OPEN LETTER - Upgrade Path from V1 to V2

[White.boi.robb]

Hi Richard. That is my understanding as well. My following comments are not meant to belittle concerns nor to try and bolster Autel's position. Especially if they previously promised something that was not delivered.
Just observations from someone playing the game since 2012 and commercially since 2015.



If either is damaged, and a suitable replacement cannot be found on the 2nd hand market, do we know that if you sent Autel the broken component that they wouldn't repair or replace the item (at a cost of course) ? Or, is this an assumption that they wouldn't ?



This has been the case with every drone I have ever purchased with the exception of home built which depends on what receivers you put into them. If you are referring to the v.1 smart controller that won't be compatible, I read the same complaints from those that have the v.2, right ? Also, the 1st and 3rd comments on your list point to the fact that there would probably be a fairly robust resale market for v.1 components because they are harder to find.



Hull insurance doesn't care if the craft is not current and an exact replacement cannot be found. You can insure your craft for the replacement cost which can be the cost of a v.2 (or 3 or 4...) The insurance doesn't care.



None of these craft pass any kind of FAA certification nor receive an airworthiness certificate. No concern there. Likewise, currently, insurance, liability or hull, has no certification consideration or requirement.

DJI released a Phantom 4 Pro v.2 that was not compatible with P4P v.1 Almost every new iteration of DJI craft would not use components of the last iteration. I agree, that it would be much more consumer friendly if they did.

If the craft works for your needs, put it to work and move on. If it doesn't, then the v.2 likely won't work either. I have 2 P4P v.1s that are still doing the job I got them for. The release of the incompatible v.2 changed nothing in that regard.

For those that are bitter about having a newer model pop up much sooner than they thought, that sucks. I get it. But it is nothing new. We all get to vote with our future purchases, at least !

Well said

 

[Peter Goldwing]

I dont think they care. Hit them in the pocket. Id like to put a banner behind my drone"DONT BUY AUTEL DRONE and fly it in New Smyrna Beach when there thousands and thousands on the beach

 

[kenautelevo2pro]

I dont think they care. Hit them in the pocket. Id like to put a banner behind my drone"DONT BUY AUTEL DRONE and fly it in New Smyrna Beach when there thousands and thousands on the beach

i think there were questions in the comments/chat on v1/v2 that didn't get asked....not sure why.

 

[ahroberts2435]

Seems to me this is just an accepted risk of buying in to any niche electronics product. I have a box full obsolete victims of the video format wars, such as HD-DVD, Betamax and Laserdisc players & movies. Of course it makes me angry that I wasted my money on a now useless product, but I knew that was a possibility going in.

 

[Admund]

Hello everyone,

This started more than two weeks ago as a series of emails to Autel Robotics and their current CEO Mr. Gary DeLuca. I cc'd the support emails in US and Europe, only to receive ticket numbers and a "issue has been solved" from the European support email. I have sent the same email to the AR owner Lee Maxwell, followed up with Mr. DeLuca two more times at his AR and gmail email addresses to no avail. I believe that there are enough V1 owners that feel betrayed and underserved by AR and would, like myself, like an answer. As I mention in my, now open letter, I bought the system less than a year ago and to find ourselves collectively in the current situation is unacceptable.

I would like to invite and encourage everyone here to share their thoughts directly with the CEO and owner of Autel Robotics. Here are their respective email addresses:

CEO Gary DeLuca: gary@autelrobotics.com, garyldeluca@gmail.com
Owner Lee Maxwell: maxwell@autelrobotics.com

Support: enterprise@autelrobotics.com, support.eu@autelrobotics.com

I hope we will jointly find a solution to this stalemate.





Dear Mr. DeLuca, dear Autel Robotics leadership!

I would like to share with you a few thoughts.

Bear with me here. A couple of months ago I finally caved and ordered the new (2019) Mac Pro. Following the ill-fated direction that Apple took in the early 2010’s with the design of the “Trash Can”, it finally, in the eyes and minds of visual creators everywhere, came to its senses and returned to the tried and tested “tower”design. Once I made that purchase, Apple offered me a buy back for the Trash Can and actually made it really attractive by paying about 40% of the original purchase price. Then, they send over a custom-fitted box with a pre-printed shipping label and even a tape to close the box with. All I needed to do was to drop it off at UPS and voila, a week later the promised buy back amount appeared on my credit card.

Now, let’s talk about your EVO II first generation drone, also known as the V1. Unlike Apple’s Trash Can computer, the EVO II V1 wasn’t a wrong direction, however, circumstances regarding electronic parts made the system un-upgradable within less than a year. LESS THAN ONE YEAR! The change to V2 with no backwards compatibility or upgrade path left a very bitter taste in everyone’s mouth. The fact that AR hasn’t offered any solution to the V1 user base seems truly hard to believe and extremely disappointing.

As an EVO II Pro V1 pilot, I, like many other professional users, have invested into a complete ecosystem, into an entire infrastructure, not just one toy to play with. Many of us have acquired scores of additional accessories, extra batteries, filters, cases, etc. It is, therefore, a real shock to realize that in less than one year, the company we put our trust into, recklessly abandoned this entire group of customers. We all came from somewhere; whether it be DJI or other competitors. We all did our research, looked at the system’s specs, learned about the company making the tool of our trade, and invested our money. For Autel Robotics to do what you have done and cut off this entire group the way you have, is simply wrong.

But it doesn’t end there. It undermines customer loyalty, not only with us, the affected ones, but also with others, who will wonder whether an episode like this may repeat. It will, and I am sure already has, drive people away from AR and toward competitors that value customer loyalty. To briefly bring back my Apple example: yes, Apple is a premium brand and it isn’t cheap, but they have over the years created a huge level of loyalty and trust. Trust that the company will be there for not just the most recent purchasers but for people with units that are 5, 6, 10 years old. And even buy back a machine that’s 8 years old for a decent price.

Now, don’t worry, I am not asking you to buy back my entire system, no. I am not asking for a free replacement either. I understand that you are in a business of developing and selling highly specialized equipment that takes time and money to create. I also realize that Autel Robotics is not Apple. What I want to propose, however, is, I believe, a win-win solution. In fact, it would not only satisfy us V1 owners but I believe it would also solidify customer loyalty to the AR brand, and create further opportunities to sell more equipment that you would otherwise. Let me explain:

The beauty of the EVO system is that the gimbal/camera is user replaceable and batteries and other components are compatible between the V1 and V2 versions. Hence, there is no need to swap anything else except the airframe and the controller. AR should offer an upgrade path to V1 owners to move to V2 airframe and controller. I wouldn’t expect AR to offer that for free - I believe that most of us are reasonable people and understand that there are costs involved in this. Since the upgrade would only involve the airframe and the controller, the costs could be reasonable and I think most of us would be quite happy to pay for this. We could mount our gimbal/camera on the V2 airframe and keep using the rest of our accessories. On top of that, many of the V1 users would also immediately purchase the V2 Smart Controller, hence expanding your sales.

How complicated could this be? What are the real benefits in customer and brand loyalty? I believe they would be significant. The knowledge that the company you are dealing with is always there to support its customers is truly priceless.

A side note here: over the years I have owned and flown several different drones. Having been an EVO II owner for less than a year, I have been, until this recent debacle, proudly promoting the product and you to all my colleagues in the industry because I truly believed that the EVO II system is a head and shoulders above the competition. So, this turn of events feels like a punch in the gut.

I do have a few additional suggestions, admittedly inspired by the Mavic 3 release; I would propose that you could offer, as an option, an unlock license for pro-level codec, such as ProRes422HQ or similar, for those who require it. This is what SONY and ARRI do with their professional cameras.

In closing I would like to say this. Consider, you have created a fantastic system with many incredible features and a huge potential for expansion. Recklessly mistreating a loyal group of customers by locking them into a dead-end situation would be an unfortunate and massively damaging end to an otherwise flourishing relationship with people looking for quality, reliability, and most importantly, loyalty.


Respectfully,

Jiri Bakala
EVO II Pro Pilot

Better to You to stay with V1 to avoid many other problems with transmission signal etc in V2.

 

[GeoDrone SRL]

I dont think they care. Hit them in the pocket. Id like to put a banner behind my drone"DONT BUY AUTEL DRONE and fly it in New Smyrna Beach when there thousands and thousands on the beach

Tell me a drone better than Evo 2 Pro...I have experienced almost all range of DJI, even Parrot and Skydio...
Still, my job is made with E2P and E2E...

 

[Jiri Bakala]

Well, I did buy a used V1 SC and now the package seems to be working well. Fingers crossed. Still, the company's attitude toward customers is poor.

 

[Sjs]

Hello everyone,

This started more than two weeks ago as a series of emails to Autel Robotics and their current CEO Mr. Gary DeLuca. I cc'd the support emails in US and Europe, only to receive ticket numbers and a "issue has been solved" from the European support email. I have sent the same email to the AR owner Lee Maxwell, followed up with Mr. DeLuca two more times at his AR and gmail email addresses to no avail. I believe that there are enough V1 owners that feel betrayed and underserved by AR and would, like myself, like an answer. As I mention in my, now open letter, I bought the system less than a year ago and to find ourselves collectively in the current situation is unacceptable.

I would like to invite and encourage everyone here to share their thoughts directly with the CEO and owner of Autel Robotics. Here are their respective email addresses:

CEO Gary DeLuca: gary@autelrobotics.com, garyldeluca@gmail.com
Owner Lee Maxwell: maxwell@autelrobotics.com

Support: enterprise@autelrobotics.com, support.eu@autelrobotics.com

I hope we will jointly find a solution to this stalemate.





Dear Mr. DeLuca, dear Autel Robotics leadership!

I would like to share with you a few thoughts.

Bear with me here. A couple of months ago I finally caved and ordered the new (2019) Mac Pro. Following the ill-fated direction that Apple took in the early 2010’s with the design of the “Trash Can”, it finally, in the eyes and minds of visual creators everywhere, came to its senses and returned to the tried and tested “tower”design. Once I made that purchase, Apple offered me a buy back for the Trash Can and actually made it really attractive by paying about 40% of the original purchase price. Then, they send over a custom-fitted box with a pre-printed shipping label and even a tape to close the box with. All I needed to do was to drop it off at UPS and voila, a week later the promised buy back amount appeared on my credit card.

Now, let’s talk about your EVO II first generation drone, also known as the V1. Unlike Apple’s Trash Can computer, the EVO II V1 wasn’t a wrong direction, however, circumstances regarding electronic parts made the system un-upgradable within less than a year. LESS THAN ONE YEAR! The change to V2 with no backwards compatibility or upgrade path left a very bitter taste in everyone’s mouth. The fact that AR hasn’t offered any solution to the V1 user base seems truly hard to believe and extremely disappointing.

As an EVO II Pro V1 pilot, I, like many other professional users, have invested into a complete ecosystem, into an entire infrastructure, not just one toy to play with. Many of us have acquired scores of additional accessories, extra batteries, filters, cases, etc. It is, therefore, a real shock to realize that in less than one year, the company we put our trust into, recklessly abandoned this entire group of customers. We all came from somewhere; whether it be DJI or other competitors. We all did our research, looked at the system’s specs, learned about the company making the tool of our trade, and invested our money. For Autel Robotics to do what you have done and cut off this entire group the way you have, is simply wrong.

But it doesn’t end there. It undermines customer loyalty, not only with us, the affected ones, but also with others, who will wonder whether an episode like this may repeat. It will, and I am sure already has, drive people away from AR and toward competitors that value customer loyalty. To briefly bring back my Apple example: yes, Apple is a premium brand and it isn’t cheap, but they have over the years created a huge level of loyalty and trust. Trust that the company will be there for not just the most recent purchasers but for people with units that are 5, 6, 10 years old. And even buy back a machine that’s 8 years old for a decent price.

Now, don’t worry, I am not asking you to buy back my entire system, no. I am not asking for a free replacement either. I understand that you are in a business of developing and selling highly specialized equipment that takes time and money to create. I also realize that Autel Robotics is not Apple. What I want to propose, however, is, I believe, a win-win solution. In fact, it would not only satisfy us V1 owners but I believe it would also solidify customer loyalty to the AR brand, and create further opportunities to sell more equipment that you would otherwise. Let me explain:

The beauty of the EVO system is that the gimbal/camera is user replaceable and batteries and other components are compatible between the V1 and V2 versions. Hence, there is no need to swap anything else except the airframe and the controller. AR should offer an upgrade path to V1 owners to move to V2 airframe and controller. I wouldn’t expect AR to offer that for free - I believe that most of us are reasonable people and understand that there are costs involved in this. Since the upgrade would only involve the airframe and the controller, the costs could be reasonable and I think most of us would be quite happy to pay for this. We could mount our gimbal/camera on the V2 airframe and keep using the rest of our accessories. On top of that, many of the V1 users would also immediately purchase the V2 Smart Controller, hence expanding your sales.

How complicated could this be? What are the real benefits in customer and brand loyalty? I believe they would be significant. The knowledge that the company you are dealing with is always there to support its customers is truly priceless.

A side note here: over the years I have owned and flown several different drones. Having been an EVO II owner for less than a year, I have been, until this recent debacle, proudly promoting the product and you to all my colleagues in the industry because I truly believed that the EVO II system is a head and shoulders above the competition. So, this turn of events feels like a punch in the gut.

I do have a few additional suggestions, admittedly inspired by the Mavic 3 release; I would propose that you could offer, as an option, an unlock license for pro-level codec, such as ProRes422HQ or similar, for those who require it. This is what SONY and ARRI do with their professional cameras.

In closing I would like to say this. Consider, you have created a fantastic system with many incredible features and a huge potential for expansion. Recklessly mistreating a loyal group of customers by locking them into a dead-end situation would be an unfortunate and massively damaging end to an otherwise flourishing relationship with people looking for quality, reliability, and most importantly, loyalty.


Respectfully,

Jiri Bakala
EVO II Pro Pilot

Yes I totally agree with that, they seem to forget that we pay for their employment and perhaps more
LETS NOT FORGET HOW WE GOT SCREWED

 

[uas_gian]

Take for example a company like Fuji. They still offer parts for their meanwhile obsolete digital cameras and they even recently released a firmware update with an improved auto focus algorithm for a camera model that's no longer sold but still is very popular. This way they support a loyal customers base and cater to a strong secondhand market. They ensure their customers choose to stay with the Fuji brand rather than switching their entire investment to the competition. However there are just too few brands in the drone market to make this kind of loyalty based approach an option for Autel Robotics. Also the actual number of Fuji cameras vs the number of drones ever sold might be a reason. What makes me angry is the style of advertising. How Autel presented itself to us looked like a company that would allow retrofitting of payloads and cross compatibility between controllers and items such as live deck. Yes the post COVID changes in the supply chain caused difficulties and the ban of certain Chinese silicon chips played a roll, but just dropping the 1st and 2nd generation customers the way it happened really sucks.

For me it leads to not investing more money in the brand, basically counter productive to the first objectives of a company, isn't it?