WILSON AUDIO/ cost vs. value

the sophia 2 just maybe the best deal in all of audio, if i ever purchase a wilson product, it will be a pair of those.

Parts only make up a limited percentage of any product cost, as a person involved in manufacturing, I can tell you, there is Industrial design cost, which can be in the six figure range, product design costs, can also be in the six figure range, prototyping/ material selection costs, expert assemble and handling costs (cabinet makers), factory cost (taxes, lights, heat, air condition, water), then there is "after" costs, like liability insurance, health insurance, shipping, warranty costs, marketing, shows, future research and development, damages and so many other small stuff it would make your head spin.

Now all this investment has to be made back, plus the cost of parts.

How can we even begin to point fingers at Wilson, I mean, does your wife have diamonds, gold, how about art work, designer cloths, handbags, shoes, watches, do you eat in any fine restaurant, it is a class thing I am afraid, the only reason we think $27K or $250K is over the curve, is because to you and I it is, but to many it's nothing, so therefore to those that can afford these speakers it's worth every penny.

I am not sure if Wilson is right in what he says in the ad (unless we see his books and every other speaker manufacturers) but I do understand what he's trying to say.

There seems to be a lot of contention about Wilson products, price, size, weight, sound, color...everyone seems to have an opinion.

In my life I have found Cost vs. Value is generally in the depth of my wallet.

A couple of examples...

I use to think that Mobile Fidelity recordings were way too much money and not a good financial value, until years later when my income level increased to the point of having disposable cash, now I am sorry I did not purchase the complete catalog as they were released. If I had of they would now be Value vs. Cost (what an investment that would have been)

Or...in my younger years Steak and Lobster was way over rated and quite frankly not worth the expense, hamburgers and fries were the way to go.
Steak and Hamburger come from the same source, so why such a discrepancy, or disparity in price, as they are both beef. It takes more work and time to produce hamburger than steak so why is steak more expensive? I now think steak is expensive but not over rated as I can now afford it on a regular basis.

Is it right to assume Cost vs. Value is a derivative of income, and does it sway or have a bearing on a persons opinions toward a product?

How many of the posters on this thread actually own, or have owned, WIlson products?

Out of the people who have, what do you feel about the cost vs value issue now, are you comfortable with what you paid, or do you now feel the price was inflated, and you did not get good value?

Dave, excellent point. There are things I do, own, have done for me that, when I was a young buck, I thought to be ridiculous to spend the money on. Now I do those things and oodles more. Why? Because I have the means. As to Wilsons, being worth the money? I haven't heard their new Puppy, but the ones I have, I'm not wild about the sound. I don't understand why all these audiophools are picking on Dave Wilson and his (to me) over priced speakers. Don't buy em and clam up. He's entitled to his markup. Fair or unfair. Wilson does give you a lot of weight and fine craftmanship...sound? Not my cup of java..