RE: Merc Guild

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian Bilderback [mailto:bbilderback@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 5:35 PM
> To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
> Subject: RE: Merc Guild
> 
> B Lin Wrote:
> 
> >But the point of hiring mercs is that you aren't buying the 
> equipment, you 
> >are renting it.  It is far cheaper to rent than to buy.  In 
> addition you 
> >are hiring people to run the equipment for you.
> 
> And that expertise is where the expense starts to get near 
> that of buying 
> the equipment.  Remember, my premise is that Mercs will be 
> hired by nations 
> with few men but plenty of money.

I'm not sure I agree with the part where expertise is the bulk of the
expense.  In most cases today, the operator of the equipment is the
cheapest part - i.e. F-16 pilots probably only cost a few million to
train, while their planes are 25-40 million each, cost $500,000- 1
million to fire a missile and probably a few hundred thousand dollars in
maintenance.  The pilot himself is probably making less than $40K a
year.

Assuming as similar ratio in the future, the personnel cost for high
tech equipment will be low compared the cost of purchasing the unit.  So
if you can rent the unit for 1/10 or 1/3 of the purchase cost, you come
out way ahead.

The situation changes if you are engaged in a long-term battle.  After a
point it becomes more cost-effective to buy/build the device and train
your own personnel. ( A comparison would be renting a car - $200 a week,
but if you went at that rate for 5 years = $52,000, whereas you can own
for $400/month x 5 years = $24,000)  But if you only needed the car for
a week or two... Plus maintenance, insurance...

--Binhan