professore July 26, 2013 08:15 AM Yes, an excellent up-date to the folding boats used by UK commandos in WW2. Rehab July 26, 2013 09:58 AM There are small inflatable boats for $1,000 that are 10 times safer not to mention sea worthy. Would anyone really let their kids on the water in this? Not eye eye Captain. Dave B13 July 26, 2013 11:02 AM Very similar boat has been around for decades. I've seen several used as tenders, so those have been real world useful. I've no idea is one brand is better than the other, both should be looked at if interested in either one. See also: http://www.porta-bote.com BigGoofyGuy July 26, 2013 11:41 AM I think it is neat since it looks sturdier than most foldable boats that I have read about. I think it is neat that it can be put together by two (or one?) in about a minute. jerryd July 26, 2013 02:02 PM I nice revival done many times though easily done for $300 in plywood/epoxy.A good material selection for a lightweight but still strong and considering that, the price isn't bad.I'd bet it would take real people 10 minutes to put together. Fritz Menzel July 26, 2013 03:00 PM @BigWarpGuy: One of the photo captions says one person can assemble it in three minutes, which is still pretty quick. This boat seems to be far better engineered with far better materials than all the previous foldable boats that commenters are mentioning. Very impressive. Slowburn July 26, 2013 05:01 PM I'll take a Zodiac. Jim Sadler July 27, 2013 05:10 AM Like many modern products the price is the spoil point. I realize that quality plastics can be quite expensive but still in all this boat at $500. would be attractive. At $4,000 only defective people would snap it up. These days people want items that require next to zero maintenance and are still good twenty or thirty years into daily use. This is the same nonsense that we see in the auto and motorcycle industries. Companies seek huge sales prices on products and it drowns the industry. It's time to produce real goods and stop with the nonsense. Bert Mert August 10, 2013 12:46 AM at over $4,000 a pop you've got to be dreaming I think i''ll stick to my tinny Calson October 31, 2013 02:38 PM No different in design than the 40 year old Porta-bote which costs half as much. The 66 lb. limitation on the engine weight means a limit of 6 HP as that is the maximum output available for engines under that weight. Hull deflection results in power loss so this type of boat will be slower with the 6 HP motor than a rigid aluminum boat of the same size.