Certainly, the lower the exchange price that's offered, the less there is a problem.
That price has to be weighed against loyal customer loss. If they offer you 50%, you're a customer forever, but if they offer 10%, you're gone..... Tricky business.
Just a thought, though, what is the breadth of what we are talking about here? I mean, how many of the SP1/1.7 users took adantage of the existing upgrade programs of SP1 to SP1.7 and SP1.7 to SP2? How many will actually upgrade to the SP3, especially since it will likely enatail a more expensive upgrade than either of the other two before? Sure, some will, but will it be extensive?
Well, I see the option of Bryston looking at taking back SP1/SP1.7s and SP2s as a virtual Pandora’s Box.
If for no other reason than what value do you assign to each of the different units? Is there a ‘trade-in’ difference offered on a SP2 vs an SP1.7 upgraded to SP2? Better still, who’s eligible for the upgrade? Only customers who bought their units from authorized dealers (and therefore paid full street price new)? Does one offer the same trade-in credit to someone who paid half price for a used unit while another customer paid full price? Does a person who bought from a non-authorized dealer get excluded? Sure, they may not be eligible for warranty, but anyone should be able to have access to an upgrade where it’s being sold for cash. I guess what I’m saying is that a trade-in program has a lot of variables. It would be too many for me, (if I were in your shoes James!)
Let's go back to the concept of the initial 'upgrade' mechanism. I suspect the cost to upgrade from model to model was always intended to be at worst a break-even recovery on the part of Bryston. At best, a marginal profit on the upgrade program. After all, it is a business.
So, let’s assume that the task of squeezing SP1/1.7/2s into “SP3s” by adding extra chassis, extra parts, throwing away old parts, etc is just not worth the frustration. As well, even if it could be done, the scope of changes may approach the input costs of a new unit.
Then, effectively the cost of the upgrade becomes the actual production cost of the new SP3. Bryston can either offer the ‘upgrade’ at cost, at worst, and maybe even marginally below costs for the value it sees in keeping the current users happy and loyal.
However, I would keep it at that. So, existing owners would get to keep their SP1/1.7/2 and upgrade at the 'Bryston cost'. Then, if the users want to sell their old units, they can. The pricing is at the mercy of the market and the price gotten would be based on condition of the unit, how many previous owners, etc. In other words, the customer has the ability to set their ‘net upgrade’ price.
As far as price crashes on the basis of obsolescence when a new SP3 hits the shelves? I don’t see that likely happening. If a new SP3 unit has a MSRP of, say $8,000, a used Bryston SP1/1.7/2 will likely still catch a favorable resale price (especially when viewed in conjunction with the fact that you’d be getting an SP3 ‘upgrade’ at cost or better). Not every one wants to be on the bleeding edge. It will take a long time for SP1/1.7/2 technology to be ‘obsolete’.
Sure, this may have holes as well. But I think you have to look at all sides. I think Bryston agreeing to give a trade in credit on existing units raises more questions.
This is just another angle. Just trying to look at something that's win/win for both sides. For the record, I have a SP1.7. Never even considered the SP2 upgrade and would only even consider the SP3 upgrade mainly on the basis of an improvement to the 2-channel analogue side.
Keith
