Srajan, thanks to your latest Darko column, I followed the threads it triggered. OEM work isn't new. As you point out, hifi had it ever since NAD, probably sooner. Most of today's class D uses OEM modules. Why are people upset now that a Chinese brand decides to branch out into a second brand? As long as it's good product for a good price, why whinge over who makes it or what it might be similar to? Most Icepower or Hypex amps just differ in bling and price. This stuff seems more different than that. I must be missing something that sticks in other people's craws. Were there more threads with more information about this? …Craig
First off, I can only speak for myself. Musician's strange evasiveness to my questions triggered me. In hindsight, my questions confronted a non-disclosure agreement between them and their chosen OEM. All evidence points at Denafrips being that OEM. Yet the same NDA forbids them from acknowledging it. So the inevitable denying, obfuscating and eluding now looks bad and people feel lied to when those who (must) withhold the answers just follow the letter of the law. To avoid this type of show-down in the instant world of well-informed consumers, the inspired-by product would have needed to look and be more different. What's more, the Musician sales force was likely unprepared when I and others asked our questions. The OEM didn't foresee such reactions to the Musician product launch and the rest is now history.
Two, OEM indeed has been with us for decades. As I said to someone else on the subject earlier today, very few cars today are purely from the brand whose logo they fly on the bonnet. Factories share entire automotive platforms, sub assemblies and parts. Usually those mixed origins are simply better concealed.
Three, in a personal email to me, Mr. Zhao of Denafrips explained that to keep his growing forces employed, he must be involved in OEM/ODM work. It's about the long-term fiscal viability of his enterprise/factory and the reality that a single global reseller in Singapore won't be enough to sustain them forever. Anyone who loves Denafrips and wants them to continue to be successful must accept that the same tech could be shared with other brands.
Four, this story also touched on cultural differences in business conduct. I attended a Shuguang event in China where I learnt that government-operated factories like theirs are told what to produce. Today it could be vacuum tubes, yesterday it might have been refrigerator assembly, tomorrow it could be tractors. The notion of a large work force in a factory stocked with industrial equipment that doesn't operate at max capacity seems anathema to them. If supplying multiple brands with similar products increases productivity and sales, that's considered to be the obvious solution and anyone not grasping that would be a dunce. A Westerner meanwhile might view it as brand dilution, disloyalty or questionable ethics. It's easy to go judgmental. Only someone responsible for a work force of 50 will understand what people like Mr. Zhao face daily to insure that they don't have to let anyone on their staff go. Srajan
