vladimir
The Voice of Reason
- Messages
- 45,433
- Reaction score
- 67,187
- # of dives
- I just don't log dives
Justifying the increase is not the same as getting people to pay it. They would still face the same competition from substitutes, whether home compressors or an alternative hobby.Owners could justify an increase in air cost to the customers, the customers would be safer while they are in the shop as well the employees would be safer.
From a societal perspective, isn't there some regulation you could promulgate that delivers more bang for the buck? Maybe it is back-up blowout preventers on offshore oil rigs, maybe it's flashing red lights on every kid's bicycle, or maybe it's more inspection of ground beef. If you want the kind of society that mandates protections to make us as safe as possible, there ought to at least be a cost/benefit analysis done. If this requirement is truly cost-effective, why don't insurers mandate it now?After the cost of the unit was paid for in 1-2 years it would be a revenue generator for the shop, one that has very little maintenance and could last the life of the shop unless there is an explosion then the shop owner would be happy to lay out another 6 K for a replacement.
Last edited: