WILSON AUDIO/ cost vs. value

Question to Macrojack: Does the 1/5 of MSRP refer to COGS alone? What exactly is included? Before we can declare that his margin is 67% (12k/18K), we need to consider such costs as warranty expense, shipping (not trivial on Wilson speakers), sales and marketing as well as other G&A expenses. When it gets to profit that falls to the bottom line and accrues to the owners, I expect it's a much smaller number than $12K per WATT/Puppy.

883dave-
The post immediately preceeding yours would indicate that I responded in the manner sought by the original poster. That, however, is the only comment you offer with which I disagree.
But, while you are factually accurate, in your cable comparison, I'm pretty sure the analogy wasn't quite parallel.
Radio Shack is selling some sort of raw cable and the Zu product is terminated. I don't know what this means in precise numbers but it seems to equate to a comparison between the price of raw drivers from company A and the price of finished speakers from company Z.
How Wilson's company is structured addresses what happens to the profits more than how great they were.

OVER.....

Miccrojack between Zu on Zu and this thread: do you have any time to listen to your rig? lol... :)

Again, I can't argue on if the Wilson statement is accurate or not, as much as anyone else here can't, but being involved in the manufacturing of amplifiers that are in the process of changing its entire line and looking at the costs ahead and behind us so far, for things like C&C machinery, specialized booths, engineering costs, tooling, industrial design, I can tell you without conjecture it can cost close to a million dollars to bring honest products to market.

I suspect Wilson could have much more than that invested in their facilities and if one does not include all daily operational expenses, one would not be in business long, there is so much more to it than a simple equation of cost of production to retail.

So unless someone here is Wilson's accountant, we can only speculate on if Wilson's claim is accurate or not but from where I sit, I can see it being closer to the truth, than not.

FYI, I do not own a pair of Wilson speakers or have I ever, nor do I suspect that Wilson has ever used or even heard of our amps but I feel to single out a prominent manufacturer who may have millions as well as decades invested, whither or not we like the speaker and simply because some feel that an advertising statement is misleading, is simply wrong and extremely judgmental, especially without any kind of pertaining facts.

My defense is not only for Wilson but I feel it's to all honest manufacturers who have spent a greater part of their lives along with immense investments to bring products to consumers who are very happy with them, Bose and Polk included.

Drubin-
Shipping is typically born by the purchaser. The other points you raise are post production and not considered part of the production cost so they don't alter the model as I presented it.
The ads in question seemed to state that Wilson enjoys a smaller margin than other manufacturers. My figures represent an educated guess as to how that might not be true. I don't claim to know any facts and figures. However, even if the margin is any smaller than any number of other manufacturers, the volume and unit price still land him among the gentry.
None of the realities of Dave's finances really matter here as long as the assertion in the ads is correct. The numbers as I see them probably contradict that claim.