Yes, right now if you want your design to be produced more quickly, it's probably best to go with DSA. Or through GMK, but that usually involves a
looong order time in order to reach MOQ even now that it's lower than it used to be.
Gateron and JTK have full queues, so the wait with them will most likely be similar to SA profile. Devlin is in discussions with UKKeycaps, but apparently things are moving very slowly, so they're not yet an option either. I really hope they do get their stuff in order, though, since I think their "Q" profile is nicer than DSA and would suit most of the same use cases.
Anyhow, the fully utilised SA profile tooling makes a lot of the points in this thread moot for the time that they're so busy. They don't have time to do more runs for older sets. What they are trying to do, though, is to add extra sets to the current production run if the designer gives permission, which they will then put up for sale on the store. It's a lot easier to produce a few extra sets while the tooling is set up for it than to set it up for the set in between other designs being run.
For some sets this is a good option, since it caters to those who "missed" the main GB and maybe this is all that's needed. I think that if the number of extras is in direct proportion to the number of orders (percentage-based), it could work out well for all parties.
And with the changes to the license agreement, I think more designers will be willing to allow SP to do this.
The way I see it, SP has two options, depending on how interested they are in "cutting out the middle man" and essentially running GB's directly on their site. The way I see it, with the current version they're aiming for some kind of half-arsed middle ground, which just won't work.
If they fully commit to it, they could make it the best GB system with lowest prices, fastest turnaround time and best long term set availability. But it will require big changes and a lot of work. It still won't generate the numbers MD does, though, so sets will probably still end up being more "limited edition" there, contrary to the "always available" promise that their concept seems to offer.
On the other hand, they could just drop the whole submissions, voting / IC section and let things run the way they do, with external GB systems and the designer decides about running extras which they put up on their store.
Either way they go, if they happen to have some downtime coming up for their tooling, they could put up a "make more of this set" poll for sets where the designer has agreed to let them make more, so they make more of whatever the community want most.
Honestly, though.. I think running sets just once without extras is best, but that's because I have more of a designer and collector mentality. You design a special set based on a particular theme, people who participate in the collaborative IC process help improve the design until you have something really nice, that appeals to many people. Then you allow as many people to order it that want it, you make it and send it out and.. that's it. Move on to the next design. There are more designs coming all the time and designer's don't like to get stuck with managing an "old" design. As an example, during the time it's taken to develop Classic Space so far, I've come up with concepts for three more great sets - actually five if you include the font fundraiser kit and unique test set design, and their "greatness" is of course very subjective
-, which should appeal to similar people.
That also brings up another unexpected thought.
I'd be okay with SP making more of some of my designs, but not others... So I'd be happy to sign the license for some, but not all my sets. The ones I don't want to license are more limited edition / special / collector's type of designs with a lot of very custom elements, though, so the appeal will be more limited, too.
Another interesting point is that Classic Space will be using a different finish on the majority of caps (gloss) and completely new legend molds, which may allow it to run more in parallel with other SA sets since they're using different molds, but I've yet to confirm this with SP. It's a fair way off, anyway, with the font initiative needing to be completed first.
Many designers aren't aware of all the very interesting capabilities SP has for some of their profiles and I'm compiling a document detailing these. Even the profile information PDF's that they have up on their site are out of date and contain a number of incorrect items of information. Along with my legend specifications document, that should provide designers with a better starting point than currently and should reduce the number of both uninformed designs going up as IC's and irritating, repetitive requests from prospective designers to Melissa. I'd like to extend the documents to include GMK, JTK, BSP, Devlin and Gateron capabilities and specifications, too, but I'm starting with SP since I have an active communication channel with them.