Only one regret...

I have not read through the bile that I am sure certian nay sayers have vented upon our beleaquered hosts.

I feel awful that the Outlaws have had the "manufacturing partner" pressured to kill the project. I believe the pressure is ample evidence that firms lthat might include Harman Intl, Parasond, NAD, Onkyo/Gibson or D&M beleived the planned product would have been a threat to their higher end offerings.

The way I see this, an overly intrusive North American based competitor pressured an ambitious SE Asia based contract fab into not risking known quantity business for disruptive upstart. It ia bit ironic that the SE Asian firm is tied down by old style bullying traditional competitor...

The response of Outlaw is commendable. Their formerly covert "Plan B" is moved up as both "new hope" for Outlaw and a shot across the stern of the "traditional North American competitor" that by sabotaging Outlaw's high end project said competitor is now facing the very unpleasant prospect of both its higher margin AND higher volume product(s) being under attack.


While Outlaw looses this battle they've upped the ante in the overall war against crummy value...

I think most of the bile around here is being aimed at whoever instigated the demise of the Model 978, not Outlaw. There may be some other sites today that are less compassionate toward Outlaw's loss, but - likely in part by the honest and level-headed nature of the announcement - I haven't seen much of that.

Why do people keep mentioning Parasound? They aren't in the SSP market any longer.

I don't see Harman either. They are in a completely different price category than Outlaw would be. And wasn't their latest pre/pro killed too?

Gibson has a stake in Onkyo, but Onkyo is not based in North America.

And D&M Holdings is based in Japan, not N.A. either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%26M_Holdings

I believe outlaw it telling the truth as they heard it, I'm wondering how honest their Chinese partner is? How long until the 978 is available under another name and different cosmetics? There have been earlier posts in the 978 forum discussing the futility of trying to litigate such matters in China. This may well have been a colossal con-job by the partner. Amazing how this became an issue only when the final design and beta testing was complete.

That leaves NAD as a possibility (part of Lenbrook Group of Pickering, Ontario, Canada according to Wikipedia). Are there any other possibilities?

Shimrod, do you think an OEM in China that is experienced in building this kind of equipment needs to con the Outlaws out of a product? That's preposterous. If they wanted to put out their own product they'd do it with or without any Outlaw's involvement. WHat they're not going to collect is money from Outlaw for building anything. That's not a very good con job if it were one.

twistybox:First off, it's just speculation.Still, what did Outlaw bring to the table? If the OEM could just crank out a high quality processor at will we wouldn't have been waiting all these years. Whatever value Outlaw added to the project development, even if it's simply a firm grasp of what this segment of the market is looking for in a processor, that value is over in China as a ready-to-go product.
The OEM doesn't make money from Outlaw sales, but someone may have decided the whole enchilada is more enticing. Just see if someone's touting a great processor from "the next OPPO" in 6 months. Again, I have no direct knowledge of anything to do with this, I just find the timing curious.

But it's unfounded and somewhat ludicrous speculation. Complete fantasy, unicorn-tear style. It implies that one hasn't kept up with news/info of what the 978 would actually offer. In 6 months the processor would only be more out of date than it is already. This OEM would be looking to do what with this product? They'd be far better off collecting manufacturing costs from Outlaw.

DId you read the bits about Outlaw offering to buy the designs from the OEM? If you think that Outlaw brought the design to the OEM simply to "build" then you're way off base. The OEM was most definitely responsible for all the heavy lifting in this project. And such companies aren't in the business of direct retail sales. They're in the business of selling or facilitating design and manufacture. They'd still need to sell the design to someone to offer at retail. And I can't think of too many people that would like to start his kind of direct-sales business who would prefer to start with the 978 design rather than something a little more current.

I don't have a problem with speculation, but the idea is totally unfounded and just another form of China-bashing. It's sad to see.

If the story is exactly as told, it could very well be any third-party company. The issue with some of the ones already mentioned is that they don't currently offer any comparable or even interesting products. NAD has nothing. Parasound has nothing. Anthem isn't exactly a company with a lot of clout in retail, they're just overpriced boutique. But regardless of who it may be, this is just a case of someone protecting their own investment. Nothing anti-competitive about it. But the very nature of competition, of competing, is not to foster a competitive playing field. It's to win. To come out ahead. Yes, it's surprising that such a decision would come so late in the game, but no one outside the parties directly involved knows the details, so it's going to be very difficult to even speculate as to why.

This is what Outlaw gets for trusting outsourcing. They should have
built it in the USA & own it themselves rather than let the Chinese
do it. Back to the drawing board! Who knows? Maybe 5-10 years
down the road, maybe we'll see something?

They've used the formula of teaming with a manufacturing partner on nearly all of their products. Granted, the multichannel amps and the speakers used US partners, but the Model 1050, Model 950, Model 1070/970, and Model 990 were all developed using the same formula as the Model 978. Would it be cool to see a domestically-built Outlaw processor? Darn skippy. Could it happen? Maybe, perhaps even using a partner like ATI (who bought B&K a while back), but the price tag is likely going to be tough to swallow.

Question is, how much money has outlaw paid the O&M during the design process? If it's zero, that one thing. If outlaw has been subsidizing development of the design then my earlier questions still stand.

This time I agree with renov8r. I've seen posts that I completely disagree with:
1) It's not unethical, it's just being competitive. BS - it IS unethical!
2) Outlaw deserves this for trusting outsourcing. BS - I have several outsources in the U.S. and Asia and elswhere and after due dilligence, and years of partnership, I trust them. Sorry, a diversified company cannot make everything inside. And, Outlaw's unit volumes are TINY in the consumer electronics world. To manufacture that volume in the U.S. would probably double the retail price. There's future good news - in a few years, for a number of reasons, it will cost as much or less to manufacture in Mexico (and some products, in the U.S.) as it will in China. The winds of change are blowing - but that's another topic.
3) Let's boycott ALL big labels. Come on, that would make us look immaturely foolish. My guess is that it's a Harmon label, but my guess has no basis in actual information, so it's worth no more than any other guess.