Why can't production of SB's be restarted?

[kidstypike]

Thank you.

What would your hardware list look like if you were building one today?

Pretty much the same as I have now, (I have a spare same setup somewhere).

Raspberry PI 3 or 4, Pi 7" screen, case to suit.

Either a DAC add-on board or use USB out to a separate DAC.

[bloodycat]

Sonos played in the same space and has developed into a nicely sized and profitable company. Sonos took an Apple-like approach. They realized that potential customers didn't really want to play with configurations and hardware and software, they simply wanted to play music. The more plug and play they could make their ecosystem, the better market acceptance it would have and they succeeded in doing that, to the detriment of the SB products. When they were competing neck and neck, Sonos' products weren't necessarily technically better or as flexible as the SB family and SB was ahead at the start. The SB flexibility was popular with only a small segment of the market and for the rest of the market opportunity, the complexity for the average user was a turnoff. Sonos won the competition, it did a better job of assessing the desires of the market and filling them.

Sonos was definitely Applie like in charging premium prices for not neccessarily better products that they dictate what you can do with it and how -backed up by a big marketing budget.
The squeezebox range provided a much cheaper starter setup and the booms were excellent small sound systems, they still sound better than most portable music players.The problem is that Logitech really didn't promote the system so ourside of geeks and similar not many others knew about them. It was only towards the end of their life that I saw the Boom along with the Touch available in Currys rather than just online.
I still use 2 Booms daily in the bedreoom and Kitchen as well as a Touch in the lounge- even the Duet got ressurected(had to replace the power supply for the controller) during Covid for the home-office.

[amey01]

Short answer, never going to happen.

If all your previous answers are correct, then why not?

Have they ever been approached to gauge the possibility of more units being manufactured?

Why don't you approach them then? It's kind of a very expensive exercise - procurement of parts, engineering of alternate parts that are no longer available, procurement of alternates, design, manufacturing.

they were probably .000000000000000000000000000000001 percent of Logitech revenues. Logitech was probably not a good fit as the owner, but it is what it is.

Why on earth did they buy Slim Devices then? Still makes me angry to this day.

Years after they were discontinued they would still wipe the floor with the competition

Yeah, they would
Yes, they would still wipe the floor off anything on the market today. Anything.

It is in reality very easy to do with PiCorePlayer and a RaspberryPi.
So it is kinda a pointless argument.

[Redrum]

I know nothing of the inner workings of Logi's business, but, having worked in consumer product development for many years, here is my take (guess):

It's all financial, including the revenue this type or product would provide to the business (as a share of the overall revenue), and closely related is the dollars and infrastructure (people) needed to support the products.

Logi's niche is high volume, low margin, minimal support (expense spent on infrastructure to support). Squeezebox is not. Slim Devices (It appears) was a better fit.

A return of the squeezebox business would dictate a much much lower volume, forcing higher margin, and a huge investment on support (unless they hire us ). Plus, the change to the needs of the market are evolving fast as technology evolves so fast. Think of the whole wifi6 thing. I think (hunch, as I don't have any experience) companies that have jumped into it (like polyvection) have struggled keeping up with the support and continual evolution aspect.

But, many of the other consumer electronics companies who operate on higher volume, lower margins (Yamaha, etc), but as the product gets more niche (as examples - Arcam, NAD, etc) volume goes down, margin must go up. Some consumer electronics companies can produce both the consumer (high volume) and niche (low volume) products. Marantz is an example.

Also, as mentioned, tough to compete with the DIY, which would cut into the market.

Probably 15 years back, my company (toys and children's products) developed an interactive book product, that was a wonderful idea, and turned out to be a great product, but it was a massive mistake. The expenses need to build the team and the platform was huge. We had to put a team in place for continual development of content (new books). We had to hire and train a 24/7 support system. But that wasn't in our "wheel house" we were setup to design or refresh new products every year. The business started to glow slowly, but it wasn't fast enough for our management who wanted to see recoup of the massive expense. I was on the team and spent 3 years developing it. It was a great challenge and disappointment/relief when it was dropped.

So, instead of the above rant, I could have just said "not a good fit to Logi's business")

Jim

[garym]

It's all financial, including the revenue this type or product would provide to the business (as a share of the overall revenue), and closely related is the dollars and infrastructure (people) needed to support the products.

Logi's niche is high volume, low margin, minimal support (expense spent on infrastructure to support). Squeezebox is not. Slim Devices (It appears) was a better fit.
[.....]

Jim, you nailed it with this answer. Thanks.

[Goodsounds]

First time I laid my hands on a Sonos product was at a HiFi show in 2006 (I went there to checkout and order a Transporter).
My immediate reaction (apart from the feeling that their remote was WAY too big) was that Sonos would appeal to the sort of people who bought B&O - they just wanted something to plug in, turn on, and have working.
In contrast, the Squeezebox system appealed to the kind of people who back in the day mounted and aligned their own pickup cartridges, and fiddled around with VTA.
So it's hardly surprising that the potential market for Squeezebox was as small as it was.

This is part of the saga, as I see it, but not all of it.

I spent my career working as an advisor in Silicon Valley with the full spectrum of companies. ranging from dozens and dozens of startups - some successful, most bombed- to medium to large companies whose names all would recognize. And with VCs. There used to be a saying that went something like this: To successfully create a business, four things are required: 1) an existing market opportunity or one that can be created, 2) the right product or service to fit the opportunity, 3) the right execution to make it happen successfully, and 4) enough money to fund the effort. With only one of the four, the effort will fail. With two of the four, success may be possible but is unlikely. Three of the four, a greater chance but still an uphill struggle, exit may be by acquisition. I have no inside knowledge of what happened at Slim Devices (though I can say I WAS inside its office in Mountain View sometime in the mid 2000s when I picked up my first device to save shipping cost) but to an outsider, at least two of the factors were missing. Maybe three.

To say it's "all financial" is a trite oversimplification. "Financial" is the scoreboard, it doesn't describe what happened in the game that resulted in the score.

To echo another comment - all who continue enjoying SB products owe an unrepayable debt of gratitude to Michael Herger. He's the rock we all rely on. Thank you Michael!

[Redrum]

This is part of the saga, as I see it, but not all of it..
....
To say it's "all financial" is a trite oversimplification. "Financial" is the scoreboard, it doesn't describe what happened in the game that resulted in the score.

Ok, you might replace "all" with "first". But your post addresses a startup, not a company of Logitech's stature.

The OP in the post was about Logitech reviving the line. Since Logitech is a publicly traded company, it runs (the game) allot different than a startup . Startups are allowed to be based on a vision for what the company is to be. This is not the case, Logitech is already what it is. Also, being publicly traded you can bet it's all about money and revenue growth. Going outside your core expertise, to build and market something new, not "core" would require a significant documented growth opportunity with associated expense payback. You can bet the discussions start and end with the finances.

It's just not a fit for logitech. Having said that, if a startup had a vision, and they wanted to procure the IP from Logitech (or, work around the patents), and as part of their business plan transporter, touch, radio type products emerged, that might work out. It's just not for logitech.

I imagine (again, not knowledge or experience) that logitech looked at the money it was bleeding and would continue to bleed, vs the revenue, and cut their losses (before their CEO/board paid the price). I think it was mentioned earlier that they might have primarily targeted IP and infrastructure (people) primarily anyhow, and just gave the line a go.

It's a vicious world out there, glad I'm retired

Jim


.

[garym]

Logitech did the same thing with Harmony smart remotes. They had a nice niche, were very popular with the users (like squeezeboxes). Logitech bought them, and after a few years dropped the line I believe. There's a lot more profit in (and less post sales support for) keyboards and mice.

[Goodsounds]

But your post addresses a startup, not a company of Logitech's stature.

Yes, that's right. With no inside information, I was referring to Slim Devices. It had stalled in the marketplace, it failed to thrive and grow. For whatever reasons the selling shareholders agreed to the acquisition, it wasn't for a huge payday. And for whatever reasons Logitech decided to make the acquisition, things didn't apparently pan out to its expectations. It hadn't risked a lot of money to do so.

Small niche markets are not a happy place to live, whether it's a small company wanting to grow or a big company wanting to be profitable. The same factors for success apply to fledgling products in large companies too, though having enough money may or may not be an issue. And again, as previously mentioned, Sonos has managed to become a multi-billion-dollar company with what perhaps at one time was inferior technology but with better marketing and execution. Having great technology isn't enough.

[amey01]

Come to think of it, it's all open source. PiCorePlayer and a Raspi is a very simple way of doing things. But if you wanted to go "all out" and manufacture an integrated product, I guess there is nothing stopping you, is there?

[d6jg]

Come to think of it, it's all open source. PiCorePlayer and a Raspi is a very simple way of doing things. But if you wanted to go "all out" and manufacture an integrated product, I guess there is nothing stopping you, is there?

isn’t that exactly what Polyvection tried a couple of years ago?
their biggest problem turned out to be parts supplies if I’m not wrong

[P Nelson]

Another issue is achieving an expected (or target) rate of return given the investment and operating cost. Large companies want to see large amount of return on investment in product lines. Squeezebox, even if profitable, it might not be profitable enough to yield the desired return on investment. If there is something else that yields better return for the same cost, then it does not make sense to stay in that business.

When I worked for a large company, I was asked to review the feasibility for this project several times over a 5-year period. It was profitable with a reasonable time to return OF investment, but the return ON investment was always borderline with the company's expected rate of return. The investment was never made because I assume there were other projects that had better expected return. (No one ever told me why or why not an investment was performed.)

The large tech companies that buy smaller companies know that not all acquisitions will be successful. What puzzles me is why not try to get something for the assets. What about selling Squeezebox to Yamaha or some other company selling music devices? Maybe Logitech thought selling it might help a competitor.



Paul

[agburnsky]

No Linux skills need, all setup via a web browser.

Pictures of one of my setups, nearly 6 years old and still going strong.

Raspberry Pi 3B+
Raspberry Pi official 7" screen.
HiFiBerry DAC board
FLIRC remote dongle (allows me to use original SB IR remotes).

kidstypike, Out of curiosity, what case are you using in this photo with the hifiberry dac?

Thanks

Anthony

[kidstypike]

kidstypike, Out of curiosity, what case are you using in this photo with the hifiberry dac?

Thanks

Anthony

Just looked, I don't think it's available anymore.




Similar case here - https://shop.pimoroni.com/products/r...=6337432321

[w3wilkes]

Did you check with CanaKit?
Case for Pi 4 and Official 7" Touchscreen LCD (canakit.com)