Off the top of my head, the bulk chargers do 10 batteries at a time. I have two to donate to a large order.
-walter On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Dave Crossland <d...@lab6.com> wrote: > Hi > > On 13 June 2016 at 04:07, Sean DALY <sdaly...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Chihurumnaya Ibiam > > <ibiamchihurumn...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hi, i think this is a good idea, but i don't think buying and selling to > >> make profit is part of SL's agenda. I'm i wrong? > > > > If proceeds from the sale(s) benefit the organization and not > individuals, > > there is no "profit". > > Profit in a technical sense means surplus remaining after all fixed > capital costs and labour costs have been paid; some of this surplus is > typically distributed to a tax authority, and some is reinvested into > the organization, and in a for-profit org, some is paid out to the > shareholders as dividends. > > Sugar Labs is a project of a US charity, and so the US tax authority > gives the charity a break on most tax distributions, and there are no > shareholders so there are no dividends. However, the org still pays > fixed capital costs and labour costs, and our project contributes to > both of those by allocating 10% of all revenue to the org. > > So buying and selling anything to pay out dividends to private > individuals is not part of SL's agenda; but buying and selling > something to create surplus to reinvest into the project is part of > the agenda (or ought to be, if it is to be an effective project.) > > On 13 June 2016 at 04:20, Sean DALY <sdaly...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 7:07 AM, Dave Crossland <d...@lab6.com> wrote: > >> > >> individual units regularly clear $100 each > > > > If these are functioning units, I support the idea, > > The listing says are functioning: > > This full listing says: "Qty 172 - OLPC - One Laptop Per Child XO-1 > w/7.5" TFT, 256MB RAM & 1024KB Flash ROM...All have been tested to > post...More information about these units can be found on line at link > below...Includes 254 chargers, 90 extra batteries plus 10 charging > racks, if desired......Customer is responsible for arrangement of > freight trucking pickup and insurance from our dock, FOB Destination. > One pallet of laptops, 2 pallets of charging racks....Sold as > is...Payment must be made within 24 hours of purchase." > > "All have been tested to post" suggest to me that they have tested > them to at least boot and have the screen turn on. I think that is > good enough for a developer excited about the project, which is the > market I propose targeting. > > > but perhaps what should > > be done is to try to keep them together in a single microdeployment by > > partnering with another nonprofit, a sponsor, or a university. > > If this raises the same amount of funds for SL, I think that is fine, > but I am skeptical of that. > > > For example a > > college could do a project for a local elementary school. Sales logistics > > for individual shipments are difficult, with no benefit to SL. > > I totally disagree, I think this is super easy; we get the bulk > shipment to somewhere in the US (like Walter's house or my apartment) > and then we ask members to volunteer to share the fulfillment workload > by taking X units and sticking them under the bed or whatever; then as > orders trickle in, we send them out one by one, using this list or a > wiki page to co-ordinate. > > > Kept together, we could study the XO's place in the 2016 context, > showing how the > > software has evolved. > > Per the Pareto principle I am skeptical of the value of studying a > group of 80 or 160 users, compared to studying a group of 3-5 users. > > We do not have a shortage of passive users who don't contribute code to > Sugar. > > We do have a shortage of active developers who do contribute code to Sugar. > > > OLPC France has managed the Nosy Komba, Madagascar microdeployment for > years > > now in partnership with other NGOs and the learnings have been fantastic. > > Great! No need to duplicate that :) > > > These units have US keyboards and would be suited to a deployment there > - it > > could be problematic to deploy them elsewhere. > > US keyboards are ideal for developers; and are fine for anyone being > instructed in English. > > On 13 June 2016 at 04:19, Sam Parkinson <sam.parkins...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > They are XO1s... does Sugar run OK on the XO1? > > Yes, and it seems to me that it is essential that Sugar runs OK on the > XO-1 for another 5 years. > > > $100 seems steep for an XO1. In the USA, apparently less than $100 > yeilds > > you a "tablet" from "Walmart" (can't vouch for anything... just searched > it > > on the net) [1]. Maybe sell it for less? Or try $100 and see if we > need to > > go lower? > > For less!? > > Actually I would start at $200 (the RRP ;) and asking people to > enquire about discounts if they need 'em. > > Software developers are one of the most expensive labour commodities, > and buying equipment is a tax write-off for anyone who has their shit > together. > > > But at $75 or $50, that's a nice thing to put on the frontpage of the > site. > > This will be amazing. We can setup the infrastructure for selling > devices, > > sending updates to people, etc. We can empower deployment who need the > > hardware. > > :D > > > The "profit" can probably be invested in things we need. Devel work? > More > > capital for selling more devices (aka. things other than XO1)? Anyway, > that > > is off topic... we can deal with that if the money actually eventuates. > > :D > > > But it is also great for our growth. Not everybody installs OSes, but > most > > people are familiar with the idea of buying a box of hardware. Is $75 > > expensive? In a school budget yes probably. But there are defiantly > some > > people who would be willing to spend it. > > https://www.google.com/search?q=average+software+engineer+salary says > > "A software developer's average salary, $99,530, is higher than most > other occupations on our technology jobs list. For instance, a > software developer made thousands more than computer systems analysts, > who made an average salary of $87,320 in 2014, and computer > programmers, who made about $82,690." > http://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/software-developer/salary > > > This is a very good use of the SL capital. > > :D > > > We obviously need to think about the risk. If we spend $4000 on XOs, at > the > > price of $75, we need to sell 50 (+more to cover postage costs) to make > the > > money back. Is that likely? I would say yes... that is about 2 classes > of > > students. > > If we'll support the XO-1 until 2010, I expect selling them all is > easy as our deadline will be around August 1st 2019. > > > https://www.google.com/search?q=how%20many%20software%20engineers%20in%20the%20us > says > > "There are about 18.2 million software developers worldwide, a number > that is due to rise to 26.4 million by 2019, a 45% increase, says > Evans Data Corp. in its latest Global Developer Population and > Demographic Study. Today, the U.S. leads the world in software > developers, with about 3.6 million. [Jul 10, 2013]" > > - > http://www.computerworld.com/article/2483690/it-careers/india-to-overtake-u-s--on-number-of-developers-by-2017.html > > Its a big market. > > > Of course, people will argue that it is not SL's job to get involved in > > selling hardware. > > They are mistaken :) > > > On the same token, nobody would say that is NOT SL's job > > to promote Sugar. > > :D > > > Selling a small batch of hardware is just a way of > > promoting our software. This isn't OLPC scale, SL is not becoming an > OEM... > > it is "Uncle Dave's Phone Repair Shop" scale. > > ;) > > On 13 June 2016 at 06:20, Samuel Greenfeld <sam...@greenfeld.org> wrote: > > FOB (Freight on Board) means that the responsibility for customs fees, > > shipping charges, etc. belongs to the buyer. XOs directly purchased from > > OLPC historically had similar terms. > > > > The shipping calculator on that listing can give you a rough idea of > what it > > would cost to get to you in the US (around $500-$1000 uninsured). > > Great! > > > Personally I think it is a waste of funds and time given that someone > will > > have to go through all 172 XOs to verify their functionality, determine > > which 10-year-old batteries still can hold a charge, make repairs, etc. > It > > would primarily be of interest to projects which already get donated > XO-1s > > and could salvage parts of necessary, > > Which projects are these? > > > but not necessarily at the $4k price point. > > > > Reselling the laptops as usable also would incur a bit of liability that > the > > recycler (selling as-is) is not willing to take. > > Per the above, the laptops are not sold as-is but sold as booting. I > expect some will have dead pixels and those can be sold at a small > discount. > > > About the only good thing > > is that this recycler does not appear to be shipping from Massachusetts, > > The listing says: "Item location: Alpharetta, Georgia, United States" > > > where one recycler was selling pre-release parts even after being told > they > > were not usable by anyone else. > > Mmm, that's a pity. > > > While we seem to have discovered Sugar Labs has money this year, Sugar > Labs > > is not a bank for everyone's little pet project. *Before* we spend any > > significant portion of funds beyond the significant amount already > allocated > > for stipends & translation, I would like to see proof that Sugar Labs can > > fund raise most of the money already spent back. > > I am proposing this as a way to raise funds. > > The proof that this can raise funds is that every month, a handful of > XO-1s sell in the USA ebay for around $100. > > Here are the current other XO-1 auctions: > > > http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2047675.m570.l1313.TR11.TRC2.A0.H0.Xolpc.TRS1&_nkw=olpc&_sacat=0 > > When Conservancy sells the laptops it won't be considered donation > income because there will be a material benefit in exchange for the > money - the laptop - so there may be tax to be paid, but we'd need to > ask Adam to ask Conservancy to confirm that. > > And before Adam does that, the board would need to agree a motion to > spend $500-5,000 to obtain the laptops. > > > The only valid way I could see doing this would be to ask the recycler if > > they would be willing to just donate the laptops to the SFC (or another > > 501(c)3 registered XO-using nonprofit) and take the profit as a tax > > writeoff. > > That's a great idea! > > > But *before* this gets done, it really needs to be discussed by > > Sugar Labs' board > > For me the board is currently frustratingly slow to respond, so as a > member I took the initiative to explore the donation opportunity. Will > keep you posted on what they say. > > (Of course I agree the board needs to approve any spending) > > On 13 June 2016 at 07:05, Walter Bender <walter.ben...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I have to say I with Samuel Greenfeld on this one. There are lots of > > potential issues with these machines (depending upon how they have been > > stored and maintained.) > > With 176 laptops, there are plenty that can be cannabalised for > missing ears, cracked screens, too many dead pixels, etc > > > They could well have dead batteries (both the main > > battery and the battery for the RTC). > > How much are RTC batteries? > > > They most certainly will need an > > investment in time by someone getting them unlocked and reflashed as > well. > > "Unlocking Weekend" coming up ;) > > > That said, if we go that route, I have two bulk battery charging racks we > > could add to the mix. > > Those chargers could be a nice incentive for a bulk purchase; how many > units to those support? > > Cheers > Dave > _______________________________________________ > IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) > IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep > -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org <http://www.sugarlabs.org>
_______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep