Popular Content

Showing most liked content since 04/24/2017 in all areas

  1. 2 likes
    So... If you haven't been aware or haven't been keeping up with the Electric Sign Industry there has been a big PR fight going brewing in the background slowly making itself to the forefront and it starts with WatchFire Signs mainly leading the war of American vs Chinese Import EMC Boards It's been all over social media and LinkedIn a lot lately with all links pointed to Watchfire Signs http://www.watchfiresigns.com/blog/watchfire-signs-unveils-new-fcc-emissions-guarantee What is this all about?....The Short? Watchfire Signs claiming the Imports break FCC regulations when it comes to emissions. That they can interfere with Broadcasting as well as cellular/data usage. How real is it? It's hard to know, placement is a big key along with usage, and individual EMC make up. But their painting it with a much, MUCH broader stroke IMO. We've all seen this once before in the electric sign industry when it came to LED's with unfounded claims followed by the long mis-information & mis-characterization marketing campaigns over conventional light sources. LED manufacturers used and created regulation to strangle and utterly annihilate conventional light source manufacturers. Though this is similar, it's also exaggerated and campaigning the FCC into a marketing sales tool. No doubt there is some truth to the claims in certain situations, but it's being painted into a much larger problem than it really is. They've involved and introduced a lot of fear marketing to the consumer, by they themselves paying massive fines and having to pay money for new EMC Boards to pass the FCC. Where this will get bigger and unlike in the past where Sign Associations have shrugged their shoulders at LED MFG claims and omitted to act on behalf of Neon & Fluorescent light manufacturers, that most likely WON'T happen this time because their going to get dragged into a self-serving marketing campaign that might bite them selves in the ass at the end, not only for Sign Associations who will be asked to pick a side between a large paying membership/sponsorship & Advertising payers, but also for the EMC industry itself who might get the government and bureaucrat agencies to look at the industry with a microscope which may entail more regulation to sort out the "green washing" but also bump that cost to the consumer who after all will pay for the waged war. We commented on a Linkedin WatchFire post a couple of weeks back when it comes to breaking emission standards, stating that most everything is produced in China, they have the worst pollution standards in the world and in no way would any manufacturer ever pass California standards. So if you take their "dirty" components from China and assemble them here in America is it suddenly now "Clean???" I personally can care less which way this goes, I know the consumer will pay for it in the end like usual. But I've been in this industry long enough to see manufacturers use regulation, U.L. / NEC / IAEI to rub out their competitors by bending so called "Safety Standards" to their advantage. As I've said in the past, beware of the "Product, Environmental Safety Movement", it's the biggest industry/manufacturer killer and once unleased it doesn't care who's side you're on. But this time their attempting to drag the sign associations into the street fight too. LED Boards are big money, and they pay big money to Sign Associations like ISA (International Sign Association) and others. If they think they won't find themselves getting involved, or can simply ignore it, think again. They'll have a lot of companies looking at them and they'll have to pick a side, gain some money/membership here, and loose a lot over here. This time it's a movement pushed and backed by bigger, more powerful funded dogs, Sign Associations will be asked, Errrrr.... demanded "to do what's right, and not do only what comes easy" as is their way in the past. After all these large LED Board Manufacturers basically make the sign conventions with their big floor spaces and sponsorships foreign or domestic. Their not funding these Associations for nothing after all every time we see a city pass a ban on these Boards a ISA rep is there before the ink is dry. The ISA Expo LED Park that they like to have on the floor will be at stake if nothing is done in the eyes of those that fund it. This is something the Neon & Fluorescent market should have done from day one with the sign associations when they were on top, instead of fighting to be the "Last Man Standing" in a small market that was one dominating. Lesson Learned. This will be interesting. Sign Associations never gave two shits about letting the LED manufacturers spread mis-information and mis-characterize the Neon & Fluorescent manufacturers and community, which has been the Electric Sign Industries long standing heritage....So... Watchfire Signs is marketing... Watchfire Signs Doc Subversive_Importers_Threaten_042817_Web_OPT.pdf This may go, or it may all go nowhere at all BUT.....make no mistake.....I'll be watching how this all slowly unfolds with a beer in one hand and peanuts in the other from a distance Hell, I think I better make an order for some hot wings with some extra ranch on the side, this may be a while!
  2. 2 likes
    In a few weeks we will be making a major change over. Some Features and Forums will be moved over the and will ONLY be accessed by the paid membership, or....free members who choose to support The Sign Syndicate by upgrading their free membership. I'm going to be updating a few things. As some may know we have shut down the White Neon Lamps that have been in The Great White Hope II due to bad processing. In the original Great White Hope manufacturers made and processed the lamps. For round two I had the grand idea of letting a local guy do it, NOT good. We had larger diameter lamps brighter than thinner diameter. So, for this we're going to have one of the best Neon Guys Process these for us so we're on the plane we're supposed to be on. Also this week we're ordering an electric sign cabinet extrusions and build that up for Lamp studies and benchmark numbers for light sources, namely HO Fluorescent & LED Light sources. I want to update a lot of our ongoing testing and a lot of this increase will cost money, so I'm looking to boost some membership to pay for some of this. Lastly, the Review Forums will be moved to this side too. There will be more perks such as adding your company to our subcontractor & Installer Map, Non-Commercial Classifieds Section The Best Part? What??? This membership is dropping HUGELY, from $100 to $29. That's very affordable, and doable to up keep and do what our trade magazines and sign association WON'T dare or have the courage to do. Something only the Syndicate can do
  3. 1 like
    Original article I was asked to rebut The Original 360˙ Image Article - March 2017 Issue 0_image360_mar2017_whitepaper-1.pdf Which reads without Downloading Below, The Official Rebuttal below... Image 360's "A Brighter Idea? - Converting fluorescent or neon signs to energy-efficient LED illumination" ARTICLE COMMENTARY More mis-infomration and mis-characterazation of light sources......so let's do this casually Whether you are a light source user fabricating signs in the electric sign industry or the end user consumer there is a lot to know when it comes to light sources. Mainly, ALL light sources whether it's Neon, Fluorescent, or LED, ALL have their strengths and weaknesses based on the application of your intended project. Not ALL applications are the same, and the environment in which the light sources are in can play a key factor of success or failure. Those of us that have been in the industry for a period have all seen failure of components that never did live up to the hype or the marketing claims on the manner of which the products were pushed either by distributors or by what we read in trade magazines written my manufacturer reps. What this article fails to tell the reader is, well...a lot. It's hard to tell whether it was intentional or regurgitation of marketing points done by others (outsiders), in either case it's damaging to the electric sign industry, and readers should be cautioned. So let's begin by breaking it down so we can separate fact from fiction and do good for the consumer who buys our integrated products used for electrical identification. Ask anyone in this industry who has been around long enough to see trends, and someone who is worth their salt will tell you, magnetic transformers, magnetic ballasts, or magnetic LED power supplies will last significantly longer than solid state versions. Yes, electronics are smaller, you will save over cord and coil, but magnetics are just simple and without electronics their just make up of coils, not a whole lot can go wrong with them. Heat can play a big roll of failure when it comes to electronics because as we all know, electronics and heat don't mix. One of the first claims to roll out of this article is "Energy Efficient"....."energy savings of up to 80%" Nothing unusual about that, we see that in any trade magazine we pick up today and we've all heard the same points from just about any manufacturer rep who might sit your company project managers down and who buys them all lunch (to obligate you to buy from them) while they go on with their presentation. No real big headlines here right? First, let's put aside what we think we know about light sources used in the electric sign industry by what you were told, or what you may have read. This next part is VERY important to remember. When someone says that one light source is more "energy efficient" over another, then the two light sources must have equal light output and THEN one has to work at a lower cost of operation. When the said product can, only then can we truly say a product or light source is more "energy efficient". This is key! 90% of the time we will read these claims in a trade magazine, marketing ad, or by a manufacturer rep trying to sell us something. Only to find if you actually took the LED product that only consumes .4 watts a module, we might see something different if we made our own comparison. So let's do that! We'll use JT LED as a example for our model below for visual purposes only, at 3 modules per foot put into a 2' long channel, 4" wide, 5" deep, a #7328 white acrylic face. We'll use this as our ideal channel letter, because our standard for channel letters is, anything over 4" would require a second stroke of material, be it Neon or LED. Let's compare it to another channel sitting side by side, which houses a 15mm 6500K neon lamp (we'll use a FMS Neon TC Lamp). The surface light on the Neon side would be overwhelmingly brighter, not much of a fair comparison, but this is what is always compared and the claim is, "LED is brighter, better, etc etc". How would you ever know unless you compared??? These days not many have ever illuminated channel letters with Neon, especially LED reps. LED Channel 121 Surface Foot Candle Average Neon Channel 191 Surface Foot Candle Average The Neon channel is nearly 37% brighter than the LED Let's look at the cost of operation An LED Channel with 3 modules per foot x 2' x .40 watts = 2.4 watts (Electronic) A Neon Channel 15mm 6500K 2' (15mm Hg - 3 watts per foot) x 3w = 6 watts (Magnetic) Using LED modules you will save 60% in cost of operation over the Neon Channel. Something to throw out, we could have used an electronic Neon transformer and saved about 30% but let's keep it extreme for sake of discussion. So to save 60% in energy you must give up almost 40% of light, and depending on what LED you choose, how long would it last? Most of the time you get what you pay more, but NOT always. What would the lumen maintenance be of that LED product in say 3 years, 5 years? What we see in the article is claimed savings, but what they are doing in reality is comparing a pen light to a mag light and telling consumers the pen light is more "Energy efficient" because their using smaller, less power batteries to operate under, leaving out the fact that the Mag Light puts out much more light. Signs like advertising is about Competition right? Light is also competition when a sign is sitting in a strip center or shopping mall. Back To Reality... The fair comparison is to step up the LED Module power to a 1 watt module or .92 watt module for a near equal light output comparison, if we're comparing LEDs to Neon let's redo this with a .92 watt (using a our NC "Reckless" LED module for example). LED Channel 190 Surface Foot Candle Average Neon Channel 191 Surface Foot Candle Average The Neon channel is nearly .005% brighter than the LED, or nil to nothing, let's call them equal for sake of argument. Let's look at the cost of operation again LED Channel with modules 3 modules per foot x 2' x .92 watts = 5.52 watts (Electronic) Neon Channel 15mm 6500K 2' (15mm Hg - 3 watts per foot) x 3w = 6 watts (Magnetic) Again, we won't do it here, BUT we could have saved nearly 30% in energy using a Electronic Neon Transformer which we did not. Using LED modules you will save 8% in cost of operation over the Neon Channel Is one more energy efficient over the other in this comparison....YES! But not my much or as much as claimed. Like most instances you can use the lower wattage LED modules in channel letters or sign cabinets and sign suppliers and mfg reps will tell you, you can use less LEDs to stretch power supplies for "usable light". That is true....and...well and good when you see these models on a show room floor, or at a convention for an "Ooooo and Ahhh". The problem with that lays when you put that same sign out in a strip center or shopping mall and now it has to compete against other signs and light sources. The customer will complain, you will bring that sign back into your shop and that three (.4w) modules, or one module (1w) per foot soon turns into 9 and 3 modules (sometimes tripling material) just so it can compete with conventional light sources already out on the field, the ROI just went up at this point for any kinds of savings in retrofitting or a project sold as "Energy Efficient" Which can bring us to.... "Retrofitting". We as sign makers will make money on retrofitting. It's the new profit farming idea put out from just about every LED manufacturer to motivate YOU to go to your customers or create new accounts with the idea of $$$-SAVING MONEY-$$$. Oh and possible "rebates" energy companies hand out, a handicap subsidy paid for by the taxpayers. Why handicap a product? A whole other topic for another time. I have personally seen the most outrageous "propaganda", and I'm been nice in using that word because that's exactly what it is. It's shameful to know so many in this industry and to see quite a few trying to convince sign shops so much money can be made buying THEIR products and inspire/motivate you to sell consumer on retrofits. Putting on presentations knowing full well Neon does not consume 10 to 12 watts per foot, especially clear red (Neon gas pumped). As licensed Electrical Sign Contractors we must have our business ethics and sense of integrity, and it is not fair to unjustly convince a consumer to retrofit their existing Neon Channel Letter sign over to LED based on magic fuzzy math and figures. We know from our own testing and evaluations which we won't go into here, that Neon & high powered 1-watts LED modules, their light output will degrade over time 30% to 40% over 40,000 hours of operation, or nearly 14 sign years if left on 8 hours a day. One thing to stress, very few high powered LED's make it that long, and in our testing only two products made it that long, GE (Power Tetra MAX) & Axiom's High Powered LED. Lower power LED's i.e .4 watt modules produce less heat, less stress, and under driving we can expect longer life, but more than not, even that's not always the true or the case. A topic for another time. Doing our own calculations without labor we've seen the ROI from 20 to 40 years just for the consumer to make their money back. You have to ask yourself, did you pick the right components to last 20 to 40 years, how many times will you need to re-retrofit the retrofit? Being in this industry we've seen many large sign programs fail and burn with utter disaster, resulting in thousands of locations needing a "re-change" over. If the Environment plays a big key for you into choosing the right light source. Something else omitted from this article....... TEMPERATURES Yes, correct. Standard 30ma Neon systems do not like cold weather and are affected because the mercury (Argon fill) inside condenses up in the cold. BUT, if you're using red Neon lamps, clear with Neon gas and no mercury or even orange (Green pumped red), light output is not affected by temperatures because it's just glass and gas. In most cold regions shops will bump the 30ma system to a 60ma doubling the cost of operation for cold weather purposes for heating up those lamps, or change gas. But these days unfortunately, there aren't that many 60ma Neon Magnetic Transformers still being produced (**Except Franceformer), namely only electronics which can limit jobs in cold weather for exposed argon filled lamps because GTO cannot touch metal surfaces. With cooler temps Neon and Fluorescent lamps will dim, and LEDs will prosper. The Flip side. There's a what? Neon & Fluorescent lamps are brighter in warmer climates, and LEDs dim in warmer weather, LEDs can catastrophically fail in these conditions because just like computers and electronics, they hate heat. Temperatures cannot make Neon lamps catastrophically fail. This is what separates one LED mfg product from another, how is it dissipating heat, can it dissipate the heat? This is for another discussion. It should also be noted, companies like Voltarc make a double insulated T8 Lamp for cold weather, this means the temperature won't affect the light output much. This is why it's important as a sign producer, we must ask ourselves, where is this sign going? Somewhere extreme like Minnesota cold or Arizona heat? Some big banking sign programs that have catastrophically failed have learned from their big failures and have hybrid system in place. Based on sign sizes of geographical location will be specified with Neon or LEDs THE ENVIRONMENT This is nothing other than good fear marketing, and a good way to sell based on guilt and create headlines where there are none. The truth is..... mercury is a natural element, and it's everywhere naturally....Streams, Volcanoes, in the forests and it's released naturally....there is no escape! The mercury in a lamps is it's purist form (quicksilver), and unless you decide to open a vile of mercury and inhale the vapor, the world will still keep on spinning, and children will continue to play out in the streets as far as our industry is concerned with it. Most environmental groups are extreme and work against our industry under an assumption "a rogue Neon bender could simply pour mercury down the drain and poison people". Believe me, I know....I've had these conversations with them and when they see these fake headlines it peaks their interest and it's ammo for their cause and there is a reason why that sentence is in quotes. Neon & Fluorescent Lamps are 100% recyclable. LEDs are not. What??? LEDs have a lot of metal toxic content, something left for another topic. So it's best not to sling mud at one industry when your backyard can be just as messy and controversial. The average home consumer will throw out Hg (Mercury) lamps and think nothing of using a recycling center. As professionals in our industry we dispose of these lamps commercially, we don't just simply toss them in a waste bin somewhere where it will be dumped off next to the puppy farm's drinking water. Which begs the big question about LEDs, what to do with those since they are composed of toxic metals? Landfill??? Most LEDs today are come from China just like about everything else. China has coal plants....not exactly the best clean coal plants to date. What do coal plants put into the atmosphere?.....Mercury. If environmental impact is a large concern to you like it was in the image 360 article, would you rather buy a product that has mercury trapped in glass that gets recycled, that is energy efficient in it's own right, or from another that puts it into the atmosphere? Burn a 1000 watts to build a product that uses 5 watts??? Something to note if the 'Green" movement appeals to you. U.L. or Underwriters Laboratories, and most all know them in our industry if you produce electric signs, UL lists Neon as a "Green" product, and has a Green Product listing. Something we did not see in this article, we only read the words "hazardous". PRODUCT AVAILABILITY Mis-information. The replacement of a single Neon unit or Fluorescent Lamps is much more inexpensive than having to replace failing LED modules. Lets think for minute. We've all seen failures of Neon, Fluorescent and LED signs all around town. You can take just about any 6500K lamps whether it's Neon or Fluorescent and replace it, and match up isn't that bad unless it's had years of lumen maintenance. Those conventional light source component manufacturers have not changed that technology or products much, and you can always expect what you'll get from them. The Hg Lamp industry has a better more solid standard than LEDs at the moment. Those lamps and glass are they same as they were 20 years ago. With LEDs, not so much. As we walk into the next big sign like the upcoming ISA convention we can expect to see the new LED modules by our choice vendor 10.0, next year will be 11.0, 12.0 after that. When a LED fails and even in a short few years, your chances of finding that LED can be next to impossible leaving you with the choice depending on how much failure to replace the whole existing sign. Cross your fingers you're not mixed up into a major sign program and replacing thousands! UNLESS you're the subcontractor who will make the labor on that change out! LEDs are exactly what their touted, technology. Technology always changes. You can walk into any sign supply house and buy a few feet or single lamp for service, with LEDs you must purchase by the Tray or box, sometimes a carton, a much higher cost just for a simple maintenance job. A cost that must be passed off to the consumer, who might not the that happy when sold on 50,000 to 100,000 hours of dependability FLUORESCENT LIGHT SIGN CABINETS & RETROFITTING Sometimes old technology gets better. Most run of the mill Fluorescent HO (High-Output) lamps are inexpensive and their usually a single halo-phosphate lamp. Lamps do improve. Just like Neon and Fluorescent Lamps, their both also available in high light output lamps, or Tri-Phosphor Lamps. Tri-Phosphor lamps are a brighter "whiter" lamps, that last longer, and stay white much longer over time than conventional single halo-phosphate lamps. Companies like Voltarc who specialize in premium light source products have even gone so far as to improve the HO Lamp electrodes for longer life. Voltarc lamps are specified out in many large sign programs and for good reason. Their Tri-phosphor lamps, T-12 & T8's are rated for 60,000 hours of operation, and it goes against the marketing of LED manufacturers that claim HO Lamps will often only last 5,000 hours of operation, need to be changed out often, "buzz and blink" not that they ever did anyway. This brings us to our finale and final project we will share with you the industry. We can all plug away with products we all use to see if Retrofitting Sign Cabinet's to LEDs is truly worth their claim. Don't get me wrong, under the right circumstances it can be! This is a project that we did on The Sign Syndicate a few years back to study Retrofitting and possible ROI (Return on Investment). It's just casual and not concrete, we do leave a few things out that's up to you to insert. RETROFIT PROJECT A customer calls you up and wants to know when they can expect to reach their Return On Investment for possibly retrofitting their T12 Pylon Sign to LEDs as an option, because they always read about energy saving using LEDs, and they have been visited by a rep. You discover the sign specification below after a survey Current Sign Specifications • 24 - T1296F Conventional single halo phosphate Lamps • 4- old 48' Magnetic Ballasts • 48 - Rude looking HO Lamp Sockets that have seen better days You have a couple of choices. Go LED or consider using an improved conventional light source system, HO Lamps and Electronic Ballasts because Magnetic Ballasts are not really being manufactured anymore. An improved Fluorescent HO Lamps system means "energy efficiency" because for the same power you're getting a brighter longer life lamps going from single halo-phosphate to tri-phosphor for the same cost of operation, and you're also saving from going magnetic ballast to electronic ballast. Let's look at a few products to choose from for this quick project/discussion Voltarc 8' - T12 HO Tri Light Max (Tri-Phosphor) Lamps - 6,190 Lumens, 67 Watts Each 8' - T8 HO Tri Light Max (Tri-Phosphor) Lamps - 7,467 Lumens, 74 Watts Each GE (Double Sided) 8' - Line Fit LED- 5,760 Lumens, 57.12 Watts Each Principal LED (Double Sided) 8' - Qwik Stik (Double Sided) 4,316 Lumens, 42.4 Watts Each LIGHT OUTPUT Voltarc T8 - 7,467 Lumens 17% Brighter than a T12 23% Brighter than the GE Line Fit 42% Brighter than the Principal LED Qwik Stik Voltarc T12 - 6,190 Lumens 7% Brighter than the GE Line Fit 30% Brighter than the Principal LED Qwik Stik GE Line Fit - 5,760 Lumens 30% Brighter than the Principal LED Qwik Stik ANNUAL COST OF OPERATION What it costs to run each system annually HO Lamp Proposal 1 - T12 (6,190 Lumens) T12 Lamp Retrofit 24- Tri-Phosphor Lamps, & 4- Electronic Ballasts, 48 HO Sockets 24 Lamps x 67 watts = 1,608 Watts 24 Lamps x 10 Hours a day x 365 Days a Year x $.12 KWH/1050 (Power Correction) = $670.76 Annual Cost of Operation HO Lamp Proposal 2 - T8 (7,467 Lumens) T8 Lamp Retrofit 24-Tri-Phosphor Lamps, & 4- Electronic Ballasts, 48 HO Sockets 24 Lamps x 67 watts = 1,776 Watts 24 Lamps x 10 Hours a day x 365 Days a Year x $.12 KWH/1050 (Power Correction) = $740.84 Annual Cost of Operation GE Line Fit (5,760 Lumens) 24 LED Line Fit Lamps, 8- 180 Watt LED Power Supplies, 24 Rails, 48 End Caps, 48 Sockets 24 Lamps x 54.2 Watts = 1,300.80 Watts 24 Lamps x 10 Hours a day x 365 Days a Year x $.12 KWH/1050 (Power Correction) = $542.62 Annual Cost of Operation Principal LED Qwik Stik (4,316 Lumens) 24 Qwik Stik LED Lamps, 12- 120 Watt LED Power Supplies or 6 - 264 Watt LED Power Supplies 24 Lamps x 54.2 Watts = 1,017.60 Watts 24 Lamps x 10 Hours a day x 365 Days a Year x $.12 KWH/1050 (Power Correction) = $424.48 Annual Cost of Operation COMPONENT COSTS Fluorescent Lamp Retrofit Voltarc TriLightMax T8 Lamp $22.10 Each x 24 = $530.40 (7,467 Lumens) Voltarc TriLightMax T12 Lamp $25.54 Each = $612.96 (6,190 Lumens) 48' Ballast $69.00 Each x 4 = $276.00 HO Lamp Socket $1.19 Each x 48 = $57.12 T12 Tri-Phosphor Lamp Retrofit total cost of components $946.08 (6,190 Lumens) T8 Tri-Phosphor Lamp Retrofit total cost of components $863.52 (7,467 Lumens) LED Retrofit GE Line Fit 8' Lamp $180.00 Each x 24 = $4,320.00 180w GE Power Supply $97.14 Each x 8 = $777.12 8' Rails Each x 24 = End Caps Each x 48 = Total Cost of Components = $5,097.12 (5,760 Lumens) Principal Qwik Stik 8' Lamps $89.99 Each x 24 = $2,159.76 6 Principal LED 264w Power Supply $157.65 Each x 6 = $945.90 Total Cost of Components = $3,105.66 (4,316 Lumens) RETURN ON INVESTMENT This is a calculation of annual energy cost saving vs upfront initial cost investment. GE Line Fit (23% Dimmer than the Voltarc T8) (7% Dimmer than the Voltarc T12) How long would it take for a Retrofit package using a GE Line Fit System to break even using the initial annual energy consumption savings versus the initial cost, and how many years would it take to make that back? Initial Cost $5,097.12 / Savings using Fit Line over T12 = $128.14 Annually= 39.77 Years (145,160 Hours) Initial Cost $5,097.12 / Savings using Fit Line over T8 = $198.22 Annually= 25.71 Years (93,841 Hours) Principal LED Qwik Stik (42% Dimmer than the Voltarc T8) (30% Dimmer than the Voltarc T12) How long would it take for a Retrofit package using a Principal LED Qwik Stik System to break even using the initial annual energy consumption savings versus the initial cost, and how many years would it take to make that back? Initial Cost $3,105.66 / Savings using Fit Line over T12 = $246.28 Annually= 12.61 Years (47,121 Hours) Initial Cost $3,105.66 / Savings using Fit Line over T8 = $316.36 Annually= 9.82 Years (35,843 Hours) In most cases when it comes to retrofitting, it won't make business sense to spend the upfront cost. For this project the sign shop can spend less than $1,000.00 in material and simply swap out old sockets, add new long life lamps rated for 60,000 hours and ballasts. What we did not add in is labor, and small component parts needed for the LED systems, this will bump those figures up because with an HO System you're replacing four ballasts, with the LED systems you're adding in more, in some cases 6 to 8 power supplies. This is just a generous / casual comparison and calculation and factors you can add in for yourself CLOSING I know that it may appear as if I'm hammering LEDs, or am bias in some way. I am not. I am merely only filling in the holes created by Marketeers, low information manufacturer reps who probably have never touched, let alone ever measured a Neon Lamp, and also from sign suppliers who only pass on what they are told to tell you from upstairs coupled with Sign trade magazines who's only purpose is to fill headlines and create content with exciting claims/headlines. Truth be told, I am a user and seller of all three light sources. My goal in this trade is quality and longevity, and I've always been VERY picky with what I use because I practice what I preach and put my own money where my mouth is with 5 year worry free electrical warranties to my own customers In closing I will say again.....ALL Light sources have their pro's and con's, strengths & weaknesses all according to a number of factors and applications we NEVER hear about. Not all sign shops have access to good Neon benders and processors for electric signs. Not all sign shops have the "know how" to install or integrate Neon properly, so the LED alternative is attractive. For the sign shops who do know how to handle Neon there is no reason why sign shops who do, cannot give at the very least a 5 year worry free electrical warranty to the consumer. LED's are also very attractive for signs that are produced and shipped. Small channel letters that can be packed up and shipped via FedEx, or UPS without the worry of glass breaking. 5' glass sticks are not always easy to ship in case of breakage and not everyone has access to a Neon Bender to make those needed repairs from travel. When it comes to difficult installations & maintenance access it's much easier to used LED's over Neon at times. But again, a good properly process neon lamp can last 20 years, even longer for Neon filled which is just glass and gas. I myself have some channel letters out on the field that have never had a call going on 20+ years For Neon you also need a certain clearance to work with and keep space clear, and why for smaller Channel Letter jobs, once again....LEDs are a better choice light source! When it comes to red channel letters it should be noted. 15mm Clear Neon red is 3.6 watts per foot, red LED modules are usually .48 watts a module and space 3 per foot for 1.5 watts per foot. Behind your standard #2283 Red acrylic there is very little difference in surface light, one does not appear to be brighter than the other. So you do see significant savings using LEDs, and it's over 50% in cost of operation BUT....the flip side is.......red clear Neon lamps do not degrade in light output (just glass and gas) whereas red LEDs do. There is a price to be paid for the 50% savings in cost of operation. (Pro's and Con's) This industry will always have failures from light sources, sometimes it's inferior products, a lot of times their just not installed right due to not enough "know how" or by hackery. Poor installation and in house fabrication/integration will affect all light sources with quicker breakdown. The biggest part that kills our industry and rots our trade from the inside out is the wrongful intention of marketing mis-information & mis-characterization of ALL light sources we use in our industry. Neon & Fluorescent lamp manufacturers have paid the biggest price from this in the last decade and it's any wonder their still around. Like all trends and cycles, things go away and have a way of coming back again. Neon is slowly making a comeback, not by the demand of sign shops, but by the consumers themselves who want back that unique look only Neon can offer. It will be a task for most shops if they can fill that demand which is now a premium project, or will they have to pass it on to someone else who possess that knowledge because they choose the easier path of peel and stick? - Erik Gastelum Administrator of The Sign Syndicate Former Technology Leadership Team of The United States Sign Council