R.O.I. (Return On Investment)

[Pierre]

Is money allways the most important factor?

 

[kamenges]

I'm a little bit confused. The poll question doesn't seem to match up with the question in the post.

The poll question is:

When you see new system, would more money really have made it better?

My answer to that is not necessarily (OK, no).

However, in the post the question is asked, presumably relative to return on investment,:

Is money allways the most important factor?

To that I say yes. You wouldn't be looking at a new system if you weren't concerned about money. There are different reasons for considering a new system. Current system obsolescence, faster production speed, ease of maintenance, etc. But it all boils down to ultimately saving money. While it would be nice, most of us don't have the financial freedom to try something simply because it looks fun or for some other personal gratification reason. It's all about the coin.

Keith

 

[Vetteboy]

Very Important, but..............

In business, yes. Personal life, no. But even in business, you have to be ethical. A good reason to choose PLC programming over such available positions as Hitmen, Crack dealers, Soylent Green manufacturing (IT'S PEOPLE!), etc.

 

[Thomas]

classic questions

One word: safety!!!

Until the machine is (legally and reasonably) safe to use, expense takes a back seat.

 

[Tom Jenkins]

Nitendo is entertainment, PLCs are't. Of course, the people that make Nintendo do that for money too.

Obviously, there are many applications where money is a secondary issue. In my industry, wastewater treatment, for example many systems are primarily intended to enhance process performance. However, money certainly enters into it, both by virtue of the bidding process and by virtue of improved efficiency reducing operating costs. And eventually the taxpayers have to provide money to pay for the system. I have turned down projects because budget consraints precluded doing the job with what I thought was an acceptable level of quality. And that cost me money.

Safety of course is another overriding concern, but even that is, wrongly, sometimes made secondary to financial considerations.

In the long run most automation projects have to be justified by by money concerns. Capitalism is a system that often disgusts, and often pits ethics and professionialism against accounting. But for the life of me I can't concieve of a better system, and in the greater scheme of things it serves society's interests better than any alternative.

 

[Doug_Adam]

Think of it this way,
If you are in private industry and you don't make money, your business is going to close and you will be out of work.

Secondly, for all organisations public and private (and even family life), resources are limited. If you can save money somewhere, you can use it somewhere else. There is also always a finite amount of money available at any given point in time. So if you spend it all and don't get what you need, then too bad.

Within these constraints, money may or may not be the most important factor.
If you have more money than what you need, you could probably focus on other priorities.
If you have less money than you need, it becomes the overall priority.

Doug