Most woodworkers have probably heard of the Ryobi Table Saw lawsuit (March 2010) in which the plaintiff was awarded 1.5 million dollars. The premise of the lawsuit is that Stephen Gass, inventor of Sawstop, had offered a technology to Ryobi in 2002, which would have prevented the injury. Ryobi, for whatever reason, declined it (click here for the full article). thus making them liable for accidents which could have been prevented by the technology.
On February 3, 2011, USA Today reported that the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is considering regulations requiring all table saws to have this technology (full article here).
For those not familiar with Sawstop and the flesh detecting technology, take a look at the video below:
First, let me say that I like the flesh detecting technology that Sawstop offers and I do not argue that Sawstop could and does prevent some injuries. I have never met someone who saw a demonstration of the product and said, “that’s a horrible idea.” I do, however, have several reservations about statements made by both Sawstop and the CPSC.
The CPSC states that ten people per day loose fingers to tablesaws. That means over 3600 people per year or 36,000 every ten years are loosing their fingers. The National Limb Loss Center reports that 133,725 people per year loose a limb(s). Of that, 97.5 percent are due to medical issues leaving 3,343 people per year. Furthermore, they report that 82 percent of those are lower limb amputations. That leaves 602 people per year, in the U.S.; loose an upper limb due to traumatic causes. Yet the CPSC statistic is 5 times that and is actually higher than all traumatic amputations combined! The math just does not add up.
Looking further into Sawstops information, I began to notice a trend. All they talk about is the safety of the saw. What about performance? After reading through various woodworker reviews including Wood Magazine, Woodworkers Guild of America, and Consumer Reports, the vote is unanimous that Sawstop performs at a five star rating making its performance comparable with other high end tablesaws (see the WWGOA review here). However, its price is far from comparable. Looking at the contractor’s table saw, the Sawstop model retails between $1600 and $1750 per unit. Meanwhile, other contractor tablesaws with similar ratings retail between $350 and $550.
Researching this, I found several times where Mr. Gass stated, “the price is nothing compared with the cost and lifelong pain of hand injuries”. While there is merit in that statement, it only goes so far. Commentators in support of Sawstop are quick to point out that when airbags were introduced, car prices increased. However, the difference in price between a Sawstop contractor’s saw and its performance equivalent is about $1100 dollars or a 300 percent increase. That would be like trying to justify selling a Honda Accord for $90,000 dollars just because it has an airbag! The market will not bear a three hundred percent increase in price of any product regardless of the safety ratings.
Currently, the Sawstop technology damages (often destroys) the blade. Along with the blade, one must also replace the brake cartridge. This combined cost is approximately $95 - $200 (depending on the blade quality). Now do not get me wrong. Most people would gladly pay that versus risking loosing their fingers. Keep in mind though, that cost is incurred every time the system activates. Sawstop admits that cutting green wood or metals may activate the system. Around the internet there are various reports of false activations. Given the already expensive price, can the home woodworker afford one or more false activations over the life of the saw?
With all the hype on the safety aspect of Sawstop, one may assume that their mission is to prevent injury. So the question that should be asked of Mr. Gass is, “Is it better have a high profit margin and a low sales volume or to have a high sales volume and a low profit margin?” I believe Wal-Mart has proven the later.
If the mission is to prevent as many injuries as possible I would think Sawstop would want to price their product line to be affordable to the woodworking community thus increasing the potential to prevent injuries and possibly save lives through volume selling. Instead they spend their resources justifying their prices against the cost of injuries (sawstop).
I find it interesting that Mr. Gass testified in the Ryobi case and petitioned the CPSC to regulate the industry. It is as if he is frustrated that no one wants to pay his prices and so he runs to the government in an attempt to force the woodworker into buying. It reminds me a lot of a child who is angry because nobody will play with him.
What is done is done. If the CPSC begins to enforce a safety mandate to the power tool manufacturers then I sincerely hope they are reverse engineering the Sawstop technology in hopes of developing their own versions. Given the recent Ryobi case and the hundreds of similar cases which have been filed since, I don’t think they have much of a choice in this matter. Should the US government begin regulating tablesaws manufacturing in the name of safety, either Mr. Gass’s greed will finally be fulfilled or he will be crushed by the competition as similar technology is introduced at lower prices.
The laws of supply and demand dictate pricing. It is probable that prices would come down as volume increases (much like flat screen TV’s). However if the bigger manufacturers do not give Mr Gass a reality check through development of their own technology, it is more likely that Mr. Gass will be in a position to dictate pricing of a proprietary technology. If you doubt that, just try to find a two hundred dollar I-Pad.
Flesh detecting technology has the potential to prevent significant injuries. I do not doubt that nor argue that point. My concern lies within the pricing the consumer is expected to pay and the manner in which Mr. Gass is attempting to force consumers to buy from him. I would think that he could make a stronger case for his product by approaching the insurance industry. After all, if a cabinet maker could reduce liability insurance by purchasing Sawstop, would that not be a significant benefit? Possibly one that would allow a recovery of the greed laden price he or she was forced to pay in the first place!
Until next time, I’ll be in the Vortex…
Kevin
What are your thoughts? What do you think of the technology? Do you own a Sawstop? If so, has it ever activated? If government mandates this technology, will you be able to purchase it?
No comments:
Post a Comment