This was fun discussing but we are going around in circles with a lot of assumptions being made about Yamaha’s market.

Assuming that the market does not care about keyfeel and keybed but mysteriously cares about 76 v. 61 would not get us any where and help the apologist understand how a 76 key TOTL arranger would be beneficial not detrimental to Yamaha.

In one breath, they would want to say making a 76 key TOTL arranger would interfere with the proven formula that has been working. But in the other breath they contradict them selves and say it is good to change the proven formula that has been working as it relates to sounds and styles.

So to save internet space, I will end my discussion on this topic.

That's exactly the point.

I have some info that might just convince some of the naysayers regarding 76 vs. 61 keys and why Yamaha chooses (unjustifiably so in my opinion) not to make the former i.e. "76 keys" on their high-end arranger line.

For my illustration I am going to use workstation figures for Roland's new Fantom G flagship. Roland officially released the Fantom G just days ago in Japan with shipments of the Fantom G to the U.S. and abroad starting soon. Roland is confident that the new Fantom G will hit a projected sales mark for the first year of 10,000 for the G6 (61 keys), 7,000 for the G7 (76 keys) and also 7,000 for the G8 (88 keys). Here is the url for the statistics if you would like to look for yourself: Fantom G released! >> After you get to the page you will then have to use a translator site to translate the url page. Google language tools is a relatively good one for translating japanese into english, which can be found here: Google Language Tools PS: For PC users you will most likely have to have the japanese language pack from Microsoft installed to view the page properly.

Notice if you will that the biggest seller in the G line will be the Fantom G6 (61 keys), at least in the first year anyway. No surprise really because it is a well established fact that 61 key keyboards are the biggest seller for those manufacturers that make a 61 key version in their product lines. One of the biggest reasons 61 key boards sell the best is because it is also a well established fact that they are the least expensive of the bunch. If people can get all the features and sounds of the extended range keyboards at a cheaper price many times they will opt for the cheaper 61 key alternative obviously. Money doesn't grow on trees as we know and a good segment of these 61 keyers are younger dudes who don't necessarily have the resources to buy the more expensive extended 76 and 88 key options. Next in line is the Fantom G7 (76 keys) which will boast a projected sales of 7,000 units. Seven thousand Fantom G 76 key units selling in the first year is nothing to shake a stick at and most likely Roland will have turned a nice profit within the first year of selling the Fantom G7 (76 keys), recovering all R&D and other associated costs by then. And since a product line usually lasts 3 to 4 years Roland is expecting the Fantom G line i.e. G6, G7, and G8, to eventually outsell the previous generation Fantom X line thus making the Fantom G Rolands most successful workstation ever. And finally... pay particular attention to the Fantom G8 (88 keys) which also has a sales projection identical to the Fantom G7 (76 keys) with a projected sales of 7,000 units according to Roland.

My point is: If 76 key keyboards are such financial losers for manufacturers why then doesn't Roland also quit making the 88 key version as well?? Since the 88 key Fantom G8 has the same projected sales figure as the smaller 76 key version why then does Roland continue to make either one of them for that matter i.e. 76 or 88 key?? I'll tell you why my friends, it is because they "both" make a handsome profit for Roland and company. You may think it unthinkable if Roland were to actually quit selling the full sized 88 key versions of their workstations because true pianists must have 88 keys. Yet the 88 key version of the Fantom G does no better in overall sales than the 76 key Fantom G. If Roland can turn a handsome profit on the 88 and also the 76 key Fantom G could Yamaha expect anything less?? Especially since the Yamaha name has greater worldwide recognition compared to all of their competitors and also has a much greater market following?? Do you get my point?? Of course Yamaha 'could' make a HUGE profit on a 76 key high-end arranger if they indeed attempted such a "scary" scenario once again!! Scary in their eyes maybe; but as the old addage testifies to: "Nothing Ventured Nothing GAINED!" And furthermore: Failure i.e. (PSR 9000PRO) is the Backdoor to "success" i.e. 76 key Tyros"4" - since we already know that the Tyros3 will be 'lacking' those extra 15 keys.

Hey... if Yammie doesn't want to risk making a 76 key high-end arranger again that is up to them. Myself and others are just poking holes in these (excuse my french) "lame" excuses as to why they don't.

>> Now I know why Ian was sent here among us by Yammie central. Besides espousing his employers products, which is fine and dandy and I have no qualms with him doing so by the way, - his main imperative from Yamaha is to try and convince us that 76 keys are evil in Yamaha's high end arranger marketing scheme of things and a foreboding token of what lies ahead for Yamaha apparently . His main nemesis though, being Diki and others like myself, won't bend to Yamaha's will and way of thinking and as a matter of fact, we the consumer, are just trying to give Yamaha a much needed wake up call with our objective opinions and insight and we only do it because we actually and truthfully want Yamaha to thrive as a company, and more importantly, to simply offer the same options that all of their competitors currently do. We keep beating this apparent dead horse in hopes that this apparent dead horse will eventually feel the pain and prodding and wake up from its unconcious state of mind and once again become "alive" and start living outside the tepid, tip toeing scary box it finds itself currently in. At least that's the image I get when listening to our beloved Ian. [img]http://www.synthzone.com/ubbs/wink.gif[/img]

Best,
Mike

[This message has been edited by keybplayer (edited 03-31-2008).]

Yamaha clearly know what works best for them...obviously you don't agree to their tactics, Mike, but that's okay...I'm sure no one going to lose sleep over it.

Ian

Hi Mike
Yamaha do make 61, 76 and 88 mote Workstations just like the Roland Fantoms, however we are talking Arrangers, which are a completely separate line of instruments. (As well as a separate market)
Regards

Bill

Look, maybe we can put and end to this nonsense. NO-ONE posting here (including Ian) has the slightest clue why Yamaha chose not to participate in this profitable market segment. NO-ONE. Opinions offered by the 'naysayers' are as uninformed as the rest of us. You are all just guessing. Your philosophy of 'my company/religion/choice of brand is the market leader, therefore ALL their decisions MUST be correct is as absurd as your position that your friends (or whatever you think of us) here have gone delusional in thinking that Yamaha COULD make money in this segment.

You have no more FACTS to back you up than we do. In fact you have no facts at all (other than the fact that Yamaha don't make a 76 PSR). Just idle conjecture. We, on the other hand, DO have the fact that every single other manufacturer DOES make a profit on a quality 76 arranger.

But, in looking at the whole thing, I think something Ian guessed at a while back is probably the TRUE reason Yamaha chose not to make this product. Divisional rivalry. Yamaha want to keep the DGX line afloat, and making a 76 S900 would go a LONG way to killing that off. Roland and Korg don't have the same fractured divisional structure, so are able to produce the product without treading on any divisional toes.

Now, whether this is a 'good decision' because it basically has no relation to the marketplace, only to intra-corporate relations and rivalries is debatable. But it is quite easy to see, under these circumstances, that it has nothing to do with whether the product itself is needed or would be profitable. The decision is being made to preserve divisional and organizational differences in a large corporation.

The idea that if a company dominates sales in ONE area, then all their decisions in OTHER areas MUST be right is absurd. If Ford make a great compact, and dominate the market, does that make any decision they make about the luxury car market automatically correct? No, it does not (as demonstrated by just about every corporation that works diverse markets). Success at ONE thing does not bestow prescience about anything else. This decision is NOT being made out of any knowledge about the market (Yamaha obviously know by now there's a demand for the product!). It is being made to preserve the fiefdom of some corporate manager of a rival division. If that's good enough for YOU, have at it! It doesn't strike me as a 'good' decision, just a pragmatic one.

But what is good for Yamaha's corporate structure is NOT necessarily good for the arranger users. For all the posturing, it has been fairly obvious from the poll and discussion that there is a fairly high demand for the product, despite what the status quo defenders would have you believe. The reason that things got a bit crazy round here has mostly come from having to listen to die hard Yamaha fanatics (sorry, guys, but little you have said now or in the past give any credibility to your 'my company right or wrong' attitude) jump through hoops to try and explain something that ONLY makes sense to a corporate manager, not an arranger player.

There IS a high demand for the product, it WOULD make a handsome profit, it WOULD put strong pressure on the success of it's competitors products. All worthy goals. But it isn't being produced to preserve a corporate divisional structure. And that, my friends, does NOT constitute a 'good reason' in MY book.

'My corporation, right or wrong'...? OK, then. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

You're only guessing there is a high demand for the product...if there was, Yamaha would be making a 76 note arranger.

If you can't comprehend Yamaha's approach to this situation, that's okay....a few others do not as well...but the fact remains the company does what is best for itself.

Ian

Good points by all. However, we can't assume that 'might makes right'. Because a company is very large doesn't always mean that all of their marketing (and general business) decisions are correct. Remember IBM and Dos (Bill Gates does ). Or, how about GM and Ford and Chrysler....oh yeah, and Toyota and Honda. Sometimes, product success is a fleeting thing. Let's hope Yamaha doesn't ending up having to sell off it's motorcycle division to keep it's 61 key arrangers afloat .

chas

The poll is mostly hypothetical...how many pollsters would be prepared to really ACTUALLY buy an new arranger in first place?

Talk is cheap.

AND...the poll didn't figure in the ones who would not buy a Yamaha arranger no matter how many keys it had.

If you took the total of who wanted 76 keys, and factored in those who are brand loyal to Roland, Korg and others, the number grows less.

Yamaha has more accurate ways of reading the market...their success is the proof...what more do you need?

The slice of the 76-note arranger pie obviously just isn't big enough at present.


Ian

As I pointed out earlier, we (Synthzone forum members) constitute a tiny fraction of the overall consumers. As a good friend once said "It's kinda' like pissin' in the ocean and expecting the tide to rise--it ain't gonna happen!"

Cheers,

Gary

------------------
Travlin' Easy