WILSON AUDIO/ cost vs. value

Holleneck - I also thought the show was silly. You are right that it could have been about farm equipment and it probably was the following week. It could have been about the upcoming fireworks display or the Prom 2 weeks ago. It was a poorly executed puff piece put on by a local news show. Dave probably helped to write the script, telling the emcee dude what questions to ask. For a company that markets itself to the rich and famous, it was embarrassingly provincial. Dave came across to me like Donald Trump.
And to stay on point, I don't think there is any real justification for speakers to cost so much. Hence, I do not see them as a good value. I would say the same about a $1000 bottle of wine. It is just so far beyond the point of diminishing returns that it cannot be commensurately better than other options available for a fraction of the cost.
Unlike some others, I do not feel a crime is being committed in the sale of these items though I would not choose them at one tenth of the price. Timex is just as good as Rolex. And they're both better than my ex.

If we truly want to discuss his margins, we need to know what salary David Wilson is paying himself, his wife & what his employee payroll is. His advertising budget is enourmous as well. Also, he can do some innovative bookkeeping to keep the profit elsewhere. He could have 2 separate companies selling from 1 to the other and the profit is divided. All this is guessing but possible.

Now discussing his advertising. I bet there is a firm involved. If you see his advertising is thematic. Many different ads with different information concepts seeking to differentiate Wilson from other speakers. The advertising campaign might have a few poorly chosen examples, but this is all from the advertising firm.

On to Dave Wilson's salary. For a multi million $ company I am sure he is allowed to pay himself a huge salary & why not. I believe he pays his staff very well, but to be fair he should as he probably is sharing his growth.

I am also guessing that he manufacturers more of the product in house than many other speaker manufacturers. Other manufacturers probably farm out a lot of their production including cabinet work. Others manufacturers might not have a marketing department, customer service dept. or a quality control dept.

Holleneck: "I am sure he never thought for a minute it would be shown on the internet and be discussed by some nuckleheads like us"
Maybe you are right on this one. But I still stand by my assertion that the program was silly. Nothing more to say.

Now discussing his advertising. I bet there is a firm
involved.

Of course he has an ad agency. I'm sure most
high end companies doing remotely near his volume of sales have ad agencies.
If not, they end up with ineffective, ugly crap.

I really don't understand the point of the ad at all. Why advertise something that cannot be proven nor verified by any means, and something that you will not even provide your own details to back up your claim? To me this is just irresponsible advertising period. My opinion on this has nothing to do with the speakers themeselves...

Furthermore, the profit margin is really misleading. On a cost basis let's say they were right. But the more speakers or revenue you generate via market share etc, you achieve economies of scale and bring down the fixed cost burden such as depreciation etc as well some share variable costs such as ads, back office etc. B&W can do this. On the other hand one of the key reasons some smaller or new equip makers have a large cost plus margin but low overall margin, indeed many are likely to be loss making.

At the end of the day none of this matters. Why does profit magins matter to us consumers? We only are concerned with quality of the product and affordability in the end. No one would purchase a product on the basis of an guess on the mfr's profit margin.

Overall I find the ad, quite insulting.