[geowak]

1. Audio magazines. You could not get an accurate, non-biased bit of info from them.
(But they can be fun to read, as the writers are smoozing the bigger, established names)
2. Companies that make astonishing claims, when they don't have quality parts in the gear they sell? And it is ALL MARKED WAY UP? There is a German company that sells very high end gear that is retooled and sold here in the USA under another name. Parts changed are sub standard at best!
3.(?) It's not a rip-off if you are just giving money away for bigger and (seemingly) better audio stuff. Can you rip yourself off? If one is having fun buying insanely expensive toys that are played with for awhile and then tossed or sold again?? Is there a rip-off if the purchaser KNOWS that this stuff are just expensive fun toys?

[JohnR]

Is there a rip-off if the purchaser KNOWS that this stuff are just expensive fun toys?

I'd say that it's a rip-off if the seller KNOWS that the same product could be sold much more cheaply than it is.

[doug s.]

1. Audio magazines. You could not get an accurate, non-biased bit of info from them.
(But they can be fun to read, as the writers are smoozing the bigger, established names)
2. Companies that make astonishing claims, when they don't have quality parts in the gear they sell? And it is ALL MARKED WAY UP? There is a German company that sells very high end gear that is retooled and sold here in the USA under another name. Parts changed are sub standard at best!
3.(?) It's not a rip-off if you are just giving money away for bigger and (seemingly) better audio stuff. Can you rip yourself off? If one is having fun buying insanely expensive toys that are played with for awhile and then tossed or sold again?? Is there a rip-off if the purchaser KNOWS that this stuff are just expensive fun toys?

here's an example of #2 - a company that only changes the name of the product; it's not even retooled.  but it is marked up anywhere from 3 to 8 times the price you can get w/the "inferior label".  i own one of the older integrated amps w/the "inferior label".  they used to sell for $2k; the one i own sold for $250.  it is a decent amp.

http://www.redrosemusic.com/

total rip off.  yes, johnr, i think they know they could sell their products for less.   

doug s.

[medium jim]

The best advice I ever received was:

"To know more about what you are buying than the seller knows about it!" 

Knowledge is the best defense against rip off's and otherwise.   

Jim

[TONEPUB]

here's an example of #2 - a company that only changes the name of the product; it's not even retooled.  but it is marked up anywhere from 3 to 8 times the price you can get w/the "inferior label".  i own one of the older integrated amps w/the "inferior label".  they used to sell for $2k; the one i own sold for $250.  it is a decent amp.

http://www.redrosemusic.com/

total rip off.  yes, johnr, i think they know they could sell their products for less.   

doug s.

And rightfully so, this company went under rather quickly I might add.

Unfortunately, Leica does this with most of their compact cameras.  They are all rebadged Panasonics,
albeit with Japanese made Leica lenses, but only one or two of the top compacts have additional functionality
over the Panasonic model costing 60% less.

[andy_c]

The best advice I ever received was:

"To know more about what you are buying than the seller knows about it!" 

Knowledge is the best defense against rip off's and otherwise.d

Yes, that's what I was trying to get across earlier in the thread when I was talking about information asymmetry.  It's not always possible to know as much about a product as the seller does, but the more you know, the better off you are.

Interestingly, and somewhat depressingly, when some forum threads are created to educate people about the true nature of certain products, with photos of internals and so forth, trouble follows.  It's amazing how fast the manufacturer and/or distributor gets tipped off, and also how existing buyers join in with spirited defense of marginally defensible practices and products.

And regardless of their disingenuous claims to the contrary, the audio press exists to support the industry, not the consumer.  They promote the concept of "industry gurus" who in many cases are clueless buffoons from a technical perspective, but good marketers.

[TONEPUB]

Yes, that's what I was trying to get across earlier in the thread when I was talking about information asymmetry.  It's not always possible to know as much about a product as the seller does, but the more you know, the better off you are.

Interestingly, and somewhat depressingly, when some forum threads are created to educate people about the true nature of certain products, with photos of internals and so forth, trouble follows.  It's amazing how fast the manufacturer and/or distributor gets tipped off, and also how existing buyers join in with spirited defense of marginally defensible practices and products.

And regardless of their disingenuous claims to the contrary, the audio press exists to support the industry, not the consumer.  They promote the concept of "industry gurus" who in many cases are clueless buffoons from a technical perspective, but good marketers.

Good thing you know everything.

As much as you like to think that we're all bought off and "exist to support the industry" it doesn't really work that way.  Again, I can't speak for TAS and Stereophile (or any of the others for that matter) but the information chain is way too short for us to write trumped up reviews. That may have worked in the 80's but it doesn't work in 2012.

Our goal has always been to help our readers find a great system, no matter what the budget.  Considering the email we get from people all over the world telling us that our perspective on the components they've purchased that we've reviewed have been pretty spot on, I'm comfortable with that.

So, once again we now have another thread boldly claiming that all consumer publications are corrupt.

I would love to know what you do for a living so that I could tell you that what you do is worthless.

[JohnR]

How did this get to be all about TONEPUB?

[Rclark]

For the record, I really enjoy Tone Magazine, and all of Tonepub's posts, AND Doug.S is someone who's opinion I trust very much, having spoken to him in depth. I think both these guys have a lot of experience, and I think that if we were in a pub right now, instead of on a forum, the same discussion could be had, as enjoyable as this one. Text only conversations seem far more aggressive than their real life counterpart.

 Let's not make this what it isn't.

[rascal]

I'd say that it's a rip-off if the seller KNOWS that the same product could be sold much more cheaply than it is.

I disagree or shall I add qualifier of performance. If a good/product delivers great performance then premium can be justified; after all it is opportunity to make more $$ since perceived value (to a buyer) is higher.

IMHO if you feel you are ripped off- then you are ripped off. You are what you feel  Faith and gut are two assets you cannot argue with and facts are always in dispute (at least in my country USA) 

[JohnR]

I disagree or shall I add qualifier of performance. If a good/product delivers great performance then premium can be justified; after all it is opportunity to make more $$ since perceived value (to a buyer) is higher.

Hm, but I said "same product", so they are either identical, or substantially the same. Same performance. I think it's fair to recognize that IP costs money to develop which has to be recovered through sales, that production engineering and tooling costs money, that costs per unit are higher for small volumes, that handcrafting is more expensive than mass production etc etc. Or for that matter that branding and marketing also costs money.

Speaking of watches, here's a nice one:


http://images.businessweek.com/ss/10/04/0406_most_expensive_watches/5.htm

Heck, if I had as much money as Bill Gates, I'd probably own a couple of those. Would I have a $500,000 stereo? I don't think so. It just doesn't make sense to me. Not that that has anything to do with the topic, but anyway...

[Letitroll98]

No one is arguing the point made below, at least not that I can perceive.  And your experience in the industry is unassailable.  Please, a serious question here, based on your industry experience how can you explain the retail cost of the Odin speaker cable, or the interconnect line for that matter?  What could possibly go into a length of wire to make it price out at $20K? If you said $3-4k, still very expensive, I could assume development costs, hand assembly, premium components, etc., but that stratospheric number has my head spinning, even with that preferred customer discount you mentioned, good point BTW.  (And not to pick on Nordost, we could use any of the examples I mentioned)  Thanks in advance for your answer.     

As for the hypothetical expensive "rip off" cables being worth the price tag in an expensive system, let's take this as a hypothetical situation:

You plug a pair of ODIN speaker cables into a PrimaLuna ProLogue integrated amplifier and a pair of Harbeth Compact sevens in place of the $400 AudioQuest, Furutech, Cardas or whatever other cable you are using.  The difference is modest if even noticeable - because the system, while good and musically satisfying can't resolve the difference.  Even if it could, in the context of an $7,000 system, (assuming a modest DAC like the Wadia 121) spending another $20k would probably give that user pause, regardless of income.

You plug a pair of ODIN (or any other mega speaker cable) into a pair of Wilson XLF's with ARC REF 750 mono blocks, 40th Anniv. REF preamp and an SME30/SMEV arm/Lyra Atlas cartridge and an ARC REF Phono2SE phono stage, and if the system is set up properly, I guarantee you will hear a difference between the ODIN cable and whatever other cable you are using.  This system has the resolution to hear the differences that a super tweako cable will make (notice I'm not saying improvement here, I'm saying difference).  In the context of a $400,000 system, you're looking at 5% of total cost to get an improvement, or at least a change in flavor.  Not as crazy of an expense at this point.  But then again, most consumers aren't walking into a Nordost dealer and paying retail for a pair of these either.

[jtwrace]

I would love to know what you do for a living so that I could tell you that what you do is worthless.

[Devil Doc]

It's not that funny. I expect more from a fella who makes his living with words.

Doc

[Diamond Dog]

I would love to know what you do for a living so that I could tell you that what you do is worthless.

 

As far his ability with words is concerned, I expect that TONEPUB fella is gonna make out jes' fine.

D.D.

[Chromisdesigns]

Nobody (that I have seen in this thread, anyway) has mentioned the "price to market" concept.  In other words, the selling price is not (merely) a function of what it costs to make a product, plus a "reasonable" markup.  Among other things, what is "reasonable"?

There is a famous aphorism in the jewelry industry that it is just as easy to sell a $30,000 ring as a $3,000 ring.  The only difference is who you are selling to.  Leaving aside whether this is a "ripoff" or not, if there are buyers for a given product at a given price point, then there will be someone selling something at that price point.

Perceived value is a big consideration in setting a market price.  Whether this is "fair", a "ripoff", etc. is another matter, but it IS basic economics.  And the elements of perceived value are many.

[Quiet Earth]

It's not that funny. I expect more from a fella who makes his living with words.

Doc

You also hold him up to a higher standard than you hold yourself.

Letitroll,

I don't know anything about what goes into making the specific cables everyone is fixated on, or if they are a rip off or not,  but I also know that you can't just look at the parts and calculate what it would cost to produce the product. You really are oversimplifying things. I understand what you are getting at, but you are making it sound easier than it is, in general.

John R,
If you had a fraction of the money Bill G. has and did not buy a 1/2 million dollar system, then you would only be ripping yourself off.

[Quiet Earth]

Nobody (that I have seen in this thread, anyway) has mentioned the "price to market" concept.  In other words, the selling price is not (merely) a function of what it costs to make a product, plus a "reasonable" markup.  Among other things, what is "reasonable"?

There is a famous aphorism in the jewelry industry that it is just as easy to sell a $30,000 ring as a $3,000 ring.  The only difference is who you are selling to.  Leaving aside whether this is a "ripoff" or not, if there are buyers for a given product at a given price point, then there will be someone selling something at that price point.

Perceived value is a big consideration in setting a market price.  Whether this is "fair", a "ripoff", etc. is another matter, but it IS basic economics.  And the elements of perceived value are many.

Nicely done. 

[JohnR]

John R,
If you had a fraction of the money Bill G. has and did not buy a 1/2 million dollar system, then you would only be ripping yourself off.

Um... how so exactly?

(Your statement is sufficiently bizarre that I suspect that it's a joke, but I don't see how...)

[Quiet Earth]

 If you had all that cash and didn't blow it on your favorite hobby, then you would be cheating yourself. You would be ripping yourself off.

You can't take it with you.