Welcome To P8ntballer.com
The Home Of European Paintball
Sign Up & Join In

50 Caliber Revolution

Exile

The Tao of Pooh
Jun 20, 2006
630
16
43
North London
Im not sure how they could cost less, apart from the obvious fact of using less materials. I cant see this adding up to much of a saving per case.
Smaller and lighter paintballs means smaller and lighter boxes = massive savings when shipping them by the pallet-load/container.
 

Chicago

New Member
Jan 31, 2005
1,380
0
0
Visit site
.50 caliber performs in every way worse than .68 caliber. Field owners are not going to switch to cheaper paint if it's also ****ty paint - they don't' want players shooting paint that is not accurate, bounces all over the place, etc, etc, even if it might save them money.

Second, it won't save any money. The MATERIAL costs of the paintball are tiny in comparison to the total costs of selling paintballs.

Even if there were significant cost savings, cheaper paintballs DO NOT make for cheaper paint bills! Paintball costs have been going down for almost 30 years, and the cost of paint has stayed the same, because cheaper paint just means people shoot more of it.


This change does nothing to help field owners. It does nothing to help players. It might make the milsim guys get a bit more realistic looking guns, but that's not enough to drive the other 90% of the industry.


And, if field owners really did want to make more money, the answer is simple: Limit bps to 1 or 2 bps, charge the same $40-$50 per player per day they're already charging, and only give out 100 paintballs instead of 1000 or 2000. That actually cuts the cost of paint, and the customer is having MORE fun, which is what the customer is actually paying the field for in the first place.
 

Robbo

Owner of this website
Jul 5, 2001
13,114
2,157
448
London
www.p8ntballer.com
Well, I'm old and stubborn and usually I don't like changes, but this story sounds exiting to me. It's going to be a complete relaunch of paintball eqipment and this will for sure bring some interesting innovations with it. Performancewise it should be a big improvement. Can't wait to give it a try!

Also, I'm sure there will be some .68 caliber available in the future, so I won't have to put my Phantom on the wall.


Why am I not astonished to see Robbo involved :D


Schlomo, my German friend, how are you mate?
Have you settled down to just ONE woman yet??????

Good to hear from you, hope all is well in the land of 'no laughing' and 'horrible black sausages' :)

Let me know (robbo@aceville.com) what events you are going to this year (Millenniums) and it would be cool to hook up if I go....but as for not being astonished seeing me involved in this 50 cal project?...Well you know what it's like, Richmond has always been one for revolutions and getting his old friends involved, he made me an offer I couldn't refuse and there was no gun or horse's head in sight, I'm on board because I want to be involved, pure and simple :)

I couldn't resist it mate, it seemed as though paintball needed something and nobody else was really doing anything other than bemoaning the state of the industry, I'm looking forward to it all and to see how it pans out.
I'm just as$hole lucky enough to be part of it.
Make sure you email me mate to let me know what you been up to.

Pete
 

Robbo

Owner of this website
Jul 5, 2001
13,114
2,157
448
London
www.p8ntballer.com
I was a tad negative i do admit, sorry :eek: and yes I hadn't really thought about it enough. I was set in seeing it from a walkon/torni point of view and not from a paintball site's point of view.

I suppose im stubborn :) I dont like to see change, and it is a big change, you have to admit. However there is a part of me that thinks it would be interesting to see if there are any changes to the way the smaller paintballs are loaded in via the hopper and if the paintballs themselves perform any differently. Im not sure how they could cost less, apart from the obvious fact of using less materials. I cant see this adding up to much of a saving per case.

Would they be sold in cases of 2000 or 3000 :rolleyes:
DZ, I think people are gonna knee jerk mainly because they might think it's going to come in quick or be forced upon people, neither is true mate.

People will have the option of shooting smaller bore paint and any transition, and here I am talking about the paintball market as a whole, will take years.
In that time, people will have generally had the best use of their markers and equipment and maybe looking around to replace it, it will be at this time they maybe consider changing and so it's not as if they will be losing out because they have .68 gear.

I also think, the fact that it's different will stimulate the market place and hopefully put paintball back on a better financial footing because at the moment, it's a precarious position for an awful lot of companies, and I am talking about the majority of companies not just a few.
Still, sorry if I came across a bit heavy, that wasn't my intention.

Peace !
 

Robbo

Owner of this website
Jul 5, 2001
13,114
2,157
448
London
www.p8ntballer.com
.50 caliber performs in every way worse than .68 caliber. Field owners are not going to switch to cheaper paint if it's also ****ty paint - they don't' want players shooting paint that is not accurate, bounces all over the place, etc, etc, even if it might save them money.

Second, it won't save any money. The MATERIAL costs of the paintball are tiny in comparison to the total costs of selling paintballs.

Even if there were significant cost savings, cheaper paintballs DO NOT make for cheaper paint bills! Paintball costs have been going down for almost 30 years, and the cost of paint has stayed the same, because cheaper paint just means people shoot more of it.


This change does nothing to help field owners. It does nothing to help players. It might make the milsim guys get a bit more realistic looking guns, but that's not enough to drive the other 90% of the industry.


And, if field owners really did want to make more money, the answer is simple: Limit bps to 1 or 2 bps, charge the same $40-$50 per player per day they're already charging, and only give out 100 paintballs instead of 1000 or 2000. That actually cuts the cost of paint, and the customer is having MORE fun, which is what the customer is actually paying the field for in the first place.


Chris, try getting out the other side of bed mate ... does wonders for the state of mind :)

Mind you, I have to admit, of late, it's kinda hard to get outa bed any other side after what the paintball industry has been thru of late.

And Chris, if what you are saying is right, then Richmond is wrong.. and if I look at both your track records in paintball, I think I am gonna put my money on a town called Richmond (we have such a town in London) and not a city called Chicago ...no disrespect intended mate.
 

Markie C

Carlos Spicy Weiner
Aug 1, 2004
3,327
121
88
46
Northern Quarter
www.northernquarterpb.com
This is the original press release-we got the exclusive.

..and I can't believe what some of you guys in this thread concern yourselves with, it's truly amazing.
It might be truly amazing Pete but i think to just align your self with one gun maker is a bit, well dodgy cause it gives them the rights to it all,

Might be wrong they all might be on the 50cal wagon but if it is a "New Start" then surly it should of been opened up to every one?
 

Robbo

Owner of this website
Jul 5, 2001
13,114
2,157
448
London
www.p8ntballer.com
It might be truly amazing Pete but i think to just align your self with one gun maker is a bit, well dodgy cause it gives them the rights to it all,

Might be wrong they all might be on the 50cal wagon but if it is a "New Start" then surly it should of been opened up to every one?
Markie, I wasn't referring to doubts concerning this aspect mate, but to answer your question, I think when Richmond had this idea, he realised markers would have to be manufactured at one point and so he HAD to go somewhere mate and so why not SP?

He's hardly gonna start this project and go to every single marker manufacturer and say, 'hi' I'm doing this new project and can you ALL make a marker for me to keep Markie C happy in the UK'.... :)

Ain't gonna happen mate, and I think you'll find there is no 'rights' involved when it comes to 50 cal, anybody can make a marker to shoot it.

50 Cal was used years ago when I first started Markie but back then, the chemistry wasn't as sophisticated as it is now and the problem with breakage stopped it from taking over as the preferred usage paint ... times change.

Don't worry Markie, as far as I know, nobody owns 50 Cal per se, well if they do, it ain't Richmond or SP.
 

Markie C

Carlos Spicy Weiner
Aug 1, 2004
3,327
121
88
46
Northern Quarter
www.northernquarterpb.com
Cool,

It sounds like a cool idea,

How will it work in the tournament side of things?

Will it be you will have to shoot all the same thing or would it have to be one or the other ?

Just thinking about performance they say they go further and faster.
 

Robbo

Owner of this website
Jul 5, 2001
13,114
2,157
448
London
www.p8ntballer.com
Cool,

It sounds like a cool idea,

How will it work in the tournament side of things?

Will it be you will have to shoot all the same thing or would it have to be one or the other ?

Just thinking about performance they say they go further and faster.
Markie, I think you'll find that will be down to the respective promoters and federations; I can't really see any problem in principle unless politics rears its ugly head.
We have already witnessed this to some respect but for the life of me, I can't see any fundamental problems getting in the way; just as the XBall format was assimilated in its due time, this will hopefully follow the same route but only if players think it appropriate in terms of usage.
If the paint lives up to its claims in terms of performance and cost then I think most ballers will at least want to try it.

Some people who will voice doubts will be donning their 'company' uniforms and claim they are posting from a position of genuine doubt but it's kinda obvious when they surface what they are up to.
Still, I could be wrong and they are genuine but I been in this game long enough to know what's what.
 

Chicago

New Member
Jan 31, 2005
1,380
0
0
Visit site
And Chris, if what you are saying is right, then Richmond is wrong.. and if I look at both your track records in paintball, I think I am gonna put my money on a town called Richmond (we have such a town in London) and not a city called Chicago ...no disrespect intended mate.
You can't beat physics. You might temporarily obscure physics with some very nice press releases, but physics will ultimately win. That should be pretty obvious from even a casual glance at the history of paintball products.

Edit: I suppose I really should have read the release in more detail, as I just discovered this gem:

he has engineered a new paintball with an improved flight trajectory that means they fly farther and more accurately
There must be some pretty darned revolutionary technology that is going to change how a sphere travels through air...