Brand Positioning: Instrumentation for Genomic Analysis

Report #07-369
Publication Date: October 2007
Page Count: 159

Individual Report (electronic copy with company-wide
license and one print copy): $4,000
plus Data Set: an additional $1,000

Full Package (all six individual reports): $12,000

Brief Description

Executive Summary

Respondent Insights

Related Articles

Order Form

Each member of The Science Advisory Board who participated in this study was invited to comment on the following:

The Scenario: You have just won a lottery jackpot of $2.5 million. Being the dedicated scientist that you are, you decide to continue conducting research rather than retiring to your own private island to live a life of leisure and luxury. The Question: Now that you can afford to buy any life science product you'd like, would your use of instrumentation for genomic analysis from [Brand] change? Why or why not?

The responses, which have been edited for grammar and clarity, appear below along with each respondent's job position.

Affymetrix - Yes

As part of our cancer research, we analyze human tissue and tumor samples. These are unique and valuable samples, and if funding were not a major limiting factor in our experimental design, we could expand our work to include larger cohorts that better represent important patient subgroups. As it is, we have to divide the funding we have available for global gene expression studies by 1000 to see how many samples we can afford to analyze using the Affymetrix platforms, then tailor our study questions accordingly.
Principal Investigator

Higher throughput with lower involvement of fellows.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I might use it more.
Principal Investigator

I would be financially unrestrained from choosing my own interesting projects in genomic analysis and I am most familiar with Affymetrix instrumentation.
Principal Investigator

I would be in position to discuss and get a special deal for the particular research out of the mainstream I am doing, namely the study of anti-viral response in the frog Xenopus. I could try to negotiate with them a particular microarray with a selection of putative immune genes.
Principal Investigator

I would buy an Affymetrix GeneChip analysis setup for my home and one for my car.
Principal Investigator

I would continue using the actual instruments, however, I would hire someone to write better software. Affymetrix is very good at making microarray chips and the instruments to use them. Their one main weakness is software support, especially when talking about their Tiling array platform. I think the company assumes that a third party vendor(s) will fill the gap, but in the case of their Tiling Arrays, this has not happened.
Post Doctoral Fellow

I would switch to mass sequencing technology (Solexa or 454).
Principal Investigator

I wouldn't leave Affy as I feel they are still leaders in the field. Instead, I'd move all of my projects from cartridges to the Affymetrix HTA 96-well plate format. With the extra cash, I could buy a couple of GCAS robots to label my samples and hybridize my chips. Of course, that accounts for the $0.5 million. The rest (a lot less than $2 million after taxes!) will be spent on reagents and plates (at about $30,000 a crack, it won't take long to burn through my fortune!).
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I'm currently using Affymetrix instruments for ChIP-chip analysis. If I won the jackpot, I would go buy a Solexa system for ChIP-chip, since it will save me a lot of time and human power.
Post Doctoral Fellow

My current use is based on contractual work. If I could buy any instrumentation, I would look for a system that is more flexible and that could be used for multiple purposes. I would also want an instrument that does not cost an arm and a leg for a single test...something more cost effective. Of course, I don't have that $2.5 million!
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

Only Affymetrix produces yeast chips for microarray analysis.
Staff Scientist

Probably would do more samples and additional analyses.
Principal Investigator

Unlike other company's single function system/machine, Affymetrix's single platform can perform different kinds of tasks (i.e. SNP, microarray). That would save lots of training time and maintenance cost.
Staff Scientist

We could afford to do a lot more custom chip work to correlate clinical response and pharmacokinetics with transporter and metabolizing enzyme genotype and expression...
Post Doctoral Fellow

Affymetrix - No

1. The cost to purchase the instrument can do a lot more experiments. 2. As an individual lab it is not worth it to invest such capital equipment. 3. Need to hire extra personnel and pay maintenance fee every year to maintain the instrument are not worth (not cost effective).
Staff Scientist

Affymetrix provides the most accurate, reliable, and exact information regarding gene expression changes. Affymetrix products are always up to date and their software is user friendly.
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

Already have access to their state-of-the-art.
Department Head

Gives the results you need--would value a reduction in chip costs and extended lifetime of the chips.
Professor/Teacher

I have access to a university facility, and I like having the facility maintain the instruments.
Professor/Teacher

I have not come across anything that is better or easier to use.
Staff Scientist

I need a core facility for Histomorphometry!
Laboratory Technician

I would remain faithful to the people who helped me when I was not rich.
Professor/Teacher

If I were to win the lottery, I would spend it on programs for the health of children. I would continue to use Affymetrix instrumentation for genomic analysis because that is what I chose to use in the first place... and with good reason.
Post Doctoral Fellow

My decisions regarding instrumentation are based on how reliable the equipment is, how reproducible and reliable the results are that we obtain, and cost effectiveness. That wouldn't change if I had a few more bucks!
Professor/Teacher

No need to enrich the wealthy just because I am wealthy. Affymetrix is the best choice when using their GeneChips.
Principal Investigator

Quality is superior and affordable.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

Reasonable quality and performance.
Professor/Teacher

The ultimate goal today is to sequence the whole genome, where Affymetrix doesn't have a role. I would have buy with this amount of money 6 454 machine (Life Sciences) that can generate 100Mb a day. In five days I can complete one plex of the whole genome and in one month 6 plex. Increased capacity and efficiency will accomplish 6 plex of whole genome sequences in two weeks which sums up to 100 people a year.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

They have always been consistent in their performance -- I just made a million -- why would I want to blow it and take a chance? It's like going from a Lexus and taking a chance on the new Pinto!
Post Doctoral Fellow

We use a custom SNP chip that meets our current needs.
Principal Investigator

Why should I change to something unknown while Affymetrix has been working for me for years and years?
Staff Scientist

Agilent Technologies - Yes

Agilent Bioanalyzer instrumentation is a "gold standard" for nucleic acid characterization, however, it is also useful (supposedly) for protein assays. If both analyses could be reliably and cost-effectively combined on a single, well-respected platform, then I would likely use that platform even more than currently.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

Because it has worked constantly and has outperformed all others at collection of data that is publishable.
Professor/Teacher

Ease of use and good customer service.
Staff Scientist

Good instrument, support, and consumables. It truly does the job that we need it to do.
Principal Investigator

I could afford it, and if they offer quality and accuracy compared the other brands then I would.
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

I would buy a Solexa because it is a much more powerful technology.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I would buy an Illumina bead based system for more high throughput.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I would still use the Agilent Bioanalyzer to test the quality of my RNA, but I would hire lots more people to use it (and do research in my lab)!
Principal Investigator

I would switch to sequencing-based technology, probably a Solexa machine.
Post Doctoral Fellow

I'd reverse engineer the device so I could control the scripts and run my own assays and chips of my design. I'd also fix the RNA software so it displays the RNA length rather than arrival time only. (It never seems to get fixed.) $2.5 million won't last long!
Principal Investigator

If money were no object, I'd just contract with Affymetrix to do all my work.
Principal Investigator

It would because Agilent is not always at the forefront of cutting-edge technology. If I had unlimited resources I would make sure I would have the most up to date instrumentation.
Staff Scientist

Money changes things. I can't say how in this case, but I'm pretty sure it would.
IS Manager/Specialist

With price no longer being a rate limiting concern, I could get my own and wouldn't have to share (though I would share if they asked nicely).
Principal Investigator

Agilent Technologies - No

Agilent is reliable and dependable. The system that we use is very helpful in our research.
Laboratory Technician

Agilent offers greater flexibility for custom design of arrays, as well as easy integration into data analysis software like GeneSpring (which they own). The instrumentation can also be used with other platforms, increasing its value to the lab and its utility. The only reason one might consider switching instrumentation is the hassle that comes with downloading and installing new formats for arrays, but it's not a big enough hassle to persuade me to move away from Agilent.
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

Agilent Technologies is an innovator in this field. With the 4-in-one array chips genomic research is more fun.
Post Doctoral Fellow

Because it is high quality instrumentation. They do cover the world...I could still use Agilent and retire to my private tropical paradise. I know I would have the service and support that I needed. And an abundance of researchers.
Department Head

Good product.
Staff Scientist

I have had one of the most wonderful on-site training experiences (thank you Iman) with the Agilent System. And the Agilent rep has continued to treat our small school as a respectable consumer and deserving research institution (and not like some small, insignificant player). We appreciate that.
Professor/Teacher

I use the Bioanalyzer for verification of the presence and size of PCR amplicon. It's fast, easy, and sensitive. It does the job that I need it to do, and I am aware of no other instrument that does that better.
Principal Investigator

I will not put my lotto money in my research. $2.5M is big money personally but not in research. I'd rather write a couple more grant applications. However, if I have no choice but have to put some money in research, I would purchase some useful instruments including the Agilent scanner and place them as close as possible to me.
Post Doctoral Fellow

I would look to see if there are any better products out there... but probably not... Agilent has developed a scanner that allows you to automate scanning of slides overnight. The scanners I've used have been very durable and predictable. And they interface with other equipment easily. Probably the biggest advantage has been the support the company provides... For example, in Texas, where I used the scanner(s), there were several issues related to the software... Agilent was very responsive and accommodated me in the time frame I was limited to... so their flexibility won me over... Especially in the area of technology, when equipment or software issues need to be "unpacked" in a way as to not overwhelm the end user... Agilent's people were good.
Staff Scientist

I would not use my own private funds directly for my research. This would allow me to remain unbiased and focused upon doing the best science in the way I have always done it.
Principal Investigator

I'd just get my own for my lab, not worry about sharing. Offer to use some funds to help other labs [especially in Eastern Europe, South America and Africa] get such equipment or to have their students travel to me to use ours.
Principal Investigator

No, I like the products. Funny thing is I would change my area of research and fund myself to do something else.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

Results not dependent on the above scenario.
Staff Scientist

Since we already have the instrumentation on hand, there would not be a need to change. If it is not broken, don't fix it.
Principal Investigator

The products that I use, whether they be from Agilent or some other vendor, represent the best/most cost effective products for each specific application. That philosophy would not change for any amount of money.
Principal Investigator

This instrument that Agilent Technologies has given us is the best and no amount of money would change that. When I think about how many years these people worked down the mines to eventually receive the disease they did -- and unknowingly, all they wanted was a job -- we can do no better with any other machine, and if the tables were turned and someone was in my place and I in theirs, I would hope they would keep that in mind when they were working with Agilent Technologies.
Pharmacist

We work on vector borne infectious agents and the instrumentation from Agilent allows for easy student use and the screening of large numbers of samples. A graduate student just had a paper accepted by the Journal of Wildlife Diseases -- he used Agilent technology.
Professor/Teacher

Applied Biosystems - Yes

Although they have good products, they seem very arrogant!
Post Doctoral Fellow

Because of the reliability and quality of the product.
Professor/Teacher

Buy more, of course, with the money I have.
Staff Scientist

I am currently having a secret liaison with Roche's Lightcycler.
Staff Scientist

I can afford better/high end instruments.
Principal Investigator

I currently use PerkinElmer thermocyclers and ABI DNA sequencers and sequence detection systems. These instruments have high-throughput capability -- I would love to have the robotics to prepare the samples to take full advantage of the throughput. I am wearing myself out feeding these monsters and my freezers are full of samples to analyze.
Staff Scientist

I really like our Eppendorf machine and would get another. It's faster and more user friendly-- though I like the AB machine more than most others.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I would continue to use Applied Biosystems instrumentation, but I would upgrade the system and have the newest technology available to the researchers who use the instruments with me.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I would probably let outside contractors like GeneLogic do a great deal of my work -- why do RT-PCR when you could do full array analysis and then let them analyze it for you. I might need to follow up with some qRT-PCR, but they would do the really thorough screen for me!
Staff Scientist

I would purchase robotics so that my technician's time could be put to better use and I would purchase an Illumina platform for greater throughput.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I would upgrade and increase the amount of instrumentation.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I'd add another ABI instrument or two, plus a liquid handling robot and some techs to run it and the instruments. Just want to make sure I have sufficient free time to enjoy my winnings!
Staff Scientist

I'd be moving my lab to the private island, not to retire, but to enjoy the luxury life while continuing to pursue my research interests. How nice to be able to do both. Of course, I'd be able to stock up on all the nice instrumentation, including those I have now, as well as additional items. For example, I'd add in automated DNA/RNA prep units, instead of doing this manually. I'd add in robotic work stations for liquid handling. I'd add in additional real time instruments. And naturally, I'd add in a few techs to do the hands on work. That way, I could enjoy a margarita or two, under an umbrella on the beach while contemplating the big picture in my research efforts.
Staff Scientist

I'd buy a smaller footprint, faster instrument than the 7900HT SDS and switch from SYBR Green to TaqMan, but I'd still choose an Applied Biosystems instrument.
Principal Investigator

I'd probably buy more instruments from them in order to supply the independent company that I would establish with the lottery winnings. Why make money for other people (an overgrown, unwieldy Medical Center) when you can make money for yourself?
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

It is still the state of the art, although I would hope they improve the software.
Staff Scientist

Start my own company for biotech research.
Staff Scientist

Why can't I retire to my own private island AND use more ABI equipment? I can sequence all the flora and fauna on the island -- my own version of Craig Venter's oceanic sequencing voyage. In reality, we have long term plans to buy more ABI equipment. The lottery jackpot would probably accelerate those plans.
Staff Scientist

Would investigate other options.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

Yes, I would design a team of specialists from Applied Biosystems and other big name companies to design a new more unique instrument designed especially for our needs.
Staff Scientist

You mean ABI -- Arrogant Beyond Imagination. They make good stuff but are sure a pain to deal with, and overpriced, especially the service contracts. I think they're on the way down and that's fine with me. I'm glad to see a lot of competition coming into the marketplace.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

Applied Biosystems - No

ABI has always been at the forefront of gene expression analysis -- I doubt that stance will change. In addition, their field scientists have always been willing to answer questions, even if it means scheduling a two-hour data analysis session. Even though it poses a high front-end investment, I would still use ABI instrumentation.
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

ABI has some nice products: Reliable, easy to use, and they seem to exactly fit what we want at the time we needed them. My only beef is that certain products are not being supported (like our 3700) despite being a relatively stable, and useable workhorse for our lab. Other than that, some products (Quantifiler, for example) seem to outperform other methods, and despite being rather expensive, we have gotten used to the reliability and repeatability of them.
Staff Scientist

Applied Biosystems has demonstrated that they provide reliable products and service. Why would I change from a trustworthy company? The only current negative aspect of Applied Biosystems is the cost of the instrument.
Post Doctoral Fellow

Because they make the best instrumentation and are always a step ahead of everyone else.
Post Doctoral Fellow

Even though the sales force seems to care very little about smaller labs, be they academic labs or small business labs, the company still makes first-rate instrumentation. I prefer to deal with Applied Biosystems through our purchasing department and on-line so that I do not have to deal with snooty Applied Biosystems representatives who always seem to be having a "bad day."
Professor/Teacher

Familiar with the technology.
Principal Investigator

I am very happy with the quality of the instrumentation from Applied Biosystems.
Staff Scientist

I go by the good old motto: If the system (or conditions) do not change, do not break it. Experience with a product or instrument counts a lot.
Professor/Teacher

I have had no involvement in purchasing the PCR machine from ABI, the one I've been using for long time. I know ABI has a very good reputation, and I'm satisfied with their products. But in the future, if I do have they money, I would like to have a broad evaluation of the products available in the market and tailor each item with my need.
Post Doctoral Fellow

I have the most experience with it, and I am rather happy with the support I've been getting. And if I have 2.5 million, I might even be able to afford a service contract!
Staff Scientist

I like the turnkey system that Applied Biosystems provides. The microarrays analysis is unlike most others on the market. I do not need additional, expensive software to perform bioinformatics on my microarray data. I have used Affymetrix and what I have gotten from bioinformatics services after 10 days is far less than I can get from ABI associated software in 1/2 a day. Plus, the probes used are directly associated with particular TaqMan assays. I don't have to guess. Every probe has an associated assay. I can't say enough how much easier genomics is with ABI.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I might buy more units or upgrade techniques but would stick with AB because of flexibility and familiarity.
Post Doctoral Fellow

I would get an Illumina bead station and a Sequenom system.
Principal Investigator

Industry standard with easily transportable protocols, outputs, etc.
Staff Scientist

It does what we need and does it well and reliably. Not too many advantages to swapping for another brand.
Principal Investigator

My current instrumentation works well and provides me with the data I need. Because my research requires high levels of repeatability, I also need to use the same protocol from the start of my research to the end, and switching brands would be a big no-no. Additionally, I would rather not spend more money for a product that I do not need, and in these days of grant belt-tightening, I'd be wiser to save the extra money for the future. Also, 2.5 million doesn't go very far in science.
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

My lab does not have any restraints on purchasing the best instrumentation to get our jobs done quickly and accurately. Therefore, we purchase the best from the start. I would, however, use some of the money to influence where Applied Biosystems places their priorities when developing new technologies, consumables or reagents.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

The instrumentation is purchased by my company, not by me personally. I would definitely use my jackpot in my personal life and leave the instrumentation to the corporation. No use mixing the business with the pleasure!
Staff Scientist

They both offer a very good bang for the buck and monies could be directed towards recruitment of top research technicians and adding new skill sets to my team.
Staff Scientist

We have found them to be reliable and consistent. That is the most important feature for any instrumentation and supplies.
Professor/Teacher

When something -- either a method or instrumentation system -- works reliably, I don't feel compelled to change or abandon it just for the sake of spending money. Conspicuous consumption or excessive waste has never appealed to me.
Principal Investigator

Beckman Coulter - Yes

Because their instrumentation is very unreliable and is not as sensitive as ABI. I could now afford ABI!
Staff Scientist

Better quality can be obtained from Applied Biosystems. I am not sure about better service though. I would also go to the best system available for gene expression analysis instead of using the system that Beckman Coulter has developed and is still in its infancy. We went with it only because we already have the expense of the instrument which is used for sequencing.
Principal Investigator

Buy more.
Post Doctoral Fellow

Currently our research is partially supported by a small scale core lab for microarray, sequencing, and other fundamental bioinformatics techniques; because of this, much of our machinery and products are for that same small scale level of operation. With $2.5 million we could expand our capabilities to high throughput microarray spotting, microarray hybridization, liquid handling and genomic sequencing, which would entirely alter the composition of equipment currently in the lab.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

High reliability of the instruments.
Staff Scientist

I am with Beckman for more than 20 years and I am happy to use this equipment.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I will have plenty money to afford buying the arrays and kits to run the machine, and perhaps hiring some technical support. The instrument is under used now, partly because of the limited budget and the arrays and kits are relatively more expensive than that of ABI.
Staff Scientist

I would buy the best quality, most advanced and automated Beckman Coulter instrumentation available.
Staff Scientist

I would purchase a combination of instruments that provided more flexibility and lower volume handling.
Principal Investigator

I'd be able to buy it more often, and perhaps hire someone who can occasionally run experiments for me so that I can vacation in the Bahamas.
Staff Scientist

Our experience with Beckman Coulter stems from several years of previous use and familiarity with their products. Our recent experience was initially extremely positive and we were pleased with pricing and quick delivery. We were soon overwhelmed with issues with the new equipment we purchased. Issues involved software as well as hardware. The equipment and its capabilities were misrepresented to us upon purchase; the robot simply could not perform the functions as advertised. It took 6 months to get the machine up and running. We still have some issues with it. We no longer receive calls or visits from Beckman. They should have replaced our unit, but they did not. I will never purchase another piece of equipment from Beckman Coulter. Moreover, I will encourage anyone that asks me about BC to avoid dealing with them completely. Our case may be unique, but our complaints went far up the chain of command at BC headquarters and no one made a sincere effort to correct the problem. I would add that their field service techs bent over backwards and spent days (literally) trying to repair our machine; those guys were top notch.
Principal Investigator

There are better choices out there if money was not an object.
Principal Investigator

When money is not an object, there is no sense in sticking with what works some of the time with results that can be salvaged most of the time. I would rather invest in what could potentially work most of the time with results that don't need to be salvaged at any time!
Staff Scientist

While the thought of giving up a life of leisure and luxury boggles my mind, if I were so inclined to invest my jackpot in research, I would change the USE of the Beckman instrumentation, but NOT the instrumentation itself. I like the instruments -- a lot -- so I would buy several more instruments for genomic analysis and hire people to use them, while I sat back and watched the research throughput increase to the limits of my wealth.
Staff Scientist

Would like to upgrade to more robust instrument.
Principal Investigator

Yes, my use of instrumentation for genomic analysis from Beckman Coulter. With $2.5 million I'd actually obtain the latest and greatest in order to streamline lab activity and move on to more interesting (less repetitive) research. Of course, I'd spend a great deal of time on my private research plot funded by the $2.5 million too.
Principal Investigator

Beckman Coulter - No

Because Beckman is not known as a major reliable player and innovator in this field.
Staff Scientist

Beckman Coulter always supported me when I was a poor struggling scientist trying to sequence uphill in the snow - now that I am rich, I can throw the Beckman Coulter CEQ8000 in the back of my Land Rover and drive to the top of the hill.
Principal Investigator

Beckman Coulter is okay and able to do certain specific research, however, there are better machines in the market.
Principal Investigator

I already use the necessary Beckman products. Additional financial resources would allow me to purchase more expensive or niche-specific instrumentation.
Professor/Teacher

I have not found anything that can replace the specific function I need from Beckman.
Principal Investigator

I would still buy Beckman Coulter, because it is a brand that I am familiar with, and I trust the equipment to do a good job every day!
Post Doctoral Fellow

If it ain't break, don't fix it.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I'm operating a core facility.
Staff Scientist

It does the job.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

It works to date.
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

The current protocols are written for the current instrumentation being used. Changes cannot be made midstream. There is more flexibility only at the beginning of a new project.
Staff Scientist

The instruments are reliable and easy to use. The Beckman scientists actually visited working laboratories and asked us what we wanted. They used their automation expertise to make it happen. Why go somewhere else?
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

They make a very consistent quality product.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

Use what works.
Post Doctoral Fellow

When you trust the company and reputation you will buy them now matter how rich or how poor you may be.
Principal Investigator

Bio-Rad Laboratories - Yes

Although the Bio-Rad instrument is very user friendly and inexpensive, I would prefer an instrument that is better made and more reliable if I could afford it. The plastic on two of our thermocyclers have already broken after about one year and had started to fail the temperature calibrations within a year. We've never had this problem with our other thermocyclers from Applied Biosystems (up to 7-8 years before any problems arise -- although, Applied Biosystems instruments are really expensive).
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

I like MJ better for PCR machines, so I would purchase an MJ. Also, the machine I'm currently using for PCR does not permit changing the temperature of the hot lid. I would prefer one that permits setting the temp of the hot lid.
Post Doctoral Fellow

I would be able to buy more of their products and have more staff to run experiments.
Principal Investigator

I would buy something better from a different company. Bio-Rad products (real-time PCR/thermocycler) fail too often.
Post Doctoral Fellow

I would definitely utilize this equipment to its full capacity. I have not fully utilized the multiplexing capabilities of the real-time machines because of the time and money that would be required for optimizing the conditions and validating the assays. This would allow me to take a very in-depth look at the cytokine expression in the very small lymph nodes of my mice. Ultimately the information gained would help vaccine design.
Post Doctoral Fellow

I would like to see if they are any better.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I would like to upgrade my instrumentation with something that works faster and is easier for my technician to work, so I don't have to!
Professor/Teacher

I would purchase the $130,000 Genome Lab GeXP from Beckman Coulter plus robotics because it's capable of doing genetic analysis and gene expression. Throughput and consistency would hopefully improve -- but, I would also move my lab, my techs, my family and dog to that private island -- not necessarily in that order!
Principal Investigator

I would upgrade my current instrumentation.
Principal Investigator

I would waste the money on more specialized pieces of equipment that get the answers more directly rather than on multi-use equipment that serve to complete the grant work and aide in initiating new grant directions.
Staff Scientist

I'd buy a newer instrument as my old RT-PCR machine is outdated and not readily upgradeable.
Principal Investigator

I'd use a whole lot more.
Professor/Teacher

It has a reasonably good price/quality ratio, and we are familiar with Bio-Rad instruments.
Principal Investigator

It's slower, has less sophisticated software, and is less amenable to higher throughput than some higher priced competition. It's just good enough in its price range.
Post Doctoral Fellow

That's a good one to ask. I would buy a 7500 Fast Real-Time PCR System from ABI. I feel like the sensitivity is far greater with this machine and software interface is very useful in analyzing the data. In my opinion data analysis is the key for the gene expression experiments. Any product that offers a robust analysis module will be the winner. Give me all the possibilities to work with my data, don't forget to make it easy. For example: "Apple made ther user Interface easy on their iPods which became a huge success." This would be my choice, if I had a chance to buy one.
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

There are products from other companies with more versatility and capabilities than the Bio-Rad product we have. Bio-Rad was the affordable solution for our lab, but we frequently "window shop" in catalogs of companies with higher end instruments.
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

To increase the analytical capacity of the laboratory at a relatively affordable cost.
Staff Scientist

Would use another supplier.
Principal Investigator

Bio-Rad Laboratories - No

After I purchased my own island so I could continue my research there, the only change I might make is to update the equipment I already have from Bio-Rad (i.e. a new PCR machine that could accommodate more samples). I am happy with Bio-Rad products/equipment and with the sales reps that I have dealt with over the years, so I'd continue to do business with them (provided that they could deliver to my island, of course).
Staff Scientist

Because Bio-Rad is as good as any other company.
Principal Investigator

Because it works very well for what we do -- and "if it ain't broke -- don't fix it."
Staff Scientist

Bio-Rad has been a tried and true company and instrumentation source. I would definitely stay with them. But then why would I even be at work?!! I think I could find a way through research and development to conduct my research from the private island! That is if I could find the time between sailing and martinis!
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

Bio-Rad is a leader and known for its quality. The gel electrophoresis apparatus we bought 10 years ago still works fine, so do the power supplies and other equipment. Wow! 2.5 million, I don't want that much, even 1/5th of that would do! I have some ideas for unique instrumentation for the Bio-Rad people. Please do get in touch with me, I can certainly cut a deal.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I have been using instrumentation for genomic analysis for more than 13 years without a problem. Why would I not stick to it?
Post Doctoral Fellow

I use another lab's equipment. Even if I become filthy rich... why should I buy my own if I can borrow someone else's?
Post Doctoral Fellow

I will buy from ABI. They make cutting edge instruments that I need to expand my research. I have all the instruments that I need from Bio-Rad. They are excellent quality and serve one for a long time.
Professor/Teacher

I work at the NIH. I already live the scientific researcher's version of a life of leisure and luxury!
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

I would still use Bio-Rad products, but I'd conduct research on my own private island, and hire someone to do it for me and report weekly…
Laboratory Technician

If I were the PI… I could use that money to buy something else for the lab. Bio-Rad Lab instrument serves best its purpose.
Post Doctoral Fellow

If it's working, don't fix it.
Principal Investigator

It's the best product. Their products always work, are reasonably priced, and they have great tech support.
Professor/Teacher

Lack of support.
Staff Scientist

One of the things that most impresses me about Bio-Rad is their Technical Support service; they are easy to reach, approachable, and very responsive and helpful. Additionally, Bio-Rad's instrumentation and software are well thought out and user friendly. The Bio-Rad website is easy to use and I absolutely LOVE the fact that they recycle styrofoam shipping boxes. For all of these reasons, I will choose Bio-Rad over the competition every time.
Post Doctoral Fellow

Since I am a "dedicated scientist," I would use my money in a more cost effective way on the instrumentation that have similar/same function. Bio-Rad products are usually overpriced. Why should I spend more money on instrumentation without any significant/obvious technical/research gain but a brand name?
Staff Scientist

They have tried and true instrumentation that suits my needs currently. I would just buy more of it!
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

They make good products of high quality. Although I might look to another real-time PCR machine within their line.
Professor/Teacher

Too busy.
Staff Scientist

We already have it and it works just fine… what reason would I have for buying a different one… if it ain't broke, don't fix it!
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

We already have what we need for our current projects. An HPLC system might be nice for some protein work in the future, however, I still like that private island idea.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

With the money available I would purchase the best quality products available for my research. This may or may not include purchasing some more Bio-Rad instrumentation if I required some. I have always had tremendous success with Bio-Rad products and have found them to be long-lasting. So the laboratory may already have all the Bio-Rad instrument support it needs. I would prefer to use some of the money to provide salaries for more researchers to use the Instruments in the laboratory. If, however, I did want to expand the spectrum of my research I might purchase some new Bio-Rad instruments if I felt they were required to venture into a new area of research for the laboratory.
Post Doctoral Fellow

Corbett Research - Yes

Yes, but I would simply buy the larger, higher capacity versions of products I already have. These would be complete overkill, of course, but fun to show off to colleagues.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

Corbett Research - No

Corbett is the easiest to use in my experience thus far. I have used Applied Biosystems and Bio-Rad real time PCR machines, and they never produce the quick results I get from Corbett.
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

I am familiar with it.
Professor/Teacher

It is clearly the best value on the market for our present purposes. With my lottery winnings, I might add a couple of new machines from Corbett to alleviate the run queue we have now with only one machine and open up a few new research projects.
Professor/Teacher

It is one of the best instruments I have ever used. Its software is very user friendly and very easy to use... if I have authority and the money and plan to continue my research, then I would prefer to buy a few more of their instruments.
Post Doctoral Fellow

GE Healthcare - Yes

A long time ago, we were buying reagents and equipment from different sources. They worked great, however, some of them caused us serious problems. Reagents purchased from different companies had different purity and could be used for different applications. Some equipment was incompatible. People who used to work on one platform could hardly switch to another. Fortunately, the market has changed a few years ago. Companies began merging. People with different background were encouraged to work together and they developed a few universal standards. This made the life of researchers, like myself, much easier. Speaking of myself, I'd like to standardize my data, and it is easier to do if the lab uses few or even one brand. It would be simpler to find the right people for the lab, set up training for them, and compare their data even if the data were obtained from different sources and by different methods. A few companies, including GE Healthcare came very close to becoming the only supplier for some labs like ours. I consider the slogan "one brand- one standard" as the next strategic goal of our research plan.
Staff Scientist

Depends on how good the instrument is.
Staff Scientist

Depends on the situation.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

First of all, it's unrealistic to think that you can retire on 2.5 million. Not in this day and age. I think I would spend the money paying salaries for good people. It's not the instrumentation that makes a lab, it's the people who run them.
Post Doctoral Fellow

I could really see myself being a spokesperson or an advocate for GE Healthcare for their line of products on 'Instrumentation Analysis,' which are great product lines yet are a little more expensive, and by being a spokesperson for them, I could elevate its usage by many other companies to make the unit price more affordable through increased volume of sales! It would be a 'win-win' scenario for GE Healthcare as well as user companies!
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I would now WebEx conference most of my meetings (unless there was lunch) and direct experiments from afar. While I would continue to "use" GE healthcare instruments, I might not actually see or touch them. Perhaps every once in awhile place a purchase req. for more instruments, but rarely use them myself after the install training.
Staff Scientist

Just for certain items of instrumentation that the company is really good at.
Department Head

Of course, but I would spend my personal money to buy GE equipment for personal use. I would start by buying a scanner to monitor my brain during research!
Principal Investigator

Their line of products can provide new avenues of research that could potentially open a new therapy for many human diseases. Some of the diseases are causing substantial suffering to the daily life of my family. With that money, I will be able to purchase equipment that I was never able to think of and pursue the most innovative ideas.
Principal Investigator

GE Healthcare - No

Because GE offers better instrumentation, better support and better deals. Now that I have 2.5 million dollars I can bargain on advanced instrumentation.
Post Doctoral Fellow

Because I always buy what I believe to be the best instrumentation for my group -- they deserve it!
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

For the most part, we buy the products from GE Healthcare -- and all other companies for that matter -- because we have adapted our protocols around them and because they work for the experiments we need to do. The products that we use aren't the cheapest on the market, nor are they the most expensive.
Post Doctoral Fellow

I am very satisfied with this product.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I have machines in my lab which are being used continuously. So the current use probably would not change. However, I can buy new and better machines if so required. But I think lottery money should not be spent like that.
Post Doctoral Fellow

I will keep using it.
Post Doctoral Fellow

I would never use my personal money to purchase anything for research purposes. But if my lab budget and lab space was unlimited, then I would certainly splurge on more GE stuff.
Principal Investigator

It's about the quality of the research. It does not matter that "we bring good things to life" only to have them become useless. It needs to be focused on what is needed.
Staff Scientist

There has not been much advertisement from GE Healthcare about their genomic analysis products. I would more than likely spend my money on Bio-Rad's and Invitrogen's products for genomic analysis if I was interested in saving money. However, if I wanted to spend and get the best instruments and products, I would probably buy Stratagene or ABI.
Laboratory Technician

There will be no point in changing the instrumentation if the desired result is obtained, the extra money of the jackpot can be used for some other research projects.
Post Doctoral Fellow

Very tough decision, but since we are role playing that I am a dedicated scientist, I would use the jackpot winnings to set up a private foundation and hire the best scientists who would determine the materials and equipment to conduct research.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

Illumina - Yes

I might try, in the first case just for the academic interest, other platforms/applications (i.e. epigenetics, CGH, and SNP -- or whole genome sequencing) from Illumina not currently included as part of my research projects.
Post Doctoral Fellow

I would "burn" a lot of the money on buying (linkage, GWA and expression) chips from Illumina to analyze the many samples already in the freezer waiting for such money to find genes involved in personality, depression, alcoholism, intelligence, as well as ataxia, deafness and myopathy.
Principal Investigator

I would buy the high end instruments and not worry about associated reagent costs as much!
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I would genotype all the employees in my group, correlate the productivity with the genotype, and use the productive genotype as a criterion in future hiring into my group!
Principal Investigator

I would try experiments that I right now cannot afford.
Professor/Teacher

I'd bring it to the island with me to analyze the genomes of the most colorful reef fish.
Principal Investigator

More genotypes, more Type I errors, more publications!
Principal Investigator

Reliability.
Post Doctoral Fellow

This can drastically change the input in genomic analysis and for a long time use in research can give a better satisfaction than sitting idle in a beach.
Staff Scientist

Would have more money to run chips.
Principal Investigator

Would like to have limitless access to Illumina's latest SNP chip and the instruments to utilize them.
Principal Investigator

Yes, I could afford two machines, dedicated technicians to run them, and the cost of the runs. I'd be dreaming up new large-scale sequencing experiments every day instead of waiting in a queue to do each $8,000 experiment.
Post Doctoral Fellow

Illumina - No

Because I would still get that work funded from other sources...
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

Because this use of Illumina instruments still best serves my ongoing projects.
Principal Investigator

First of all, I would retire. But if that is not an option, I would still keep the money for my family and continue to raise grant money to purchase Illumina products, as I do now.
Principal Investigator

I see Illumina as the best platform for SNPs but I do mostly expression work (for which I see Affy as best).
Principal Investigator

I would continue to use Illumina products! They're high quality products and provide me results that enable me to continue my research.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I would use the money to pay my salary, since federal grant funding is impossible right now.
Professor/Teacher

I'm happy with the results of my investigation using Illumina.
IS Manager/Specialist

It is cheap, reliable and innovative... No way I am changing that... come what may.
Post Doctoral Fellow

It is the best. I have no issues putting money into a company with the interest of continuing the advancement of genomic research technologies.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

It is the only company that produces the mouse linkage panel that I am using.
Staff Scientist

It would cost too much to hire more employees and train them on the instruments. The computer storage for data from their machines would use most of the 2.5 million quickly.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

Right now it is the leader in genomic technologies and their performance and responsiveness is the best in the industry.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

Their assays provide a big bang for the buck!
Principal Investigator

Very happy with Illumina.
Principal Investigator

Works well.
Post Doctoral Fellow

Molecular Devices - Yes

Because I could afford something fancier.
Laboratory Technician

Because I would purchase a similar instrument from each of Molecular Devices' competitors, so I could try them all and decide which instrument worked best for a particular task.
Staff Scientist

I will still purchase equipment from MDC/MDS, but this time I would not need to spend a lot of negotiation on prices!
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I would take more time to investigate and test the instrumentation they offer, which is quite modern in appearance and useful for many applications. The problem has been the expense of their instruments, and the fact that our purchasing people look at every order and try to spread the instrument money around to the best value. Having millions would certainly allow me to buy whatever I requested. Perhaps the recent merger of MDS will help their company focus more on getting products and sales representatives/technical specialists in the field. They are not seen very often.
Staff Scientist

Sequencing as a means of studying genomes or gene expression has become the newest and most efficient method. Hybridizing microarrays is becoming secondary in our laboratory to sequencing applications.
Laboratory Technician

There are so many good instruments and each of them has its specific features.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

Molecular Devices - No

2.5 million is not a lot of money to run a lab and a gnotobiotic pig facility for my research.
Professor/Teacher

Getting the data I want, I don't need another instrument.
Principal Investigator

I already do what I like to do.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

I currently use MD instruments and will keep using them. I would spend my millions buying instruments that I don't currently own. Well, I guess if I can have the Axon scanner installed on my new Porsche then that could be considered a MDS instrument purchase.
Principal Investigator

I have been happy with the performance in the past.
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

I have the equipment but I need the skilled people to run the equipment.
Principal Investigator

Molecular Devices products have unique capabilities as compared with their competitors. I would not want to do without their instrumentation.
Staff Scientist

No, but I would expect a blinged-out, rhinestone-encrusted version of the machine. And, if word got out about my new-found wealth, I would want some kind of security personnel to protect me from all the sales reps from other companies that would come sniffing round my lab.
Professor/Teacher

Reliability, usability, and performance are primary factors and cost is secondary. As a researcher in the Boston area, I have always been able to find instrumentation locally if it can't be purchased due to budget constraints.
Staff Scientist

This basic piece of equipment is perfectly well-suited for a laboratory. Simple and sturdy, there would be no reason (and no gain in productivity, etc.) to change it.
Post Doctoral Fellow

Stratagene - Yes

Depending on demand.
Post Doctoral Fellow

First, 2.5 million would only fund about 10 years of research if one is conservative. Therefore, I would stick with Stratagene as it is the best product on the market for our work and in terms of price.
Principal Investigator

I would buy a top of the line Applied Biosystems machine with robotics and ability to run microfluidics cards.
Staff Scientist

I would buy more products from them.
Professor/Teacher

I would really retire to my own private island to live a life of leisure and luxury, but I would feel sorry for my students that would be jobless without warning. So, this is my alternative plan: salaries are already covered by grants, but we need supplies to keep the research going. I would spend ~50,000 in the whole list of Stratagene antibodies (against transcription factors, signaling molecules, receptors, kinases, phosphatases, cancer-related molecules, EVERYTHING) and ask my students to go through the list, testing every single antibody against each of the protein-interacting partners of the hundreds of proteins they have cloned. Thus, 1) once or twice a year something interesting will be found by chance, producing the adequate flow of papers, 2) I don't need to bother thinking about relevant scientific hypothesis, 3) I can buy my own private island with the $2.45 remaining millions and show up at the lab every now and then, and 3) still live a life of leisure and luxury.
Professor/Teacher

I would use the money to devise homemade instrumentation from my secret backwoods lair (also courtesy of the lottery). Once these had all failed, I would change equipment purchasing tactics by purchasing the platforms with the most long-term reliability and also the best reputation for customer service and technical support.
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

I'd go in for the Corbett rotor gene that provides the melt resolution that I need sometimes. Though the real reason I would get it is that I then can buy the robot that is available with it that will do all the pipetting and set up for me.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

If it is in good quality, why not!
Principal Investigator

It is a very fine company.
Staff Scientist

Other machines are more sensitive to lower amounts of cDNA it seems.
Laboratory Technician

Our purchase of the Stratagene instrumentation was based on cost considerations at the time. Given that $2.5 million in winnings, we could purchase an instrument from another manufacturer and still have lots left over to live on that private island!
Staff Scientist

They have very cool looking instruments and make a real statement about design, so my use of their products would increase. Their stuff also works very well, they have very good customer support, and the reagents are top notch as well.
Lab Director/Supervisor/Coordinator

Thus far Stratagene is satisfying all our needs.
IS Manager/Specialist

Stratagene - No

Being an "old timer" (in my 40's), I don't change much unless I have to. If I find something that works, I stick with it.
Professor/Teacher

I am familiar with it and I will keep using it.
Professor/Teacher

I am so familiar with the instrumentation and software, why change?
Staff Scientist

I have other vendors which I prefer.
Staff Scientist

I have used and trusted Stratagene products for many years and feel that Stratagene instrumentation and other products produce reliable, consistent results. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
Quality Assurance/Quality Control

I would choose the most advanced instrument on the market. Stratagene has not made any striking innovations in this sort of instrumentation .
Staff Scientist

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Post Doctoral Fellow

It works for me!
Professor/Teacher

It works.
Principal Investigator

No change, but I would buy a mini-prep machine!!
Principal Investigator

Not familiar with it that much.
Professor/Teacher

Stratagene already is an innovator and one that is trusted/respected. If anything I would be less likely to shop around for equivalent platforms.
Laboratory Technician

Stratagene's Robocycler is the most versatile workhorse in the laboratory. Bypassing the ramping of other one block PCR machines, the Robocycler removes the guesswork and opens up possibilities. With my 2.5M, I would buy more Robocyclers!
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

The instruments we use from Stratagene are basic PCR machines. It would be a waste of money to buy new machines. I would prefer to use the money to invest in either new technology (possibly from Stratagene or elsewhere) or consumables.
Graduate Student/Research Assistant

They make high quality products!
Purchasing Agent/Buyer