2. misc-audio
  3. 154916-139155

If I have good local shops available, should I restrict my purchasing?

So, the title of this post is a bit tendentious — I'm actually interested in a canvas of the ethical landscape. Let me explain….

A few different reviewers I like (Guttenberg, others) have made mention of how important it is to support one's brick and mortar shop, should one have one near enough to visit. I actually have several, though a bunch of them are actually installation businesses that also sell gear.

As I've spent time in these shops listening and learning, I've also gained an amazing education online (thank you Audiogon, YouTube) about the variety of audiophile gear out there — including older gear, and gear made by small, independent artisans. They too deserve support and patronage.

What I'm struggling to determine is how to spend as ethically as possible. Assuming (1) a reasonably good selection and (2) reasonable prices, what do you think is the ethical thing to do as regards audiophile equipment? (I am NOT talking about major manufacturers such as Denon, Yamaha, etc.)

Here are some options, placed roughly on a spectrum. Where would you place yourself?

(a) "Totally limit to the local shop." All purchasing of audio would be restricted to what is available locally. No buying of gear auditioned locally online or used.

PLUSES: supports the local merchant and a place to hear new gear while providing the listener with products that meet the threshold of good audio.
MINUSES: Costs more, limits brand options, cuts out many small makers who sell from far away.

(b) "Partially limit to the local shop." Some (not all) purchasing of audio would be restricted to what is available locally. No buying used or online what is available locally. Exceptions would include products from small makers who sell direct.

PLUSES: supports local merchant, but not as much. Expands brand options, supports small makers. May influence local merchant to carry more artisanal lines (assuming they get the message somehow).
MINUSES: Costs more, less support for local merchant.

(c) "No limits where to buy, but truly audiophile-level products available new should be bought new." Purchasing could be done anywhere, but avoiding used versions of products that are presently available new would be prioritized to support the manufacturer and/or dealer carrying them. This could include the local shop or the online dealer.

PLUSES: Supports makers and those who carry new, good gear. Vintage gear is still ok to buy.
MINUSES: Costs more, reduces support for those making deals and discounts available.

(d) "No limits, period." Any product can be bought anywhere. You can go listen in your local shop and then surf online to buy it discounted or used. If this continues the trend of the disappearance of brick and mortar stores, that's fine. The number of direct to consumer companies will increase, and that model may be the next evolutionary step.

PLUSES: Cost savings (discount, used, etc.); flourishing of new direct businesses; continued health of used markets; increased importance of online reviewers (professional and amateurs).
MINUSES: Traffic and pollution from even more delivery vehicles; demise of curatorship role in audio stores, and the face-to-face relationships they foster. Demise of place to see gear simultaneously and do comparison listening.

This is just a sketch of the ethical landscape. I undoubtedly left our options and supporting/detracting pluses or minuses.

If you've thought about the ethics of your audio purchasing and have some thoughts, I'd like to hear what you take to be ethically relevant.

128x128hilde45
hilde45's avatar
hilde45 OP
4,974 posts
 
@tvad Attending audio show goes around the dilemma, for sure. It solves the problem of "how can I hear things outside the context of my local shop" but it doesn’t choose within a dilemma I posed.

Regarding the idea of mentioning the online price to the dealer, I tried to build that in:
"I ask the store for a better deal, and they cannot get close to the online price point."
The question becomes, for example, "Are you going to pay $3500 rather than $3000 for that amp in the store because that’s the best the store can do — given their overhead, salaries, etc." I’m all for finding ways around a dilemma, but what if the dilemma is truly unavoidable?

Part of the question becomes very subjective at this point. You might think that paying an additional 15% above online prices is a fair cost to absorb, given what the dealer does and can do. Others might set their margin lower. I don’t know a principled way to deal with those differences.

@twoleftears If there aren’t local stores, I cannot see a dilemma.
Post removed 
hilde45's avatar
hilde45 OP
4,974 posts
 
@tvad I’m not sure there will be a one-size solution to the dilemma. I’m ok with that. The point of such dilemmas is to elicit additional ideas and sub-principles which can help.

When you say that you would pay $3500 to the dealer IF that $3500 represented a discount (in response to the lower price $3000), you’ve articulated a "best practice" as you understand it in the customer-dealer relationship. I hadn’t thought of that!

It reminds me of shopping for carpets in Turkey. If you didn’t haggle or even make a move to walk out, you’d get no respect from them. They wanted to haggle — it was part of the relationship-expectation. Would they like it if an idiot tourist paid full price? Sure. But the norm of haggling fulfills something beyond the sheer quantitative goal of the business relationship. In our culture, haggling is very awkward and sometimes completely inappropriate. It’s hard to know when that is, especially in business like high-end audio, where there’s an expectation that rich people are buying the stuff and they’ll pay whatever it costs.

danvignau's avatar
danvignau
935 posts
 
There is a lot more in the world to worry about.
hilde45's avatar
hilde45 OP
4,974 posts
 
There sure is. Big worries don't eliminate smaller worries, though. The fact that people are commenting here proves that they see something is at stake. Anyone who thinks this is a trivial issue is free to ignore it.
More to discover