19 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
grabowski	984ced2485	Biomass steam in both plans, PV on the factory roof only ... User, 17 Oct 2026: "only put solar on the factory, prepare the other buildings for solar, option a and b should operate on biomass". - Steam: two 500 kg/h biomass modules (Getabec class, 6M to 10M THB) plus a fuel store and handling block (1M to 2M, estimate) in both plans; the electric bank becomes the alternative. ~0.67M THB of fuel a year against ~4.9M for electric steam; grid demand ~264 kW instead of ~980 kW. - Solar: ~520 kWp on the factory roof (the biomass-case optimum is ~500 to 550 kWp, hourly sketch in sustainability.md "PV size with biomass steam"); office roof and parking canopies built PV-ready (~120 kWp later). ~87 % used on site, ~61 % of the plant's electricity. - Calculator: biomass default, bFuel row, pvKWp 520, pvSelf 87, iso fills the factory roof first and shows the other roofs as PV-ready. - Numbers: launch plant ~168M / 232M / 296M with contingency; Plan A ~182M (~2M above 180M: the Chinese-route lever priced only electric boilers; a Chinese biomass quote is the way back), Plan B ~217M (label ~215M), ~35M more. Calculator EBITDA A 2.17M, B 2.23M USD. - CSV, total-investment, revenue-model, sustainability, scale, biomass, site-candidates, boi, steam-cooling, construction RFQ (canopies PV-ready), README, roadmap; business plan draft 0.3 rebuilt (A and B 63 pages) with new renders.	2026-10-17 20:24:55 +07:00
grabowski	9ff5feef11	Solar on every roof, BOI solar correction, open source section ... Solar (user, 17 Oct 2026: "use as much roof space as possible") - PV on every roof and canopy: ~640 kWp on the Payap scenario plot (factory roof ~523, canopies ~54, flat office roof ~65 kWp around the AC units); ~300 kWp on the Mueang Chi hall. Calculator: pvKWp 640, new pvSelf 85 % (zero export, hourly sketch), PV cost per kWp times the array, office-roof PV in the iso view, roofs drawn full. - 12.8M to 16.6M THB at 20 to 26 THB/W; CSV baseline 34.37M to 56.34M; launch plant ~168M / 231M / 294M THB with contingency; Plan B ~216M (label ~215M), ~39M above Plan A; Plan A unchanged (it leases the array), its solar lever ~17.5M. PV payback ~4.2 to 5.9 years. - Permits (rooftop solar no factory licence since 28 Dec 2024, ERC exemption under 1,000 kVA, PEA zero export) and PPA discounts sourced in sustainability.md. BOI correction - Announcement 3/2568 (in force 1 July 2025) ended BOI promotion for solar installations; only the battery may qualify (12M THB per MW cap). Removed the "BOI solar measure" from boi.md, total-investment, revenue-model, sustainability, site-candidates and both plan versions; Plan B's case for owning the array is the PPA bill it avoids (~0.07M USD a year). Open source (user, 17 Oct 2026) - digital-factory.md "Open source throughout, and working with other plants": everything we run and build is open source on NixOS, our code published (licence to decide), vendor firmware the stated exception; later the stack and factory-automation services for other pressing plants, not in the revenue. - Business plan section 5.6 plus an executive-summary bullet, reading guide and not-modelled mentions; draft 0.3 rebuilt (A 60, B 61 pages), renders re-made with the roofs full.	2026-10-17 17:22:57 +07:00
grabowski	ab303618d8	Solar and battery re-priced from Thai market data (October 2026) ... - Rooftop PV, 300 kWp (size still illustrative): 20 to 26 THB/W installed with the Deye hybrid inverters, 6.0M to 7.8M THB (was 25 to 35 THB/W, 7.5M to 10.5M). Sources in the utilities CSV: DEDE Thailand PV Status report (Mahidol survey: 22 to 25 THB/W for factory systems of 10 kW to 1 MW, 2023), CapSolar 2026 (20 to 25 under 1 MWp), Saimai Solar's list (300 kW for 5.4M THB), Deye hybrid inverter retail (160,500 THB per 50 kW). - Battery 271 kWh, now installed: 2.0M to 3.5M THB (was the bare Gobel list price, 1.4M to 2.0M, which matches DEDE's 5,000 to 7,000 THB/kWh for LiFePO4); adds enclosure, fire protection, controls and installation, below CapSolar's 12,000 to 15,000 THB/kWh for a fully installed factory BESS because the hybrid inverters do the conversion (estimate). - Utilities baseline 27.57M to 47.50M THB; launch plant ~160M / 222M / 283M THB with contingency; Plan B ~208M (~149M to 266M), ~31M more than Plan A; Plan A's total unchanged, its solar lever ~9.7M. PV payback ~3.8 to 5.4 years (sustainability.md). Calculator, README, roadmap, revenue model and both business plan versions (renders included) updated.	2026-10-17 16:41:14 +07:00
grabowski	3f33babdaa	Plan B re-defined: the launch plant with everything in (~210M THB); front view on the cover ... - Plan B now starts like Plan A with one Duplex system and one Classic, but takes none of the six levers: owned solar and battery (with the BOI solar measure), the full metrology stack, the visitor corridor, cassette and CD-R, the bought crane and Thai-supplied utilities (user, 17 October 2026). ~193.8M THB before the reserve, ~209M with it (~150M to 268M), ~32M (~18 %) more than Plan A; the second Duplex is a growth step from revenue in both (~15.4M THB, estimate). - total-investment.md "Two plans" re-based (heading and anchor now "B at ~210M THB", README and roadmap links updated); revenue-model.md operating pictures: same volume and EBITDA as Plan A, depreciation on Plan B's capital (operating profit 1.26M USD central, payback ~3.7 yr); the extra earns nothing in the modelled table, which the docs say. - Calculator: Plan B preset = the launch plant with contingency kept out (EBITDA 2.07M USD, cash payback year ~4.3, IRR ~21 %); budget card marks 180M and 180M plus 25 %; preset label "Plan B (~210M, all in)". - Business plan draft 0.3, both versions rebuilt: every Plan B branch of the three content files rewritten; renders regenerated with the isometric view turned to the front of the site (road, car park, office, corridor facade) for the cover and Figures 8 to 10.	2026-10-17 16:33:18 +07:00
grabowski	f2ff1eac1f	Two plans for the investor: Plan A ~180M, Plan B ~225M THB; Pheenix at OMS +20 % ... User (October 2026): price the Pheenix galvanics line at OMS's reference plus 20 %, and work on a new business plan in two versions, one at roughly 180M THB and one at +25 %; the plans do not include contingency; Plan A keeps every machine and uses cost levers only. - total-investment.md: Pheenix block 324k to 445k USD (OMS 4-cell wet room with know-how transfer, EUR 234k to 321k, plus 20 %; was 320k to 650k estimate); launch plant now ~161M to 285M THB with contingency, midpoint ~223M. New section "Two plans": Plan A = launch plant with solar PPA, metrology launch tier, corridor later, cassette and CD-R later, rented crane, Chinese boilers and compressor: subtotal ~161.7M + ramp-up reserve 10 to 20M = ~177M THB (127M to 226M). Plan B = second Duplex at launch (five presses), everything in: subtotal ~209.2M + reserve = ~224M THB (162M to 286M). Contingency listed as not in either price (~24M / ~31M at 15 %). The 180M / 216M answer marked superseded. - revenue-model.md: operating pictures of both plans at 60 % specials. Plan A central EBITDA 1.73M USD, operating profit 1.34M, payback ~3.1 yr on the plan price; adverse loses money. Plan B (1.0 / 1.25 / 1.5M records) central EBITDA 3.14M, operating profit 2.63M, payback ~2.2 yr; adverse just covers depreciation; needs ~1.25M records sold. - Calculator: Pheenix price basis "OMS +20 %" and "OMS directly"; new contingency switch (in the total / shown separately); presets Plan A and Plan B (replace "investor levers" and "five-press"); budget card against 180M and 225M. - galvanics.md price note, README, roadmap. Checks: calculator regression updated and passing (0 fails, no page errors), node --check on all scripts, site build (no dead links), no em dashes added.	2026-10-17 14:47:43 +07:00
grabowski	b3e8e4272b	Specials share 60 %+: revenue model, calculator and business plan re-based ... User (October 2026): "lets say 60+% special prints" (the plant focuses on special prints, not mono colours). - Specials (splatter, marble, colour effects) run only on the Duplex systems, so at 60 % the Duplex sets the launch plant's output: ~0.58 / 0.74 / 0.90M records a year (was 0.71 / 0.84 / 0.97 at ~20 %), the Classic at about two thirds load. Full 60/40 hall: ~2.3 to 3.6M (Duplex -limited, Classics about half loaded); five-press fleet unchanged. A hall balanced by output at 60 % would give Duplex ~70 to 75 % of the floor (estimate; noted, not applied). - Blended price 3.76 / 4.49 / 5.27 USD (standard 3.40 / 3.80 / 4.25 plus the 0.60 / 1.15 / 1.70 specials premium on 60 %). Launch operating picture: revenue 2.28 / 3.65 / 5.41M USD, EBITDA 0.23 / 1.73 / 3.79M, operating profit -0.66 / 1.21 / 3.46M, payback ~3.8 yr central, break-even ~0.25M records; adverse needs ~1.1M records to cover depreciation. Specials' extra direct cost (coloured compound, purge, trim only into black) is not in the cost table yet: flagged as an upper bound until compound quotes. - Calculator default specials share 20 -> 60 % (planning rates keep the launch plant balanced at 850k: revenue 4.14M, EBITDA 2.07M, payback 3.3 yr, cash payback year ~4.8, IRR ~18 %). - revenue-model.md, scale.md, pressing-line.md, README; business plan draft 0.2 rebuilt (sections 1, 4, 9, risks). Checks: calculator regression 0 fails, no page errors, node --check on all scripts; PDF 47 pages, table of contents filled; no em dashes added.	2026-10-16 20:45:39 +07:00
grabowski	794cde228c	Re-base scale, pressing line, roadmap, revenue model and calculator on the launch plant ... Launch plant (user, October 2026): one Duplex system and one Classic, with cutting and galvanics in-house, everything in one capital round. - scale.md: capacity table now launch plant 0.71-0.97M records/yr, the second Duplex as a growth option; launch utilities (450-540 kg/h on B-1/B-2, ~390 kW on 2 x 250 kW); calculator figure ~0.94M. - pressing-line.md: launch plant section on top; five-press fleet kept as the layout fleet the hall and backbone are built for. - roadmap.md: long-lead orders for the launch plant, no bridge stampers or outsourced cutting, commissioning order, what stays revenue-gated. - revenue-model.md: operating picture of the launch plant: central revenue ~3.75M USD, EBITDA ~1.6M, operating profit ~1.1M, payback ~4 yr on 216M THB, break-even ~0.3M records; adverse corner cannot cover depreciation. Five-press table kept and labelled. - fleet-calculator.html: start fleet 1 Duplex + 1 Classic, target 850k, capex base 6.55M (cases 8.9 / 6.55 / 4.9M), Duplex beyond one, chiller 500 kW, imported machinery 2.3M, ladder from the launch plant. - total-investment.md: superseded note updated.	2026-10-16 15:34:19 +07:00
grabowski	5090609df3	Calculators: options from Record Industry's calculator; its prices as a benchmark ... Reviewed Record Industry's (Haarlem, NL) public vinyl calculator: a seven-step wizard with a live itemised cost list priced on its server. Read its prices for a reference 12" LP at 200 / 300 / 500 / 1,000 copies and for each option worth copying (checked October 2026). Both artist demos (make-a-record and artist-order): - audio arrives as digital files, analog tape (+ tape transfer) or a cut lacquer (no blanks, cutting or mastering; mastering choice disabled with the reason; cutting and mastering stages skipped in the timeline; the passport starts at "Lacquer received") - labels printed, plain white or plain black (credit line; the label artwork drop is disabled for plain labels; the mock-up shows the plain label) - press cleaning before a colour run, on by default, disabled for black - 7" dinked (large centre hole), 7" only, drawn in the mock-up - download card and barcode sticker extras - run-out inscription (A-Z, 0-9, up to 15), scribed along the dead wax in the mock-up and named in the passport - new rates (tape 3,800, cleaning 2,300 per title; plain labels -12 per disc; download card 43, barcode 6 per copy) are estimates with Record Industry's prices as the basis, each listed in the detailed demo - make-a-record investor notes: Record Industry's 9 to 11 week quote after test-pressing approval against the 7 to 9 week CNX quote, and its 2 % reject allowance against 100 % optical inspection Defaults unchanged (37,836 THB per title, 232 per copy at 100, break-even 41, goal 100, 548 kept). Docs: artist-platform.md (choices table, benchmark section: what was taken, what was left out, commercial terms worth deciding); revenue-model.md (second Western data point: 219 THB a copy at 300 ex-works, per-title and per-copy reading against the assumptions, not a re-base); production-timeline.md (its published lead times).	2026-10-16 09:42:57 +07:00
grabowski	53f3a07a45	Unified Engelbert Strauss workwear for all staff ... User, October 2026: we want unified Engelbert Strauss work clothes. - worker-safety.md: decision recorded; everyone, office included, in the same Strauss workwear with the company logo, process PPE on top. Kit at Strauss catalogue prices checked October 2026 (incl. 19 % German VAT, which drops out on export): production 3 trousers e.s.motion 2020, 3 polo shirts, 2 T-shirts, a sweatshirt, S1 safety shoes e.s. Vasegus II low, ~293 EUR before VAT, ~338 with embroidered logos (embroidery price an estimate); office 4 polos and a softshell jacket, ~127 EUR. Ordering: Strauss ships outside Germany where customs law allows, shipping quoted with the order, prepayment, duty and taxes charged to the recipient; Thai duty on work trousers 13.8 %, BOI does not cover clothing. About 9k USD (~0.3M THB) a year at the start fleet. Check lighter lines for the press hall heat with samples. - revenue-model.md: workwear noted on top of the x1.3. - Fleet calculator: workwear line under labour (production and office kits a year, shipping and Thai duty), six new assumptions; 8,573 USD a year at the defaults.	2026-10-10 20:46:27 +07:00
grabowski	1a368287f8	Labour from base salaries; health care with check-ups for all staff ... User, October 2026: option to enter base salaries; the company should provide proper extra health care with check-ups for all staff. - worker-safety.md: new "Health care for all staff" policy (decided October 2026): group health insurance (inpatient and outpatient) and a yearly check-up for everyone, office included, on top of social security; the occupational checks Thai law requires for risk-factor work (Ministerial Regulation B.E. 2547: within 30 days, then yearly, by an occupational physician, records kept 2 years after the job ends) for the press floor, galvanics and maintenance; planning costs with sources checked October 2026 (group insurance ~8,000 to 18,006 THB a head a year, plan ~15,000; Rajavej Chiang Mai check-ups 1,290 to 5,990 THB, plan ~2,500 plus ~1,500 risk-factor tests, estimates); social security 5 % up to the 17,500 THB ceiling since 1 January 2026. - revenue-model.md: cutting engineer 50,000 THB is base salary; health care on top of the x1.3 (~0.35M THB a year at the start fleet); what the x1.3 is made of. - Fleet calculator: base salaries per role (the revenue model loaded rates / 1.3; cutting engineer 50,000), employer social security 5 % capped at 17,500, 25 % overtime, bonus and PPE, health insurance and check-ups for all staff incl. 4 office staff (scale.md 3 to 5), risk- factor tests for the press floor, galvanics and maintenance; all as editable assumptions; people table gains office and all-staff rows. Defaults: labour 5.25M THB (was 4.67M loaded), direct cost 1.90 USD a record, EBITDA 2.19M USD.	2026-10-10 20:17:39 +07:00
grabowski	eac45eb234	Lacquer blank 70 EUR and cutting engineer 50,000 THB a month ... Team figures, October 2026: - revenue-model.md: a lacquer blank costs about 70 EUR, one per side, so ~160 USD a two-sided title before recuts; a cutting engineer costs about 50,000 THB a month; - fleet calculator: the lacquer assumption is now in EUR (70, one per side, converted at 1.155 USD per EUR; styli and recuts not included) and the cutting engineer 50,000 THB a month, both marked as team figures instead of estimates. At the defaults lacquers come to ~54k USD a year and direct cost to 1.88 USD a record (was 1.86).	2026-10-10 20:12:26 +07:00
grabowski	ce1d71e0b5	Fleet calculator: material, energy and labour cost, revenue and P&L ... User, October 2026: add calculation for material cost, PVC, carton, chemicals, labour etc. and revenue from sales. New "Money a year" card (and a "Prices and money" input card): - revenue: standard records at the standard price, specials with the premium, title services per title (revenue-model.md 3.50 to 4.60 blended, +0.60 to 1.70, 580 to 1,730 USD a title); - materials and packaging: PVC from the compound tonnage (rejects in, trim back as regrind), labels per pressed record, inner sleeves, printed jackets, shrink wrap, shipping cartons (estimate), maintenance; - stamper making: lacquer blanks and styli per side (estimate), nickel, silver and chemistry per electroformed part (revenue model: 60 to 150 USD a three-generation set); - energy from the fleet: machines, chiller and compressors at the hours run plus an estimated base load, roof PV off, PEA 3.2.2 blended rate and demand charge; steam from the presses running time at the biomass heat price (biomass.md); the start fleet lands in scale.md 4.3 to 6.4M THB; - loaded labour per role (revenue-model.md wages; cutting engineer an estimate), headcount now also counts QC, maintenance and cutting; - overheads, EBITDA, depreciation of capex (total-investment.md start fleet plan plus or minus each Duplex system and Classic), operating profit, payback; per-record cost bar; - Adverse / Central / Favourable presets from the revenue model ranges, USD / THB / EUR display; ladder gains revenue and EBITDA columns. At the defaults (1 M records, 20 % specials): revenue 4.42M USD, direct cost 1.86 USD a record (revenue model central 1.94), EBITDA 2.23M. README bullet; revenue-model.md links the calculator from its operating picture.	2026-10-10 19:41:08 +07:00
grabowski	c50417668b	Press fleet: two Newbilt Duplex systems with an extruder per press, plus a Classic ... The current plan (user decision, October 2026) replaces the 50/50 target (two semi-automatic presses and two Pheenix AD12s) with an all-Newbilt fleet of five presses: two Duplex systems in Newbilt's two-extruder configuration (two HRP 12 presses, an extruder each, one hydraulic unit) and one Classic fully automatic press. - pressing-line.md: new "Current plan" section (fleet table, what it means, phasing from the Single 2.1 as the first half of system 1, re-quote questions); site requirements per Duplex system. - scale.md: capacity table and basis (368 to 448 records/h, ~1.06 to 1.5M a year on two shifts, same range as before); pressing electrical row; steam and cooling flagged, not re-based: five presses draw ~750 to 900 kg/h of steam and up to ~625 kW of cooling at Newbilt's per-press figures, against the 400 kg/h / 250 kW sized for one Duplex. - total-investment.md: fleet change as an added-scope row (system 2 ~230k-300k and the Classic ~290k-460k, estimates; -60k / -160k against the two blocks it replaces); headline unchanged until the re-base. - roadmap items 4, 5 and 24, revenue model mature row, crane doc (the Classic's weight now decides 5 t or 3.2 t), vendor landscape (AD12 is the comparison for the Classic), README. The business plan docx is not regenerated.	2026-10-10 16:05:27 +07:00
grabowski	4607a4da58	Plan the artist platform: price calculator and fan-funded pressing ... New docs/artist-platform.md: upload master and artwork with automatic audio, artwork and rights checks; an itemised price calculator for every customer (per-title vs per-copy lines, price-per-copy curve, lead time from the production-timeline quote table, versioned price list); and fan-funded campaigns that press and dropship per fan once the goal is reached, refund otherwise. Covers goal maths, payments (charge into a ring-fenced account, CNX as seller of record, legal opinion first; the Qrates failure as the design rule), repress pre-orders, architecture on the cnx-factory stack with the public side on a fleet machine, PDPA, phasing (calculator public early as a run-size probe, campaigns only after first releases ship), cost and open decisions. Backlinks from README, process flow, production timeline, revenue model, digital factory and roadmap items 1 and 20; total investment added-scope table gains the platform line.	2026-10-02 17:37:32 +02:00
grabowski	1bbef055c4	Remove em dashes where the replacement is unambiguous ... The project has a standing style rule against em dashes that was missed when these docs were written. This removes the 42 occurrences where the substitution is mechanical and cannot change meaning: - table cells using an em dash as a placeholder, now a hyphen - em dashes immediately followed by a conjunction or subordinator (but, and, or, so, though, while, which, where, because, since), where a comma is simply correct 115 remain. Those join independent clauses, where a comma would create a splice and a colon often reads wrong, so each needs a judgement call rather than a pattern. A blanket regex over them was attempted and reverted: it produced double colons and broken sentences.	2026-08-06 15:31:09 +07:00
grabowski	caa38dcd0b	Rebuild the operating roll-up and labour cost from components ... Both were flagged in the review and deferred; fixing them properly changes what the model says. Labour - The 0.23-0.40 USD/record line implied 44,000-63,000 THB per head per month, far above northern Thai production rates. - Rebuilt from headcount and wages: 13-19 direct production staff (operators, galvanics, QC, maintenance) at loaded northern Thai rates gives 3.7M-5.4M THB/yr, or 0.08-0.16 USD per record. Build-up shown. - Mastering and cutting engineers excluded as title-services labour; admin and sales moved to overheads where they belong. - Stamper amortisation widened to 0.03-0.12 to match the in-house marginal cost assumed elsewhere on the page. - Direct cost total is now 1.30-2.58 USD (43-85 THB). Operating roll-up - The old EBITDA and operating-profit figures did not reconcile with their own components and showed no loss case anywhere. Replaced with a three-scenario table built from the components, each column internally consistent, with cash overheads and depreciation separated. - The adverse case is EBITDA-positive but does NOT cover depreciation: operating profit -0.32M USD at 1.0M records on the low price and high cost. The previous figures quoted 0.6-1.2M and hid this entirely. Utilisation and price realisation decide solvency, not just upside. - The favourable case is not credible and that is a finding about the cost table rather than the business: 69% EBITDA margin against industry norms of 15-25%, and 47% even at the centre. The direct cost table counts only per-record consumables and direct payroll. Named what is missing (indirect labour, scrap above the reject allowance, water and effluent, inbound freight, inventory carrying, sales commission) and marked the adverse column as the honest one until those lines exist. - Payback restated per scenario: never / 2.3-4.4 yr / 1.0-1.8 yr. The old "5 to 8 years" came from the pre-correction margin. - FX sensitivity and the utilisation bullet updated to match. The table is a sensitivity, not a forecast, and now says so.	2026-08-06 12:52:14 +07:00
grabowski	4deaa2c57c	Correct errors found by review; hedge unmarked inferences ... A four-agent review audited arithmetic, cross-document consistency, epistemic honesty and style. It found substantially more than the manual pass in the previous commit. Errors that changed conclusions, not decimals: Arithmetic - production-timeline: the headline lead times did not reconcile with the stage table on the same page. Launch is 22-49 days (was 21-39), mature 11.5-22 (was 14-20), repress 6.5-11.5. Including gates, launch is 6-17 weeks, not 8-14. - Consequence: at 17 weeks the launch configuration is at parity with EU/US plants, not ahead of them. The page now compares quote to quote rather than a stage sum to a quoted lead time, and says so. - The galvanics turnaround saving is 1.5-5 weeks, not 3-5. - scale.md Duplex capacity 300-600k/yr did not reproduce from its own stated basis; corrected to 175-540k. production-timeline disagreed with scale.md on the same fleet; both now agree. - "300 units is under an hour of pressing" was out by an order of magnitude on the semi-auto line: 5-8 hours. - project-timeline carried two totals for the same quantity. Now 27-33 months throughout, with the Gantt's two ordering breaks fixed. - scale.md: 300 kWp covers 28-45% of consumption, not 20-35%; roof PV stated as both 150-200 and 247 kWp for the same roof; parking canopy dimensions and PV disagreed with the RFQ. - RFQ: fire tank stated 200 m3 where both its geometry (254 m3) and its own mass (250 t) say 250. Drainage now gives total sealed area 66%, not the 46% paving figure, since that is what attenuation needs. - Galvanics payback used only the top of the saving range: 1-5 years, not 1-4. Inference marked as inference - The 22,000 THB stamper figure is an invoice RESIDUAL. It carries lacquer cutting, test pressings, setup and margin, so it is an upper bound on the stamper component, not a measurement. Everything derived from it now says so, and a line-itemised invoice is the top question. - The saving was also benchmarked against the wrong supplier: CNX buys from Stamper Discs, not a Thai reseller. Stated as 175-665 USD until that quote exists. - The stamper-bottleneck hypothesis now names its alternatives. Jacket print runs would produce the same symptom and would constrain CNX equally, which would remove the competitive read entirely. - Competitor capacity relabelled as nameplate times an assumed OEE, with the assumed shift pattern stated; all rows on one 300-day basis. - The fixed/variable decomposition keeps the shape and drops the point estimates: the solve point inside the flat 1000-3000 tier is arbitrary and moves the fixed component by nearly half. - "Nobody in Thailand plates" reduced to "we have found no evidence", with a desk check named as the action. - Cut the USD 450-700k valuation of a competitor's presses entirely. It extrapolated a semi-auto quote onto a different machine, ignored the used market, and supported no decision. - The collaboration payback divided capex by revenue where the same page uses contribution elsewhere: 5-10 years, not 1-3. Missing caveats added - No financing is committed or modelled anywhere in this repo; project-timeline previously asserted money was not a constraint. - Leasing cannot pull the launch forward on its own, since the press chain governs and construction has float against it. - The whole competitive analysis is one buyer, one plant, one afternoon, and the primary evidence is not archived in the repo. - ResurRec is a competitor and may decline to buy from a new entrant.	2026-08-06 12:35:37 +07:00
grabowski	20c8d283d5	Rebase costs on USD/THB; add timelines and first market data ... Currency - Base currency moves from EUR to USD and THB throughout. Rates at 5 Aug 2026: 1 USD = 33 THB, 1 EUR = 1.155 USD, 1 GBP = 1.35 USD. EUR/THB lands at ~38, so existing THB research needed no change. - Vendor quotes keep their original currency with a USD/THB equivalent alongside, so they stay checkable against the source PDFs. - Full vision ~4.7-8.9M USD; phased entry ~1.7-2.9M USD. New documents - production-timeline.md: order turnaround stage by stage. Launch 8-14 weeks, mature 5-10, repress 2-3. Quantifies the in-house galvanics turnaround claim the repo had asserted without a number, and flags artwork as an unmodelled fourth approval gate. - project-timeline.md: calendar to first paying release, ~Q4 2028. Critical path is BOI certificate to press order to build to commissioning. Two findings: Newbilt build time is absent from the repo yet carries ~40% of the schedule, and the BOI rule may be over-serialised since duty exemption attaches at importation rather than at contract signature. First market data (ResurRec, Bangkok) - Invoice-derived prices, a factory tour, and a confirmed fleet of one Newbilt Classic 12" automatic plus one semi-automatic. - Price ladder recorded at 300/500/1000-3000/3000+ units. Decomposes to roughly 34-50k THB fixed per title and 535-780 THB variable per unit, which is 4-7x the price this model assumes. - The incumbent presses 230-350k records/yr but buys every stamper as an import. That single constraint plausibly explains their 150-unit floor, their flat discount ladder and their large-run lead time, and it is what an in-house galvanics line attacks. Logged as an open question on whether galvanics should move from phase 5 to phase 1. - Inferences are marked as inferences; the whole set is one buyer and one plant, and the model is deliberately left unrebased until a second data point exists. Corrections - Gross margin arithmetic did not follow from its own inputs. Restated as ~1.95 USD at the midpoint with the 0.75-3.15 spread shown; the previous "40 to 55%" was not supported. - Direct cost low total 1.50 to 1.45 USD; contingency THB high 40M to 38M. - README indexes the construction RFQ, which was missing.	2026-08-06 12:22:40 +07:00
grabowski	195dbff1f4	Add revenue model: 3.2M-5.9M EUR/yr at full capacity, per-record economics ... Blended pressing price, direct cost breakdown, margin, EBITDA and payback bands; all arithmetic reviewer-recomputed; adverse payback corner stated honestly alongside mid assumptions	2026-07-17 17:56:23 +07:00