promised, and not this year, I know of at least one dual screen system that's getting sent back to Dynon.  I've been a pretty significant advocate of this system in the older Mooneys and this is a pretty big kick in the ass.

 

Explain.

The dates got updated and moved from H1 ‘21 to late 2021-2022... sigh... I was ready to commit to Dynon panel upgrade, back to the drawing board...

@Rick Ludtke, I understand that it is not easy process but with so many delays one has to wonder whether there is a flaw with the current approach / execution.

[chriscalandro]

7 hours ago, dominikos said:

The dates got updated and moved from H1 ‘21 to late 2021-2022... sigh... I was ready to commit to Dynon panel upgrade, back to the drawing board...

@Rick Ludtke, I understand that it is not easy process but with so many delays one has to wonder whether there is a flaw with the current approach / execution.

I believe the majority of the value of the Dynon route is in the autopilot. Without an autopilot path, the value of the existing systems like mine gets dropped significantly, not to mention the value of my airplane. 
 

if I redid my panel this year instead of last I think I’d be going a different route. 
 

As for now I’ll be pursuing a one time STC and although I haven’t contacted them about this yet, I hope Dynon will support these efforts. 
 

After after the first one, the subsequent ones get easier and hopefully Dynon has enough data to make it less painful. 

Edited March 6, 2021 by chriscalandro

[NotarPilot]

1 hour ago, chriscalandro said:

As for now I’ll be pursuing a one time STC and although I haven’t contacted them about this yet, I hope Dynon will support these efforts. . 

Do you mean a field approval for the autopilot? I’ve never heard of a “one time STC” 

[NotarPilot]

22 hours ago, Rick Ludtke said:

Hello Mooney-minded friends,

As all of you could probably imagine, the FAA is paying special attention to autopilot and flight control systems in the wake of the 737 Max accidents. This has presented Dynon’s Certification team with new challenges, which in turn has diminished our confidence in our earlier timetables. The result is the increased conservatism in our messaging.  

We’ve been successful in gaining approval of similar aircraft models in the past, namely the Bonanza P35-V35B, an approval based on our singular Bonanza V35B demonstrator. That continues to be our certification approach with the Mooney M20 series. However, given the FAA’s increasingly conservative stance as of late, the only certainty is that Dynon will present a 1979 M20J to the FAA for autopilot compliance-finding. We are very hopeful that our effort will result in the certification of the mid-fuselage aircraft, and potentially the short-fuselage aircraft as well. But, because of the above, and the fact that Dynon has no control over the FAA's decisions, we feel compelled to adjust our expectations and messaging. 

Some of you have requested schedules for the remaining Mooney autopilots. Our plan continues to include generating the evidence necessary to satisfy the FAA that the mid-, and short-fuselage Mooney models are similar, and could both be represented by our 1979 M20J demonstrator for certification. This plan has risk, but the worst predicted outcome when we initiated this plan would have been the rejection of the short-fuselage airplanes from the certification project. If that happens, we would likely react by circling back to certify the short-fuselage Mooney models at a later, yet to be determined date. Unfortunately we cannot promise any schedule for the remaining Mooney models at this moment. 

We hope this explanation helps you understand why our message has changed. We continue to be optimistic, and believe these obstacles will be overcome. But please, do not make your purchase decisions based upon a future that Dynon can not guarantee. This is the bottom line of our new message. We absolutely do not wish to disappoint anybody. We understand that some of you may already be disappointed, for this we apologize.

Sincerely,

Rick Ludtke 

Marketing Product Analyst

Dynon

425-402-0433 ext. 1152 

www.dynon.aero

Dynon Certified | Affordable Avionics For Certified Aircraft

Rick, I appreciate the more detailed explanation. I think this explains things a little better. Hopefully Dynon will not abandon the short body guys as there seems to be a lot of interest from them. Maybe Dynon can share how many units it would take for you to break even on the STC certification costs.

One point of contention here is that a lot Mooney guys seem to love your product, myself included. And being put behind the Seneca and Barons feels akin to a kick to the ol’ Johnson bar. There are simply more of us by numbers... almost as many combined Senecas and Barons made as there are Mooneys made. I know you have to gauge the market, that makes total sense, and there’s a difference between guys who say they’d buy your product and those who will buy your product. 
 

When Tesla was developing the model 3, several years ago, some of my coworkers willingly and happily plunked down $1000 deposits to guarantee a delivery position, without even knowing the end cost of the car. Dynon has been around a little longer than Tesla and I, for one, would feel confident enough in your company to put down a deposit, as a sign of commitment to buy your product, if I knew it would get me ahead in the line to get a Dynon AP and help in the costs towards the advancement of the development process. I’m not sure how many would agree with me but allowing or asking for deposits might be a way to separate those who say they would buy your product from those who will buy your product. I’m a J guy myself so I’m really looking forward to the autopilot and a D10A replacement.

I realize Dynon doesn’t have the deep pockets Garmin does to certify dozens of aircraft at a time and I don’t know if my proposition would help much but it’s a thought. Good luck to you guys.

[ArtVandelay]

One point of contention here is that a lot Mooney guys seem to love your product, myself included. And being put behind the Seneca and Barons feels akin to a kick to the ol’ Johnson bar. There are simply more of us by numbers. I know you have to gauge the market, that makes total sense, and there’s a difference between guys who say they’d buy your product and those who will buy your product. 
 
I’m not sure how many would agree with me but allowing or asking for deposits might be a way to separate those who say they would buy your product from those who will buy your product. I’m a J guy myself so I’m really looking forward to the autopilot and a D10A replacement.

Something about Mooneys (maybe it’s their efficiency) but only on this board do I see such pride on being cheap (and the label CB being a badge of honor). If I had a business this would not be the place I’d look to sell/introduce a rather expensive product.
Beechtalk is where I would go.