Gentlemen:

Sorry if I gave offense: I think I have made it VERY CLEAR that none was intended. Several people in this forum have ignored the literal meaning of my words as plainly written, and chosen to interpret my words as implying denegration. Please reread.

Case in point. Emmett wrote "You have expecially omitted any environmental considerations to answer the question " is it green. " In fact, a careful review of the posts will clearly prove that NO ONE has asked that question. Let us review the relevant posts.

On 10/6 Jonathan posted this statement (it is not a question), the only one so far mentioning enironmental issues:

" At the end of the day housebuilding can be high volume assembling of characterless impersonal indentikit units, wasteful of materials and energy, working on short term fashion and profit goals. Or alternatively .... using or recycling materials that can be obtained from sustainable sources and not harmful to our environment and not demanding vast amounts of energy .."

Note that this is not a question; it is a statement. He did not solicit a response, but I did respond with the following: "Perhaps someone with professional industry expereince will take the time to enlighten him about the numbers? "

Sadly, no one on the forum has decided to take up the task of informing Jonathan. I do not have the time to explain the obvious. Moreover, there are mountains of published literature with hard, verifiable data by governments and private organizations around the world that plainly prove that mass production of wood products under responsible regulatory controls is more efficient and more "green" than other method. I am not interested in disputing this with people that have not done their homework. Ask the folks at BREEM or LEED, or Green Globes. In any case, please do not accuse me of "especially omitting any environmental considerations to answer the question " is it green " (translate envirionment friendly and made of renewable materials)." The question was simply not asked in previous posts, while the answer is available to anyone that looks for it.

In any case, the "green" issue is very important to us, and we intend to spend the time and money necessary to get our product certified. NAHB has a new system that seems less biased against wood products than LEED, so I think we will probably go with it. Anyone have experience with the various certification systems?

I have not compared costs with other methods in the US as of yet. Once again, the question has not been asked, even by Emmett (read his post). Moreover, product is not currently for sale in the US or Canada, so discussions about cost at this time would be premature.

In response to Emmett's direct question about a plant, yes, we already have precut machinary in the US, but it is not currently operating pending ICC-ES review of the connectors. In any case, we will open multiple plants in the US. We are also considering constructing a glulam factory in Canada.

Re IBC, as we intend to build our first structures in California, IBC compliance is not something that can be avoided. We have spent a lot of money having this issued researched by industry experts and have concluded that it will not be a problem. In fact, after ICC-ES review, we expect fewer difficulties with code compliance and local review than do traditional timber frame buildings currently experience in California (not exactly a hotbed for timber framing). I don't understand what the "traps" Emmett mentioned are, but I would appreciate clarification, since Emmett indicates that my understanding of "American English as we practice it" is so poor. Damn, I do hate being a retard....

Emmett's observation that "The demand for new housing is a business environment the industry is hard pressed to satisfy with quality, durability, low maintenance and affordable cost." is very true, in my opinion. Our research shows that the North American consumer is very different from the Japanese consumer in that the Japanese consumer is willing to pay extra money for a superior structural system, even if it is hidden behind drywall, whereas the typical consumer in North America is not. This is entirely consistent with my experience in Japan in high-rise, office and hotel construction also. In fact 90+ percent of our product sold in Japan is entirely concealed behind finishes regardless of the beauty of the wood. Interestingly, I was recently told that more and more clients are requesting design changes during construction to expose the frame upon seeing the wood before finishes are applied.

I assume that the people in this forum that actually sell timber frames (instead of just pontificate about them) get few requests from consumers to hide the frame, but instead experience more cases where their clients demand to have the frame exposed. Anyway, there are cultural differences that will need to be dealt with, but nothing that has not been done before in other industries.

I have no doubt that the North American consumer is willing to pay for what Emmett calls a "manufactured product." They do it every day and in every way. In fact, I believe that traditional timber frames are harder to sell than my product, simply based on cost and construction time and hard data. After all, more tract houses are sold in NA than any other type, but most of those are horrific cookie-cutter mass produced units. But how many timber framers do you know that have the systems and horsepower to build 30,000 custom post & beam units?

I came to this forum to help find an architect because it was recommended to me. Instead of finding an architect, some, like Emmett, seem to expect me to "sell it" and defend it. BS. I have been contacted by some professional timber framers (yes, there are businessmen that make and sell timber frames that are interested in selling a product that can be erected and enclosed in 1.5 days, costs less than a traditional timber frame in materials and labor for the same floorplan, and that any PE can easily specify and any building department review), but I do not expect a single soul in this forum to buy, use, or even like my product, so I have ZERO interest in promoting it to you. I have simply answered questions, but most those have nothing to do with finding an architect. Cut me a break.

Stan