New Butterfly rubber "Dignics 05" 2019

This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Aug 2018
58
59
118
Greg Letts accurately predicted Tenergy 105 ($105 rubber)… now it is time for him to make another BTY board meeting to discuss Tenergy 150.

Following your excellent insight, I believe I have uncovered a profound anticipatory premonition.

My first thought upon encountering the naming use of "09c" was one of perplexing confusion, as I was unable to recall an incident in which Butterfly qualified an integer rubber appellation with a letter. What could it mean? I asked myself. Then, by using my Latin language background, I realized "c" is the Roman numeral for the decimal number 100. In the spirit of Archimedes of Syracuse: Eureka! The "c" represents 100, as in $100.

The 09c series will be released at the $109 price point, a nice incremental financial
advancement from Dignics 05.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Jan 2019
1,119
725
2,225
Read 2 reviews
I'm thinking 4 times 8 so ... yeah I'll probably have 32 of those for my return board, 21 could be too little ...
; )

That's a huge return board. If my calculations are correct, that's roughly 70cm x 140cm in size, a bit of a overkill imo. lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: jawien
says Shoo...nothing to see here. - zeio
says Shoo...nothing to see here. - zeio
Well-Known Member
Jan 2018
7,749
9,652
19,226
Money well spent. /s

 
  • Like
Reactions: JST

NDH

says Spin to win!
Someone should crowdsource a "price per week" on all rubbers.

Would be virtually impossible - Because we all judge how rubbers respond differently at different times.

But if Dignics lasted 4 months, with someone playing 8 hours per week (for example), you could say it was £4.41 per week in the UK (£75 divided by 17, which is about how many weeks are in 4 months).

If Tenergy lasted 3 months with the same 8 hours per week, you'd say it was £4.38 per week (£57 divided by 13).

Ultimately, it feels like this is what Butterfly are gunning for - They are possibly arguing that it is a much bigger gap than I've shown above, and in fact it's "cheaper per week" so to speak.

That being said, I'm not seeing the reviews coming in which are overwhelmingly positive about the extra performance you get from Dignics (to justify the extra cost).

Even if it was on par with Tenergy for "price per week", I'd personally still rather pay less, and change more often, as that new rubber feeling is unbeatable!
 
says The sticky bit is stuck.
says The sticky bit is stuck.
Well-Known Member
Jan 2017
2,773
2,628
8,173
Read 8 reviews
Obscene pricepoints create a particular value. This is often marketed as "exclusive", which is in fact a suprisingly frank description: the value of an item to you is determined by the fact that you can afford it while others cannot.

It's like this thing in which people eat gold-plated steak. That's not because gold plating enhances the flavor intrinsically. The placebo effect certainly will have its effect, but first and foremost it's the primates way of showing status in the colony. If you demonstrate you can piss away extravagant amounts, your status rises.

€80K watches, €30K bags etc. have the same purpose. In no sense is a €80K watch necessarily superior to a €10K one (or a €1K one, or a €200 one), so it serves another purposes. So does ordering food in expensive restaurants, and then not touching it. And so are many things.

Marketing shindigs are such. Product price has absolutely nothing to do with production cost or product quality. Pricing is established to match a demographic. If BTY (or another brand) would produce a €10K blade and €5K rubbers we'd see footage of Justin Bieber, Paris Hilton, or some or other Trump, Kardashian, bin Salman, Lisin or somesuch using it.

Gold plated steak tastes great, by the way. Even better with ground dinosaur fossil tea.
 
Last edited:

NDH

says Spin to win!
I get what you are saying, but I disagree with your examples to a degree.

Generally speaking (not always), expensive watches are built to a higher standard than your cheap ones - Different mechanisms, different materials etc.

Sure, there might be a point where a £50,000 watch is physically no better than a £40,000 watch, and you just pay for the name - But in general ,"expensive watches" are indeed BETTER than cheap watches.

I'll give you the bags example - But that's not my area of knowledge haha!

It's a bit different with Butterfly because the comparison isn't with a top end Tibhar rubber or any other brand - The comparison is with it's own market leading rubber - Tenergy.

Butterfly have to try and justify the extra cost.

If it's not through an increase in performance (and whilst Butterfly would like to tell you it is, it seems abundantly clear that Dignics is different to Tenergy, rather than "better"), then it needs to be an increase in durability to justify the extra cost.

I imagine we'll see the true value of Dignics in 4-6 months, when people start to report back, and the initial "wow" factor has rubbed off.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Active Member
Mar 2013
941
1,245
2,716
Read 3 reviews
Gold plated steak tastes great, by the way. Even better with ground dinosaur fossil tea.

I agree with what you're saying here, but there's an extra wrinkle added to the fabric when you consider that TT is a sport, rather than (just?) a fashion. Obscenely expensive watches are hard (almost impossible) to justify in objective/practical terms, so we are only left with ostentation. With TT, there will be an attempt to justify the price with performance metrics, which leads us back round to BTY's marketing strategy and the inevitable discussions here.

I have no doubt that the "I've spent money, so I'm all set" placebo effect you've discussed is real though. It's just a cloudier picture than handbags.
 

NDH

says Spin to win!
I agree with what you're saying here, but there's an extra wrinkle added to the fabric when you consider that TT is a sport, rather than (just?) a fashion. Obscenely expensive watches are hard (almost impossible) to justify in objective/practical terms, so we are only left with ostentation. With TT, there will be an attempt to justify the price with performance metrics, which leads us back round to BTY's marketing strategy and the inevitable discussions here.

I have no doubt that the "I've spent money, so I'm all set" placebo effect you've discussed is real though. It's just a cloudier picture than handbags.

With certain things like watches, the justification can be in the re sale value.

Some watches increase in price over time - Even if they don't, you could potentially recoup 75% plus of your purchase down the line.

TT rubbers are effectively, disposable.......
 
says The sticky bit is stuck.
says The sticky bit is stuck.
Well-Known Member
Jan 2017
2,773
2,628
8,173
Read 8 reviews
No, no, no. A golden, high-precision mechanical watch built by an outstanding craftsman does not tell time better than a simple steel electronic quartz chronometer.

And re-sell value is just the same thing. Over time things get more exclusive, not less. Whenever sent out east, I'm not surprised to find Dom Perignon '53 at the table, with people drinking it with gulps of coke on the side. (Cola, that is, the soda. Not the marching powder of yore, which has lost its exclusivity and hence its appeal to the rich and shameless).

The very fact that it's a disposable makes it work better as a token of wealth, the whole point being showing off the abundance of your wealth. And that's what "brand value" is, folks.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Active Member
Mar 2013
941
1,245
2,716
Read 3 reviews
With certain things like watches, the justification can be in the re sale value.

Some watches increase in price over time - Even if they don't, you could potentially recoup 75% plus of your purchase down the line.

TT rubbers are effectively, disposable.......

Another good point. TT rubbers are consumables (although I do see some very worn sheets of T05 go for mad money on ebay sometimes). Resale value on hyper-expensive fashion items are determined by their original, inflated, sense of worth of course, but if you keep your watch wrapped in cotton wool and don't scratch it then it won't devalue much at all.

I think this sense of "exclusivity" yoass discussed does play into people's decision making though, to some degree. It's a bias built over many years, compounded by BTY's marketing efforts which have focused on the use of their equipment at pro level. Some people perform some incredible mental gymnastics to justify their purchases. Everyone has their limit though, and Dignics must surely be testing that limit.
 

NDH

says Spin to win!
No, no, no. A golden, high-precision mechanical watch built by an outstanding craftsman does not tell time better than a simple steel electronic quartz chronometer.

And re-sell value is just the same thing. Over time things get more exclusive, not less. Whenever sent out east, I'm not surprised to find Dom Perignon '53 at the table, with people drinking it with gulps of coke on the side. (Cola, that is, the soda. Not the marching powder of yore, which has lost its exclusivity and hence its appeal to the rich and shameless).

The very fact that it's a disposable makes it work better as a token of wealth, the whole point being showing off the abundance of your wealth. And that's what "brand value" is, folks.

I'm not saying it tells the time better - I'm saying it's worth more due to the way it's built, who it's built by and the materials that are used.

Ironically, the cheap watch is probably more accurate due to the tolerances with expensive automatic watches lol.

The same can't be shown for Dignics - To me and you, it looks like the materials used are virtually the same, so it has to somehow show it's "worth".

I'll also +1 on the exclusivity of things - BUT...... Tenergy for me is absolutely worth the extra cost over the other rubbers on the market due to the performance and durability of the rubber.
 
says The sticky bit is stuck.
says The sticky bit is stuck.
Well-Known Member
Jan 2017
2,773
2,628
8,173
Read 8 reviews
I'm not saying it tells the time better - I'm saying it's worth more due to the way it's built, who it's built by and the materials that are used.

Yup, that's your fallacy right there. :)

Note that I've been playing T05 for a long time too. Without much wailing, or mourning, or gnashing of teeth.
 
Last edited:

NDH

says Spin to win!
Yup, that's your fallacy right there. :)

Its not MY fallacy, as I don’t determine the worth of things.

If if you are simply stating that things like Steel and Gold should be the same price because they are both hard metals..... I’m afraid that’s not how things work.

A watch that that has cost £5,000 in raw materials to build, is WORTH more than a watch that has cost £5 to build..... despite them functioning in similar ways (they both tell the time).

The value of expensive materials is evident.
 
says The sticky bit is stuck.
says The sticky bit is stuck.
Well-Known Member
Jan 2017
2,773
2,628
8,173
Read 8 reviews
Its not MY fallacy, as I don’t determine the worth of things.

Yes, it's yours. You persist in relating production cost to market value. There is no such relation.

In your example, some materials are scarcer/more precious than others. But given that there's actually no relation between the functioning of a clock and the fact that it's made from unobtanium by blind wizards while hopping on one leg, that's immaterial.
 
Top