In message <c4409994.1a23c%ken.ja...@emccompliance.com>, dated Fri, 2 May 2008, Ken Javor <ken.ja...@emccompliance.com> writes:
>I don?t understand how the first statement applies to the idea that all >these regulations are a barrier to entry, but just a cost of doing >business to the established players. > The e-mail had grown to metre-length, so it's a bit difficult to know which 'first statement' you mean. Both descriptions are half-true. The 'barrier' is that in addition to designing and marketing your product, you have to learn about the regulatory requirements, beg, borrow or steal the standards and then make sure your product complies. The 'cost of doing business' (and I was one of the first to point out that complying with regulations is not a development cost, because the product works quite well without, in markets where testing is not required) is a cost incurred in order to be in the market. It certainly includes the cost of testing, but greater than that, unless you test in-house, is the cost of employing safety and EMC specialists. A greater still cost would be the consequence of NOT employing them! -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Murphy's Law has now been officially re-named The Certainty Principle John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
