Right, but now you're moving the goalposts from "there's no issue" to "actually most companies suck on this front and we suck slightly less". The comparison to TVs and headphones is also quite a false equivalency.Ferrum didn't know when there would be a significant Wandla revision ready or a Wandla 2 etc at the time they released Wandla.
When you buy a TV, they don't tell you when a new version will come out and they likely don't know when it'll be ready themselves.
When you buy a headphone, the manufacturer provide the anticipated release date of their next one and at that time they likely don't know either.
But in either of those cases once a new one is released, there's a slim chance you'll be able to get it without selling your old one and buying the new one.
Products should be released when it's sensible and there is a worthwhile reason to do so. That's the case here. Worthwhile and desirable features were fully developed, and enabling people to get the new one for almost the same as the price delta as well means no, there really was no reason to delay this release.
What's sensible for a companies profits and what's sensible from the perspective of respecting your customers investments aren't the same thing, I'm making a point for the 2nd one.
What this really comes do to is: do you think it's reasonable that customers be asked to pay $600 on top of their already $3000 investment if they want to maintain their product as the flagship, less than a year after it's release? I think not.
Obviously I don't expect you to agree given that you are trying to sell a product, so I'll stop here.
Last edited: