Stryker Or Storz

Careful about generalizing. I know Stryker reps that are fairly passive guys and not the stallion that you might be describing. Nice guys who work and work hard, but no hurricanses and sometimes that is a good thing because a lot of surgeons don't like over agressive type As

 

Stryker's lights and booms are just older Berchtold generation designs. They recently exited the surgical table business and who's to say they will be able to survive the lights and booms business. Steris, Skytron and Berchtold each share a third of the lights and booms business. Stryker communications....they will turnover it should just be a matter of time. They are a public company and there is just not enough dollars to go around to Stryker for their communications business.

 

Your right most surgeons don't like aggressive reps but publicly traded companies know only to hire the aggressive reps because that's what managers are trained to do....

 

if you can sell, you can sell, doesnt matter who you represent....
but i will say stryker is a revolving door...they pay appropriately for the stress though.

 

Re: You sales people dont know shit about video technology

Thanks for straightening my shit out. If I need to get a new flat screen from Best Buy, i'll certainly call you first. Thanks again.

 

Storz = If you are professional, have integrity, ability to sell and desire a longer term employment opportunity

Stryker = If you like steroids, aggressive selling, ability to sell but want to move on in a few years

 

what about richard wolf and Viking

 

I do care about his comment. perhaps your are the fool, other people's opinion is always valuable for those who care and that's one of the reason to look into forums such as this. Were an international point of view can be share. Wisdom and understanding..

 

this is an objective comparison of Storz, Stryker, Olympus, and Richard Wolf surgical video systems, however, the systems here are not the latest models that each has but it is still a great reference.

http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=12&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCAQFjABOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebme.co.uk%2Fforums%2Fubbthreads.php%2Fubb%2Fdownload%2FNumber%2F431%2Ffilename%2FHealth%2520Devices%2520Camera%2520Comparison%2520Feb%25202010.pdf&ei=B9PiVLiaHoPs8AXBxoKoBg&usg=AFQjCNHeL6mdtOLrqRfg83f3EQ2jw3kKjg&sig2=7V2WpJCYOUQ0-uD--xW9aA&bvm=bv.85970519,d.dGc

 

Used both Stryker and Storz.
In short Stryker is much better in all aspects.

 

Stryker's trick in showing you the illusion of its image being a good image is that they increase the contrast, that gives you a nice first impression once you attend the OR finding the stryker's screen VERY bright. But here comes the problem.... When you get long cases, the contrast will kill your eyes and gives you a sever headache, and attempting to decrease contrast then (RIP Image quality). Main reason why most skilled doctor are comfortable with storz. Because they uses real full HD rather then illusions of HD. Besides now we are in 2k15 Image 1 SPIES rocks as helll...

 

Who dominates Miami?

 

You are kidding right.
10 years to come out with a new system and Spies is what is produced.
I'm not sure it's image is even better than image 1.

We consistently hear Stryker, Olympus and now Arthrex offers better imaging, not to mention ICG and 4K.
Yeah, but SPIES rocks!!!

 

you have a link from 2010?????

 

I'd go to Stryker because they'll end up buying Storz fairly soon.

 

Olympus BABY !!!!!