If you need to replace your older panels on Martin Logan speakers.You will get a sticker shock.They have tripled their price.Really sad.This will drive the price of resale down.Bad move on ML part.
All this discussion and no mention of how much these panels cost to replace. If they were $100, then $300 is not too bad. If they were $1000, then $3000 seems a bit much. If they need to be replaced often and the price seems too high, then their value will drop. Simple as that.

What does politics have to do with it? I agree with the post that said the consumer will ultimately decide if this was a good move by ML.
I am surprised that a discussion about speaker panels turned into a presidential debate.
Why does the OP think Martin Logan really cares about the secondary, or "resale" market? I buy used all the time and only want fully functional gear but I never really think, well if this blows up what's it going to cost me? OTOH I try to buy reliable gear. The whole repair process sucks not just the cost. I will repreat the question posed above. Do the panels usually wear out? I still use my Father's JBLs from 1959, they work fine but might need "remagnetizing."
The cost of repairs outside of the warranty is usually pretty expensive. That is this industry's normal and customary policy. Fortunately I have not had expensive repairs outside of warranty except for 2 CD players which had a transport failures, I had no option but to toss them. They were relatively inexpensive to begin with and the repairs would have cost more than they were worth.
@Onhwy61, I am not saying they should just go out of business. I was just point out the fact that once it went mainstream, like selling at Best Buys, their focus had changed. It was probably the right decision for the business but it wasn't a good change for us, the audiophiles.
@Mateored(et al) This is just a History lesson. I am posting it to all regardless of party . I bet I know who won't read it -- those afraid of the truth. It is history and nothing can change it.
But Obama is trying, by campaigning on "how bad the debt was that he inherited!"
The day the Democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was actually January 3rd 2007, the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress.

The Democratic Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.

For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this:
January 3rd, 2007, the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress:
The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
The Unemployment rate was 4.6%
George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB CREATION!
Remember that day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.
The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?
THANK YOU DEMOCRATS (especially Barney ) for taking us from 13,000 DOW, 3.5 GDP and 4.6% this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES!
(BTW: Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie -starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy). Barney blocked it and called it a "Chicken Little Philosophy" (and the sky did fall!)
And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA
And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie?
OBAMA and the Democrat Congress, especially BARNEY!!!!
So when someone tries to blame Bush...
I'm done(thank you)!

One more try: PLEASE, take your political debates elsewhere. This is an audio forum.

The unanswered questions of the moment are: 1) what was the price of a Martin Logan replacement panel; and 2) what is it now?