Competition, page-477

I'm finding it very hard to understand the problem 3D concrete printing is trying to solve.

With 3D concrete printing, you are mixing the concrete at the job-site, which is outside of the factory which is specifically designed to produce blocks at "SCALE". As we all know, scale is incredibly important in order to remain competitive in an otherwise competitive world. The complexities of mixing the concrete on the job-site is of course weather, consistency, transporting the separate products, requiring on-site mixing, etc.

On the other blocks produced in a factory at scale will always be more cost effective than mixing them on-site.
Weather: blocks are being manufactured using capital equipment and assembly lines inside so not impacted by weather.
Consistency: single process so does not rely on the human mixer on mixing on the day of the job.
Transport: you are transporting stacked blocks on pallets rather than transporting separate ingredients separately before having to bring them together. Then with the HX you simply drive to site, no need to erect/disassemble gantry system, which has implications for wear and time, labor hours, workers insurance, etc.
So with the HX, your blocks are produced at scale, transported at scale, laid at scale.
Then of course, you have a traditional built structure, without the need to compromise with toothpaste bead walls.
Then of course, follow-on trades are working with square walls, just as strong, just as well insulating, etc.

While 3D concrete printing does look impressive, if you look at it from a first principles perspective, it doesn't stack up from first principals.
I cannot see a single pro, of 3D concrete printing, over a HX built structure.
Sure, vs manual building, there could be some pros but vs the HX I can't think of a single one.

It's like 3D concrete printing started as a solution looking for a problem rather than as the HX did as a problem looking for a solution.
I have been thinking about this conundrum from first principles for some time so I just thought I would share as sharing is caring.

I just watched another video stepping through a 3D concrete construction build because of course I'm still trying to understand the value of their solution.
It almost seemed like a stitch up with the supposed impartial interviewer not probing on any of the true challenges with 3D concrete.
As it relate to dust, all they could say was they haven't heard of any problems with people complaining about dust.
Don't you think they would have researched this type of thing up-front?
Did they completely miss the idea of thinking of things from first principles.

It is truly mesmerizing that Icon have amassed a value of $2 Billion USD, i.e. 3 Billion AUD.
Clearly people think they will be successful. What will they think when the see the HX rock up on-site with all the advantages it brings vs 3D concrete printing.

Not investment advice. DYOR, etc. etc.