The following is posted on their website. It seems the hex beam maker is closing down. MAY 28, 2015 This is to inform everyone that we are closing down production of the HEX-BEAM®. If someone is interested in going forward with this effort please contact me at 978-386-7936. P.S. In addition to producing HEX-BEAMS®, there is more to be done that would bring the HEX-BEAM® to the next level of versatility and performance. http://www.hexbeam.com/news.html
Now this is a damn shame. Mike worked years to fight off the scorn for coming up with a new antenna design. He pushed it through, started his own company, and eventually people understood the great value of his design. So much so that without patent protection they cheerfully--IMO-- ripped off the design and now managed to put him out of business. Mike is N1HXA. 73 Chip W1YW
Anyone care to offer a guess as to what the blurb on that memo page that says, "...we are concentrating on the HX5Bi"?? I thought that was the designation for the Hex Beam?? They are confusing this old geezer a LOT! From The Master Control Tower at Senility Central de "Donnie"
If you read the next item labelled July 2013, you will see those blurbs on the side are referring to that. 73, Kevin N4UFO
When you sell a product for over $1000 that is worth less than a quarter of that in parts without any patent protection, you are setting yourself up for a copy cat who can still make money at 50% of your retail price. That's only one mistake they made. You can't fight economics. Sad to see another ham business close its doors but in today's market they just are not competitive at the prices they're asking.
I don't think it makes sense to generalize: in some niche markets its an issue, in some its not. In ham radio it is a big issue, and that is what keeps at least some manu's from bringing their innovations into ham markets. Mike opted for a quality product rather than a cheap one. I suspect our brutal NE winters and wind shaped some of that reasoning. BTW, if you ever saw one of those step trombone antennas , or a quad, droop after a NE ice storm, you'd understand what I mean. 73 Chip W1YW
Hex beam I had the pleasure to meet Mike at his QTH many years ago when he was developing the antenna, it was cloak and dagger stuff we had to call at night when dark, on top of his tower in the moonlight sat maybe the first hex beam and he allowed me to use the rig with the antenna in use . I was made very welcome and was fed homemade cookies etc, he also gave me a clock that i still use in the shack to this day set to eastern US time. Ham radio best hobby and some of the best people in the world. 73 Roger G4ruw.
Like many ham products previously, a new design comes out, others copy, and eventually the market is saturated and sales drop off significantly. On to the 'next new thing'!
No, I don't think we should let some of our 'colleagues' off the hook so easily. IMO SOME Ham radio vendors/ manu's are legendary for scabrous, unethical and squeeze play tactics. Far beyond the rough and tumble of free market economics. Mike's been through it. I've been through it. The players change but the smarmy game seems to continue in play. Even as recently as Dayton I get asked repeatedly:'when are you selling a ham antenna'? I just cannot convince my employees to do it. Mike's exit, IMO, is not purely a differential in perceived product pricing. Mike gave it a 20 year run. A deep nod to Mike. BTW, if you worked Bouvet or North Korea, chances are you worked them while they were using Mike's Hex beam. 73 Chip W1YW
Tom, as you probably know, 4X COM's is common in many product pricing formulas. It takes time to put that stuff as a viable antenna assembly package; tooling costs; employee costs; rent; advertising; Dayton booth; other convention booths; and so on. The cost of materials is not the only cost. Again, I suspect you know this but some may not. I remember one of my freshman was asking for help in his economics class. He had just learned that a Big Mac costs 30 cents in 'materials', and then was shocked to try to understand why he was paying $2.00 (at that time). He thought the Big Mac should cost 40 cents...good thing he didn't discuss the fountain drinks--5 cents of syrup, $1.80 for the privilege of refreshment. 73 Chip W1YW
I am sure a few Ham operators here remember "Lightning Bolt" They were far cheaper than Cubex Quad...And I had both of them in my 4 acre location, (I actually tested both of them at the same time)..Also comparing against the Yagi...But the "Lightning Bolt Quad" was better on the mechanics, and he was able to create the antennas cheaper as he made his own spreaders. (I did some consulting). Although the Cubex had better Transmit gain due to the separate feeds to each band. My point is, the pricing is not always the case (Even in the Ham market!), it can be the performance. I do believe if Mike was the founder of the Hex Beam, he should had obtain a patent...(If feasible)...I myself, have a K4KIO hex Beam, not so much for the price, but more of the better F/B. (I use the K4KIO for the WARC Bands, have mono banders for 10/15 and 20)..K4KIO, has the modified version of the Hex Beam, (Reflector larger)...causes F/B to be better and more forward gain.(I also compared to my mono banders, which was not much difference!).. It is sad to see another manufacturer go out of business..I wish Mike all the best NN2X, Tom
W0EA has it exactly right - "When you sell a product for over $1000 that is worth less than a quarter of that in parts without any patent protection, you are setting yourself up for a copy cat ..." Having worked in specialty businesses for my career, I know that, if you have a novel technology and do not have "barriers to entry" to exclude competition or privileged supply positions (ie, patents, proprietary manufacturing processes, exclusive raw material supply agreements, superior product branding and advertising, specialized labor expertise), you may enjoy a "first-in" advantage with high value pricing, but you need to know that your market advantage will be finite in duration until competition successfully positions for their share of the revenue pie. This is, in my opinion, what happened in this case. It's not a bad business strategy at all; it's just not long-term sustainable.
Mike could have pursued additional patents with better methods and matetials rather than just the electrical advantage, but if he did so it is not in the uspto database to my knowledge. People who think about ham radio as a niche market do watch these things, and look at other markets instead. Not always, but more often than is publically known. Look and see what was new at Dayton as hardware...dearth of innovation this year. 73 Chip W1YW
Mike made the case on his website that his better mechanical design was more cost effective because it held up longer. I dont think that came across enough to differntiate. Mike did have some early control of the entry barrier...but this ( ham antennas) wasnt some smiley slap your back competitive scene either. Sordid and sleazy, IMO. They dont do cases on sordid and sleazy in biz schools... Not a true free market...worse than most. Heck, just think what something truly weird, like circuit board based HF antennas, would do to the 'continuum'... 73 Chip W1YW
No business, except perhaps in name, is long term sustainable....maybe the Hudson Bay Company ;-) HP used to be an oscilloscope company. Now they are an ink company.
