Very disappointing news. I would like to know who the mysterious "North American competitor" was that convinced the factory to stop work on the 978. I will put them on my boycott list.

I'll second this motion

Agreed. Since we know from Mr. Tribeman that it was a competitor that sells in brick-and-mortar stores, it does help narrow the field a bit, but I think for the sake of the consumers imposing a bit of justice here, we should get to know. After all, we the consumers got screwed over too; because of a competitor who didn't want an even playing field, we will now never get to enjoy this product and the advances it would have yielded. We deserve to know who is responsible for this. There's probably a confidentiality agreement that prohibits Outlaw from doing so, but there are always ways to find these sorts of things out. (If not, Outlaw could do quite well to share it with us.) As a preventative measure, I'll simply not buy anything sold in brick-and-mortars until I know specifically who to boycott. One company screws up the whole party for everyone... kind of like the football coach who makes the whole team run when one guy is late. It's an effective punishment.

I will say that the e-mail was very diplomatic, so I'll tip my hat to Mr. Tribeman and the others at Outlaw for trying to stay above the fray on this.

I would like to know as well!

all we probably need to do is figure out who the Chinese factory is owned by. Then it should be easy.

It should be easy if you look at competitors who are using Audyssey XT32 (Onkyo, Integra, Denon) and where their products are manufactured.

Why are people blaming this other electronics company? They were doing nothing more than protecting their own investment and making sure the factory honored its existing agreements.

You should blame the factory for taking the contract with Outlaw in the first place. And Outlaw for signing up with this factory, whether or not they knew of their involvement with the third party. Checking and double-checking for conflicts is a pretty important step to take when choosing a partner.

Agreed, but why did it take till the stage of final approvals? Poor taste if that is the case.

We don't know the details so we can't say "they were doing nothing more"... What we do know is the company stifled competition, the manner in which it occurred appears shady, and the timing is peculiar. Which reminds me Gibson purchased a large stake in Onkyo in January of this year. Conspiracy theories abound.

I think the other company is taking heat because of the odd timing and the fact that, as a brick-and-mortar distribution model, technically don't compete head-to-head with Outlaw. It would be like Cambridge asking BBK not to build OPPO players because they both sell BD players with similar feature sets. (Granted, it would be doubly weird in that case, since Cambridge BD players are usually clones of OPPO, and deeply unlikely since OPPO has at least some peripheral corporate links to BBK.)

There is clearly some blame to be had between the factory and the other company. Did the company "black list" Outlaw several years ago and only now enforce it? If so, the factory did Outlaw an injustice by pursuing the project anyway? Did the company "black list" Outlaw just now? If so, it is a difficult-to-justify tactic to hurt another company even though the two distribution channels mean the two companies don't compete directly. Either way, it feels a lot like bullying on the part of the other company. Granted, we probably will never have all the details, but that's just the way it looks from where I sit.