Im selling my pi

Trevor said:

The problem is I am having to consider bidding for this because I am trying to present the device to an Australia wide education conference though was not considered worthy enough to get one in the first batch.

Definitely the unenviable position that a lot of us are in. That is probably the best reason I've seen so far for being upset with the original posting of the sale in the forums.

It's like anything else that is popular though and in low supply. The very fact that there are not a lot available makes it easy for a seller to auction the item to the highest bidder, so your choice is the same as many of us.

Is it important enough to warrant paying the price?

In my particular case that would be a no, since I do have other options I can use. For yourself it is possible that it's the best option to try and scoop it with a good bid.

Either way, even though some of may find it objectionable that there is a tempting but overpriced RPi SBC here for sale in the forums, it's no different than anything else that is rare at the moment being auctioned off to the highest bidder anywhere else.

Trevor said:

though was not considered worthy enough to get one in the first batch.

I believe it was a "first come first served" type of thing, not a "beauty contest".

Or did you actually contact foundation asking for preferential treatment and was denied?

Oh, and since I don't like people spamming forums advertising their ebay auctions, I would personally boycot this seller and buy from someone else on ebay if I really needed to buy one.

[jamesh]

Trevor said:

The problem is I am having to consider bidding for this because I am trying to present the device to an Australia wide education conference though was not considered worthy enough to get one in the first batch.

What makes you think you were not worthy? That rather a odd accusation to make given it was fist come first served.

If you truly need one for an educational conference, I suggest you email liz@raspberrypi.org with details, and she may be able to provide one. Although comments like the above certainly won't help your cause.

JamesH said:

If you truly need one for an educational conference, I suggest you email liz@raspberrypi.org with details, and she may be able to provide one. Although comments like the above certainly won't help your cause.

On the Sun 12/25/2011 4:29 PM I sent an email titled 'Australian Presentation' which was not replied to. This email was sent via a .edu.au address.

I have PM'ed it to you.

Andre_P said:

Burngate : the OP states he did it for the fun of the hunt. As to Altruism yes it"s people"s choice, however the OP appears to be attempting to make a profit on others Alturistic work if not then sell it again at the original sale price plus something for their efforts.
As I stated the OP has done nothing illegal and well within their rights to do what they are doing.
Happy to agree to disagree, I just think what goes around comes around.

Perhaps I am cynical, but I don't believe the "thrill of the chase" argument for a moment. I don't see the fun in getting up at 6am and sitting there hitting reload - have been there before many times trying to get football/cricket/concert tickets, there is very little fun to be had. Given the hassle involved, I would assume anybody trying to get one was either keen to get their hands on one, or keen to make a few quid. Of course the original poster is welcome to prove me wrong by donating his profit to the foundation (or any other charity).

Annoying though it is, the OP is perfectly entitled to act as a tout, but to come on here rubbing everybody's face in the fact that he is making a profit is pushing things just a bit. It will not boost his profits as anybody willing to pay over the odds for one is probably already monitoring ebay.

hippy said:

I've previously said that it looked like a rush job, a determination to get the R-Pi launched by the end of February to meet a self-imposed deadline, and with hindsight it would have been better to have not launched until everything was in place, manufacturers were better prepared to take orders and make deliveries and had been given more realistic indications of potential sales numbers.

I think that is all very well in theory, but there is a huge difference between having a long mailing list, and actually convincing a company to invest a 7 figure sum on a production run.

Perhaps the launch should have been delayed, or advertised as an advance order, but I doubt that much could have been done to actually meet the full demand any quicker.

[jamesh]

Trevor said:

JamesH said:

If you truly need one for an educational conference, I suggest you email liz@raspberrypi.org with details, and she may be able to provide one. Although comments like the above certainly won't help your cause.

On the Sun 12/25/2011 4:29 PM I sent an email titled 'Australian Presentation' which was not replied to. This email was sent via a .edu.au address.

I have PM'ed it to you.

Unfortunately that was an extremly busy time for Liz (and you did send it on Xmas day....when she won't have been replying to emails anyway), so it's very likely it got lost in the hundreds of begging/marketing/journalist emails she was getting every day. I think you might be in a better position to try again now - the majority of emails she gets now are just rude and insulting   (and occasionally racist) from people who haven't got their device yet. So I suggest you write again with the appropriate details. The Foundation has kept some devices back for educational purposes.

[jamesh]

JohnW said:

hippy said:

I've previously said that it looked like a rush job, a determination to get the R-Pi launched by the end of February to meet a self-imposed deadline, and with hindsight it would have been better to have not launched until everything was in place, manufacturers were better prepared to take orders and make deliveries and had been given more realistic indications of potential sales numbers.

I think that is all very well in theory, but there is a huge difference between having a long mailing list, and actually convincing a company to invest a 7 figure sum on a production run.

Perhaps the launch should have been delayed, or advertised as an advance order, but I doubt that much could have been done to actually meet the full demand any quicker.

Interestingly, had we taken the mailing list and forum numbers, added together, multiplied by two, and made that many boards, it's still wouldn't have been enough. And persuading someone to invest up front on made up numbers like that would have been mighty difficult.

I think people should realise that there doesn't seem to have been any quicker way of satisfying demand.

I think James is right. Getting volume production going can't be done faster.

As far as the people with the money were concerned the numbers required did not become apparent until the 29th of February - about 1030 when the servers of RS and Farnell were still DDOSed by people trying to buy Pis.  I don't think that anything else would have been half as convincing.

My guess was that the numbers required would have been about half the size of the mailing list - on the basis that most people would have done what I did - register my interest on my home and work email addresses.

If you guys have such a big problem with him selling his Pi, why don't you, put your money where you mouth is(figure speak, don't take too seriously), buy it and donate it some cause or child?

Re: #56.

As I've posted many times, demand and supply could have been equalized via the usual market method - i.e., raising the price.  The Foundation chose not to do this, as is, of course (need I even say this - but if I don't somebody will carp at me as they have done on other threads), their prerogative.   But they (the Foundation) can hardly complain about the lost revenue that resulted from this decision (and they, to their credit, have not complained - a lot of other people have, however...)

cehbab said:

I don't understand the whole giving Nokia 400 from the first batch and this came as a surprise to me, although it turned out their competition had been running for some time.

These are all going to Qt developers and were paid for by Nokia (I would hope at some at-least-small premium to the Foundation).  It's more than unfortunate for the educational goals that other developers (which is pretty simple to verify) weren't given priority based on the order in which they signed up on the Foundation's e-mail list starting nearly a year ago.  One of the most frustrating aspects of this is that a number of us have spent many years acquiring the very knowledge and skills the Foundation is trying to promote (18 years of education through a BS in Engineering and an MS in Computer Science, in my case).  Yet, such people who have done the extremely hard work that 99.9% of the population haven't bothered to put in aren't rewarded for it.

That kind of message is yet-another not-so-subtle hint that society really doesn't value hard work.  It contributes to the message that you're better off seeking celebrity, since that's what the media wastes our time promoting.  It supports the assumption that money is everything, and acquiring as much of it as feasible by the easiest means possible should be everyone's goal.  It furthers the impression in young people that it's not what you know, but, who you know that really matters, and that popularity contests are more important than just plain hard work.  It helps perpetuate the notion that it's better to "invest" in lotteries than to make extraordinary efforts to accomplish difficult achievements.

Apparently, the Foundation isn't aware of these perceptions among the general population, but, that's been the net effect of the free-for-all that's been going on for nearly two more months following four months of delays that should have been foreseen by anyone purporting to be experienced engineering business people.  I'm not talking about the visible Foundation members and volunteers with whom we routinely interact here, taking all of the heat, but, the people behind the curtain whom we hope are working on long-range plans and not just reacting to each crisis as it occurs.  It would really be nice to see that lessons have been learned and that there really is a plan to assist developers who are actively working to further the educational goals of the Foundation.

Promises that good things are coming are hoped to be more prophetic than earlier assurances.  We developers are looking forward to seeing some sort of intended roadmap for entry of Pi systems, software, and educational materials into classrooms beyond, "Build it and they will come."  What are the goals for the coming academic year in terms of systems to be fielded, early-adopter teachers who are going to help usher in the hardware, software, and supporting documentation, and how many students will be receiving personal Pi systems vs. classroom-only units?  What schools have expressed interest in participating in development of Pi-based educational projects, if not committed to it?  What curricula are being emphasized, in what order, so that developer efforts are aligned with educators' abilities and desire to support them?  As the motto for a U.S. tabloid states, "Enquiring minds want to know!"  :)

"That kind of message is yet-another not-so-subtle hint that society really doesn"t value hard work. It contributes to the message that you"re better off seeking celebrity, since that"s what the media wastes our time promoting."

Another scary thought is that this particular scary idea is perpetuated by media. It makes us think that society is on the edge of collapse and encourages us to consume yet more media. It"s a clever and sneaky memetic being is media (if memetic is a word, a collection of memes interacting)

edit - apologies, that was a bit random.

JamesH said:

After all, no-one has yet suggested a better scheme (that is legal to implement) - and you cannot crowd fund something that would need $6-$7M upfront.

This is incorrect on a number of counts.

First, the Foundation could have accepted donations more than sufficient to fund the development and first-batch manufacturing without any Foundation members having to put their properties up as collateral beyond whatever was needed to get the original USB "stick" demonstrated starting in May 2011.  To keep it legal, there wouldn't be any guarantee that a donor would necessarily receive a board, but, if any were produced, they would have first rights to them, in the order of donation.

Early external donors are traditionally rewarded for their prescience and faith, if only to have their names in lights, receive token tchotchkes (e.g., a defective early Pi board), etc.  Once the actual production (not pre-production beta) boards had been completely debugged (e.g., the Ethernet connector fiasco), then serial production could have begun with deliveries to donors in order of donation, perhaps paying the difference between actual cost and their initial donation, if the donation was insufficient to cover the cost.

It is completely legal to accept payment for products as long as they are shipped within 30 days of payment (in most countries).  Once series production is under way, that's plenty of time, and the buyer generally has the option of cancelling their order for a refund or continuing to wait for shipment if there is a delay beyond 30 days.  There are projects similar to the Pi which people paid for well over a year ago where they are still voluntarily waiting for delivery.

Crowdfunding has been raising seven-figure amounts for a number of projects, including:

blur advertising in the UK ($5 million) -

http://www.prweb.com/releases/.....223380.htm

Pebble smart watch in Canada ($3.4 million so far) -

http://www.gmanetwork.com/news.....ed-funding

Double Fine Productions' Adventure game in the U.S. ($3.3 million) -

http://www.bbc.com/news/techno.....y-17531736

Wasteland 2 video game ($2.9 million) -



Elevation Dock for iPhone ($1.5 million) -



"The Order of the Stick" web comic ($1.3 million) -



Kickstarter.com alone has attracted pledges for a total of over $175 million for projects so far, with many thousands of other projects funded by IndieGoGo.com, Quirky.com, Peerbackers.com, and, in the UK, WeFund.com, etc.

[liz]

And Kickstarter.com takes 9%. No ta.

JamesH said:

JohnW said:

hippy said:

I've previously said that it looked like a rush job, a determination to get the R-Pi launched by the end of February to meet a self-imposed deadline, and with hindsight it would have been better to have not launched until everything was in place, manufacturers were better prepared to take orders and make deliveries and had been given more realistic indications of potential sales numbers.

I think that is all very well in theory, but there is a huge difference between having a long mailing list, and actually convincing a company to invest a 7 figure sum on a production run.

Perhaps the launch should have been delayed, or advertised as an advance order, but I doubt that much could have been done to actually meet the full demand any quicker.

Interestingly, had we taken the mailing list and forum numbers, added together, multiplied by two, and made that many boards, it's still wouldn't have been enough. And persuading someone to invest up front on made up numbers like that would have been mighty difficult.

I think people should realise that there doesn't seem to have been any quicker way of satisfying demand.

I'll just say, as I have before; that the reason there were no useful figures on potential sales was because no one actually set about determining what those potential sales would be to any degree of certainty. It's as simple as that.

If the licensee partners had been approached earlier, if more reliable figures were available, if they could have put their expertise into play earlier, they may well have been able to better plan, perhaps meet demand sooner than they have, and better handle the launch.

We'll never know because we have what we have, not what could have been.

Dang! I'm setting up poingKick.com right now

I think crying over spilled milk is useless. Better focus on the software/contents and possibly that GBP 12 HDMI to VGA adapter, if it works.

We have so many folks thinking that putting a project together like this is trivial. Fine - put your money where your mouth is.

Come up with an idea, get your funding from one of these organizations, and come back and tell us when you have sold one million units.

Until then I am getting kind of tired of the second guessing...

rmm200 said:

We have so many folks thinking that putting a project together like this is trivial. Fine - put your money where your mouth is.

Come up with an idea, get your funding from one of these organizations, and come back and tell us when you have sold one million units.

Until then I am getting kind of tired of the second guessing...

word.

It is interesting, as I read through this thread, how many different groups there are that feel they should have received some sort of preferential access to first batch product.

Some are hobbyists that may well be contributing to the next image. Others are engineering types that want to create complimentary hardware or cases. I can't quite tell, but it sounds like there are 400 Qt devs out there that someone felt needed dibs. Then you've got the educators (I fall into this group) that are thinking 'I thought the whole point of the Pi was education, why didn't I get one.' and of course you've got the eBay'ers who probably don't care about the Pi itself, to them it was just the next hot item that would move quickly.  I suppose lifeboats on a sinking ship go through the same process(I'm rich and changing the world, I'm young and have my whole life ahead of me, etc.)

My only take on it from a teacher's perspective is this: I'm not publicly funded. I'll be buying enough Pis for my students with my own money or perhaps I can raise some financial support for the idea this summer. In any case, if there are really any further delays from the manufacturing/distribution end I don't see the Pi making it's debut in the 2012-2013 school year. Lesson plans have to be made (and teachers have to know them inside and out), power supplies, displays and any other extra materials have to be purchased. The end of June is cutting it close to get it incorporated into coursework for Fall 2012.

liz said:

And Kickstarter.com takes 9%. No ta.

It's called "overhead" and every organization raising funds knows they have to crank it into their budget, so, it's added to the minimum pledge total required.  It could be much worse - investment banks often get 15 ~ 25% on a transaction _plus_ preferential stock for themselves and their closest friends and relatives (for public companies, of course).  Governments are now taking 15 ~ 35% of everything, and if your business isn't spending at least 15% on overhead as a government contractor, you get audited because you're not doing the required paperwork to calculate and send them their 15 ~ 35% and pocketing it, instead.

Poing has the right idea - RaspberryPiStarter.org should be your next project

"Money for nothin' and yer chicks fer free", as your very own Mark Knopfler and his "Dire Straits" mates like to say ...

So the pi is now sold. A bargain really compared to what the others went for.

What upsets me most in this thread was someone suggesting i donate the profit back to the foundation. How dose that make any sense, they had every operatunity to sell some boards on eBay them self and raise a ton of money for the  foundation but now then they clerly missed this operatunity you suggest to me that I make up for it to them. That's stupid.

sabridges said:

It is interesting, as I read through this thread, how many different groups there are that feel they should have received some sort of preferential access to first batch product.

There's a time-ordered sequence of dependency - if developers don't have the hardware, they can't adequately develop and test the software, documentation and training materials will be less than useful, etc.  The hardware is useless to the students and educators without the software, documentation, training materials, etc.

Much software isn't being developed by hobbyists, they're computing professionals who will be putting in upwards of hundreds to thousands of hours each of their own hard work.  That's above and beyond the 12-plus hour/day business workloads many endure, just as the Foundation volunteers have and continue to do.  I'm routinely working until 3 ~ 4 AM on my Pi projects, remotely logged into a Pi in the UK from California because of the misdistribution.  It freezes up at least once a day, usually in the middle of the night in the UK, so, I have to wait for it to be rebooted.

Not everyone is that dedicated, but, this isn't just fun 'n games for many of us.  I'm waiting for a reboot as I write this at 11:30 PM local, and I'll be up hours past the time it's restarted, probably while all of the hobbyists and teachers are nestled snug in their beds.  I'm trying not to complain and I enjoy the challenge (at least before midnight), I just want to correct misconceptions by people who don't know what they're talking about.

Folks, I sold my Pi for £175.  Why did I sell it when I very much want one? Because I don't value the board at £175 and I am happy to wait another month to get one.  Other's aren't happy to wait and are willing to pay us for our patience.

What am I going to do with the money?  I'm going to spend it on 3-4 Pis and a load of accessories.  So the foundation will benefit from my profiteering.  If I had of kept it, they'd have got nothing.

Do I consider it immoral? No.  My buyer was happy, I'm happy – I didn't screw him – he was quite welcome to wait just like I am now doing.  He understood he was buying my patience.  In fact, my buyer was a company looking to get an early start on product development so he could profit.

Whilst I'm a keen developer, this is an incredibly busy month for me and I don't have time to develop anything for the Pi atm – but no doubt will do when I get my next one.