I had one and had it mounted but didn't like how small the tube in on them. I ended up sending it back and getting an eotech. To each their own though. I wanted a bigger field of view and faster ability to acquire a target so i went with an eotech.
Lots of users seem to like them on TOS etc. Nice value for the money.
IIRC it came out when Lucid was intro'd last year it, Vortex, another budget optic, Eotech, and Aimpoint ALL have components made in the same Chinese plant. You can say the same about tires too - both the great ones and economy rubber leave the same plant dock to sell here.
It's still all about getting what you pay for - A Korean shoe factory shipping Nikes might make something for a 'Mart on the next line.
Even a single Brand maker does it: Seiko also markets Pulsar and Lorus.
There's also the value for the dollar - the Lorus will tell time, but a Seiko will tell others about you. Frankly, the $200 red dots these days are head and shoulders above the $200 Aimpoint of 1979. I know, I still have one, no turret adjustments, 8 hour battery life.
Don't let it go too far, what a military grade optic does is not reflect the red dot in front for the enemy to see, and Aimpoint does get that crazy battery life. For a recreational gun, living on a budget, the $200 red dots do very well indeed.
One thing to consider is whether the mount is integral, some complain integrated mounts are cheap - and they sure are, another $65-100 for the mount alone is saved. The cost on the rail is what counts after all is said and done. NOTE: The Aimpoint PRO comes WITH a mount for $400 - they are responding to the market and trying to accommodate more frugal shooters. That means they perceive a lot of market pressure by the $200 red dots. It also means the AR market is so big, a universal gun approach is a detractor. People want AR optics, not an Anything optic they could have put on a lever or shotgun.
The whole point to a red dot is fast target acquisition, seeing it in the optic and putting the dot on to pull the trigger with no lining up sight posts or calculating holdover. To a degree, bigger lenses are better, until weight becomes an issue, what type reticle can be chosen (some have multiple reticles or different colors,) power source - easy AA or AAA, or more expensive Lithiums, which also influences the overall shape. Repeatability of return to zero by squaring the turrets around the target, what MOA adjustment they are, how easy to use the turrets or are they snagmasters, vapor proofing in inclement weather, and parallax. What type mounting clamps, knobs, and overall quality it appears to have factor in, too.
Whole bunch of stuff, and what we seem to get is often how cool it is - not how good. That's the problem with asking other non professional users with no insight into what makes optics work. They tend to take what is .gov issue as a minimum, and don't recognize all the institutional compromises and requirements they simply don't need.
If that's true, the only two things we could use to get around with would be HMMV's or LPC's (Leather Personnel Carriers, ie, boots,) neither of which meet my needs at all. So much for military specs.