Beginning Of The End for TeleVue?

wrote:

Hello all,

After spending a couple years out of the hobby and now getting back
into it, I'm amazed at the quality you can now purchase and the low,
low, low prices associated with these products.

Just in case anybody has any doubts, this post is *not* by the
Tony Flanders who has been posting to s.a.a. for many years, and
who now works for Sky&Telescope.

- Tony Flanders

After reading the responses so far, I can't help but mention the following:
this goes to show that the reason Televue and the other high end companies
survive is because astronomers, on average, are making significantly more in
annual salary than the remainder of the population. Kind of like the doctor
who almost always drives the Mercedes. If the money is there, they spend it
no matter what. Some may not agree, but that's how I see it (BTW, I make
about $28-32K a year so the high enders are a no-no for me.... what's the
average amateur astronomer make these days... used to be around $80K but
several years ago)

JD

wrote in message
ups.com...
Hello all,

After spending a couple years out of the hobby and now getting back
into it, I'm amazed at the quality you can now purchase and the low,
low, low prices associated with these products. Apos and eyepieces in
particular.

This used to be TeleVue's bread and butter, and boy did they know it
with the prices they charge! But now that we, as consumers, have
options where we get 98% of the ultra high quality performance for 50%
of the cost, what does it mean to the company that has been holding us
over the coals for the past 20 years, wringing every red cent out of us
for a high quality eyepiece? Could this competition be the beginning
of the end for them?? Or will there always be status-seekers in this
hobby that decide on purchases based on the name printed on the
eyepiece, as opposed to the quality/price ratio?

I just don't see this company doing well with the price wars that are
being waged right now. Deservedly so? Maybe. That's up for debate.
I'm just saying that I wouldn't want to be the most expensive company
in astronomy right now....

Jim Duncans wrote:
After reading the responses so far, I can't help but mention the following:
this goes to show that the reason Televue and the other high end companies
survive is because astronomers, on average, are making significantly more in
annual salary than the remainder of the population. Kind of like the doctor
who almost always drives the Mercedes. If the money is there, they spend it
no matter what. Some may not agree, but that's how I see it (BTW, I make
about $28-32K a year so the high enders are a no-no for me.... what's the
average amateur astronomer make these days... used to be around $80K but
several years ago)

I don't think anyone can know for sure what the average salary is today,
or what it was several years ago. It's not a scientific survey, but a
reader survey with the usual selection biases. I suspect quite strongly
that one is more likely to fill in the salary range if one's salary is
high.

One step toward getting a better handle on salary distribution would be
to make up six salary ranges, and ask the reader to flip a coin and roll
a die. If the coin comes up heads, fill in the proper salary range; if
it comes up tails, use the die to select which range you fill in. Of
course, I doubt that any actual survey would make their readers go through
all that rigamarole.

All in all, I rather think the mean salary is below $80,000 US. Mine
happens to be above that, but I know plenty, even here in the relatively
affluent areas of Los Angeles, that make below that (just because they
happen to work in areas that the powers that be think don't need to be
paid very much, like teaching grade school children). I guess (but do
not know for sure) that the recent introduction of low-cost, decent
telescopes that don't get put in the closet right away has perhaps even
decreased the mean salary of the amateur astronomer (at least in the
US).

Brian Tung
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt

Bri
I don't think anyone can know for sure what the average salary is
today,
or what it was several years ago. It's not a scientific survey, but
a
reader survey with the usual selection biases. I suspect quite
strongly
that one is more likely to fill in the salary range if one's salary
is
high.


I agree with Brian, it's hard to really know any sort of "average"
salary. After all, one millionaire can skew the average up quite a
bit!

Clyde

wrote in message
oups.com...
I agree with Brian, it's hard to really know any sort of "average"
salary. After all, one millionaire can skew the average up quite a
bit!

Median income is generally used more often in demographics because of that
reason.

Alson Wong wrote:
Median income is generally used more often in demographics because of that
reason.

That's true, but the problem I was raising (systematic bias in answers)
is different from the one Clyde raised (volatility of the mean value with
heavy-tailed distributions).

Brian Tung
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt

wrote:

Bri
I don't think anyone can know for sure what the average salary is
today,


You evidently work for the Bush administration?

or what it was several years ago. It's not a scientific survey, but
a
reader survey with the usual selection biases. I suspect quite
strongly
that one is more likely to fill in the salary range if one's salary
is
high.


I agree with Brian, it's hard to really know any sort of "average"
salary. After all, one millionaire can skew the average up quite a
bit!

average vs mean vs median vs mode.... just for starters. You need a
gradeschool stat course.





Clyde

On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 13:19:30 -0600, Brian Tung wrote
(in article ):


One step toward getting a better handle on salary distribution would be
to make up six salary ranges, and ask the reader to flip a coin and roll
a die. If the coin comes up heads, fill in the proper salary range; if
it comes up tails, use the die to select which range you fill in. Of
course, I doubt that any actual survey would make their readers go through
all that rigamarole.

This is an unusual protocol that I've not seen before. Could you please
comment on why this gives better results than a standard survey? I'm not
doubting you, just curious.

Bill Tschumy wrote:
This is an unusual protocol that I've not seen before. Could you please
comment on why this gives better results than a standard survey? I'm not
doubting you, just curious.

The principle behind it is that one is more likely to be honest in
answering a possibly embarrassing question (such as how much money you
make) if the answer cannot definitively be tied to the person. In
this case, an answer of "less than $20,000" might be true, or it might
just be the roll of the die. Apparently, this principle is valid,
although I'm not sure just how one would validate it.

To pick a more extreme example, consider the following instructions:

1. Flip a coin. If it comes up heads, fill in the "Yes" bubble
to Q1 on your form. If it comes up tails, please answer the
following question: Are you obese [suitably defined]?

The idea is that a significant number of people are reluctant to answer
"Yes" to the flat question (even if the form is anonymous), but will go
through the above procedure properly. Then, if the fraction of people
answering "Yes" is f, then an estimate of the true fraction of respondents
who are obese is 2f-1. (For example, if 60 percent answer "Yes," the
true fraction of obese people is close to twice 60 percent minus 1--that
is, 100 percent--or 20 percent.)

I really have no idea just *how* well this works, only that it is said
to work better than just asking the question straight out. As I also
said, I'm not sure how one would go about establishing that it works
better.

Brian Tung
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt

Don't forget you have to take into account cost of living (housing,
food, gas, etc..). That's a rather significant difference for many
areas of the country.