Innovative how? Nervous because a cheap driver can have electrical issues which could in turn leaf to fire.
Innovative - "featuring new methods; advanced and original." Mars, as far as I know, is the only company to offer customers the option of a name brand driver or a "housebound", let's call it that, driver at a lower price. Perhaps other companies off that but, I'm not aware of any who are. As a result, I describe that as "innovative".
There's cost and business risk. They have to either seek out and source the new component or they have to develop it in house. If they offer it, they need to manage how that option is perceived. Some prospects may think that a less expensive driver is of unacceptable quality so they need to develop marketing materials to deal with that and they need to train their staff on how to handle inquiries on that topic.
If it was outsourced, they need to manage that supply chain. If it was in house, they need to manage the supply chain of raw materials. In either case, they need to have a plan to deal with the inventory/inventory of raw materials in the event that the new driver does not sell.
"Nervous because a cheap driver can have electrical issues which could in turn leaf to fire."
It sounds like you're convinced that the cheaper driver is more likely to have electrical issues which could cause a fire. Is there any history of that or is that just a perception? In either case, that bias is something Mars should be savvy enough to address and allay.
I have no reason to believe their driver will cause more fires and I think there's a strong argument that we'll see that they've created a product that is fundamentally the same as the name brand. On one hand do we even know that it's not just a MeanWell OEM product that's been rebadged?
Drivers are simple technology which will tend to decrease the likelihood of a faulty product. Mars knows that, if there was a fire, Mars would be liable to be sued for damages and, though I haven't penciled out the numbers, the cost of even defending themselves in a lawsuit would probably far outweigh the increased revenue from sales of the cheaper driver. Further, they have to be aware that if word were to get out that the in house driver had caused a fire, that would have an immediate and significant or, perhaps, devastating impact on their sales. As a result, I would expect that Mars would take steps to ensure that they created a product that was not unsafe.
If you truly feel that the in house driver might result in a fire, it's great that Mars is offering it as an
option. Buyers have a choice and more product choices tends to result in more buyers who are more satisfied with their purchase.
How would you react if Mars dropped the MeanWell option and went only with the house brand driver? If the price for the in house driver was the same as the price for the MeanWell, would you still perceive that the in house driver might result in a fire? Those are questions that might help understand the source of your reaction. And they're extra credit questions, BTW. ;-)
We all have biases and weight the tradeoffs when making all sorts of decisions, including purchasing decisions. While I'm not particularly fond of Mars as a company, I'm glad to see that they're taking this step.
One, it helps potential buyers save few bucks and I've read more than one posting about a grower who's tight on cash. Having this option would make it easier for a grower to afford a grow light from Mars.
Second, some buyers might not be able to afford the light without the in house option so having the lower priced driver allows Mars to make the sale, resulting in more revenue for Mars and manufacturers making a profit is a good thing.
Third, it's a move that may force other grow light companies to offer it as an option. That would save buyers across the LED grow light market some money.
Finally, it might poke MeanWell to improve their products or find a way to reduce their prices to win back those sales
