You're not an idiot for using a TM240, you're an idiot for not having a backup plan when one fails.
The problem in my particular case is that the backup plans almost always take too long. This is why I got a machine in house. The parts are generally built on demand and the schedules are tight and cannot be negotiated since they are tied to other immovable schedules up the food chain. The problem is a whole gaggle of smaller problems that do not have a concrete answer.
On something like a TM240, it can throw down 0805's super fast but will fail on the .4mm parts, the 56mm tape parts, heavy inductors, etc. To me, it could only be good for simple stuff even if the reliability was great.
The selling point on my Quad was that it is a long proven design that can run 24hrs a day if needed. In my case, probably never but it says a lot for the reliability. Any part can be fed by any method and there are a lot of them. Tapes, strips, trays, etc. I can have about 120 different parts setup at a time which means that I can do all my boards including a couple of prototypes without any changes to the machine setup.
All parts are no more than a day away, although they are not cheap. There are lots of nozzle choices.
This is our main goal. To find what people like rx8pilot (our target audience) need in a machine. Not to single you out rx8pilot but when looking at the machine what do you need that isn't currently there.
To be honest, I have been speaking in concepts only because just got my old Quad up and running. At the moment, not in the market unless the Quad explodes. If I was looking, I would hope for.....
>1000cph
walk-away reliability
.4mm pitch (all day long)
0201
reasonably easy setup changes - adding parts, trays, etc.
finely adjustable Z - which has been very important in my application with tall caps, inductors next to 0402's
global and local fiducial support
ability to take panels and odd shape routed PCB's
Ease of use appropriate for a modestly skilled employee to setup and operate. (needing a super-star engineer to operate/monitor is no good)
While I understand it is low-cost, I have learned over the years that the acquisition cost is many times the smallest number in the total cost equation. All of my business endeavors have been equipment intensive and in the 7 figure cost range. In all the cases, labor needed to keep them busy over the useful life was much more that the purchase price. Now I look very closely at what it will cost to operate in both direct and indirect costs. The Quad is easy enough and reliable enough that I do not have a dedicate person, and probably wont for a while. It is too easy (although it was a major pain to get it going).