Stratospheric audio gear prices


The more time I have under my belt pursuing quality audio, the more I realize that high audio gear prices have some basis in their quality. Yet there is a limit. When you buy a Ferrari the cost is high, but you can see the money involved in the design and parts. Many would argue that high quality audio gear is similar to the quality and design of a hyper-car. But when you look a the sheer quantity an complexity of this kind of car, there is no piece of audio gear that compares. To me, a piece of audio gear that costs as much as even an inexpensive car is just a manufacturer cashing in because they can. Can you imagine what audio manufacturers would want to charge for a piece of audio gear that was the size and weight of a car? Like $100 million.  I believe it just drives the whole market up and we end up getting a little bit suckered. This is all perhaps a little overstated. I guess I just want to shame audio manufacturers. I do understand that they are not charities, or here for the betterment of mankind. If you are not frustrated by this, good for you.  Here is a quote from a book about marketing. The reference is a victim of link rot. Nevertheless it has common information. 
  

"Premium Pricing

Premium pricing is the practice of keeping the price of a product or service artificially high in order to encourage favorable perceptions among buyers, based solely on the price. The practice is intended to exploit the (not necessarily justifiable) tendency for buyers to assume that expensive items enjoy an exceptional reputation or represent exceptional quality and distinction . A premium pricing strategy involves setting the price of a product higher than similar products . This strategy is sometimes also called skim pricing because it is an attempt to "skim the cream" off the top of the market. It is used to maximize profit in areas where customers are happy to pay more, where there are no substitutes for the product, where there are barriers to entering the market, or when the seller cannot save on costs by producing at a high volume. It is also called image pricing or prestige pricing.

 

Luxury has a psychological association with price premium pricing. The implication for marketing is that consumers are willing to pay more for certain goods and not for others. To the marketer, it means creating a brand equity or value for which the consumer is willing to pay extra. Marketers view luxury as the main factor differentiating a brand in a product category."

Source: Boundless. “Market Share.” Boundless Business Boundless, 26 May. 2016. Retrieved 07 Feb. 2017 from https://www.boundless.com/business/textbooks/boundless-business-textbook/product-and-pricing-strateg...

ericrt
Paula, it’s an iPhone spell check error, not a sign of early onset Alzheimer’s. 
Pauly 

🙄

Where have you been? Kansas?  Don’t you know that communism is so that everybody can afford a chocolate eclair?*
Get with it, dude. 
theaudioatticvinylsundays.com
*I avoid chocolate eclairs only because I’m trying to avoid dying of diabetes like my dad did. 
Sokogear: I agree on the LODR, and the cost of my gear amazingly happens to fall within your range of $20K to $25K.


To those who think people are untitled to spend as much as they want on this stuff, I vehemently disagree: on a finite planet with finite and continually depleting resources, it is … shortsighted and selfish to spend insane amounts of dollars on audio gear.


Amazingly you are completely oblivious to what a hypocritical douchebag you sound like. For far more than 99 percent of the population of this finite planet with continually depleting resources would believe that spending anything over $1000 would be vehemently disagreeable. Somehow, you get to decide what YOUR line of acceptable is and then everyone else is short sighted and selfish. Look in the mirror because your complaint applies to you too.
What millercarbon actually said:
So for example there are more trees in N America today than in the 1800’s because we are no longer cutting them down for heat and railroad tracks.

What unreceivedogma comes back with:
a pdf about forested area and, "the quality of today’s lumber is significantly inferior to that of 100 years ago."

The assertion there are more trees is met with forest lands and lumber quality. As if these are anywhere near the same- or even remotely related to each other!

This is why no, I will not have to back up anything with a citation. Why would I? You would just shift the target yet again. There is no point- at least not until you learn to discern what the point being made even is!