or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Shure SE846: A New In-Ear Flagship From Shure. Finally! (Impressions p26-28)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Shure SE846: A New In-Ear Flagship From Shure. Finally! (Impressions p26-28) - Page 53

post #781 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobJS View Post

Their costs are an internal matter for them.  They can choose to sell at a loss (as a loss leader ... but not for long), or at a huge markup (early, to profit from early adopters and bleeding edgers, lowering the price later).

 

The product isn't out yet and the reviews aren't in, this may be gouging, or it may be underpriced, no way to know.  

 

 

 

Ah, here's the issue.

 

I gave the example earlier in the thread that our smartphones are several times more powerful than the computers that ran Apollo 11. By your logic, it would have been acceptable for Apple to charge as much as, if not more than, the cost of the computers of the Apollo....plus the cost of inflation.

 

The issue isn't whether or not their product is good, or over priced. I'm going against the argument that it is ok for them to charge so much more, simply because it has something that hasn't been seen before. Their reward for innovation could come from the massive number of units that would have been moved if the price had been lowered towards the level of the 535. 

 

I view the 846 as a pioneer product, no doubt. However, it is not innovative in the least because they are not pushing the boundaries without making us pay dearly for it.Google continuing to update the free, open source Android is innovation. Apple selling the iphone 5 at the same price as they did the 3GS is innovation. The free market has proven that.

 

*Imagine me saying this next paragraph with this face:

 

proud.gif

 

We both have solid points. I'm just of the opinion that innovation doesn't have to come at the cost of end consumers. If you are truly confident in your product, you can set it at a price that will expand your user base and make enough sales to keep going. Again, Schiit, Apple, Samsung, Google, Westone, Vsonic, JVC, and the list goes on.

post #782 of 3180

Regarding Shure's costs, I'm seeing a lot of "I think" "I doubt" "I guess" "Probably." And most or all of this speculation is coming from people who have no experience with product development and distribution. Who the hell knows what these things cost to make? Is Shure making a profit? Most certainly. But that's Shure's only responsibility--money. Unless you buy one of their products, they don't owe you or me anything.

post #783 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobJS View Post

when a pharmaceutical company corners the market on a new unique drug

 

OT comment:

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

Or exploit indigenous knowledge, patent the resource and then extortionately charge the people for using their own plants...

 

post #784 of 3180

right im getting irked. apple selling the iphone 5 for the same price as the 3gs is innovation. Do you know anything about what it costs for silicon fabrication plants 32nm 28nm and batch yields?

post #785 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

 

Ah, here's the issue.

 

I gave the example earlier in the thread that our smartphones are several times more powerful than the computers that ran Apollo 11. By your logic, it would have been acceptable for Apple to charge as much as, if not more than, the cost of the computers of the Apollo....plus the cost of inflation.

 

The issue isn't whether or not their product is good, or over priced. I'm going against the argument that it is ok for them to charge so much more, simply because it has something that hasn't been seen before. Their reward for innovation could come from the massive number of units that would have been moved if the price had been lowered towards the level of the 535. 

 

I view the 846 as a pioneer product, no doubt. However, it is not innovative in the least because they are not pushing the boundaries without making us pay dearly for it.Google continuing to update the free, open source Android is innovation. Apple selling the iphone 5 at the same price as they did the 3GS is innovation. The free market has proven that.

 

*Imagine me saying this next paragraph with this face:

 

proud.gif

 

We both have solid points. I'm just of the opinion that innovation doesn't have to come at the cost of end consumers. If you are truly confident in your product, you can set it at a price that will expand your user base and make enough sales to keep going. Again, Schiit, Apple, Samsung, Google, Westone, Vsonic, JVC, and the list goes on.

 

They sell at the same price because they are on the same "tier".  Yes they are better, newer, but still on the same tier.  All companies have their expensive models and their cheaper models, it's as simple as that.  The new Shure is just their more expensive model. 

 

If you want to use Apple analogy, it's the difference between a Mac Pro, fully decked out and a MacMini base entry model.  Well, actually, in Shure's case, it's a Mac Pro and a top of the line iMac (fully decked out as well).  Shure has just added a new top line tier to their products. Or if you want to use the iOS line, it's the difference between an iPhone and an iPod.  Two different lines, two different prices.  An iPhone costs nearly 600-700 dollars while an iPod is 300-400 (excluding older models).

 

Using Google and updating Android is an entirely different story.  It's software, and even then, not all products get that update... 


Edited by tinyman392 - 5/15/13 at 8:42am
post #786 of 3180

Its pointless comparing costs of a 3gs and iphone 5 most the hardware inside is made by other manufacturers anyways, apples plant hasn't been running long. In fact samsung and intrinsity designed the cpu in the 3gs.

post #787 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuzzy1969 View Post

Its pointless comparing costs of a 3gs and iphone 5 most the hardware inside is made by other manufacturers anyways, apples plant hasn't been running long. In fact samsung and intrinsity designed the cpu in the 3gs.

 

Samsung manufactures all the CPUs inside the iOS devices... 

 

EDIT: I understand what he's saying with the analogy, but his mistake was that he assumed the new Shure model is to replace the 535...  I don't think it's a replacement for it...  In otherwords, I don't think Shure will stop selling the 535 due to the 846 like they did the 530 when the 535 came out. 


Edited by tinyman392 - 5/15/13 at 8:47am
post #788 of 3180

Well not completely true, apple designs and manufactures the new A6 or something the also bought out instrinsity who specialise in optimising ARM's holdings design. but Im going to shut up now.

post #789 of 3180
Your smartphone is also subsidized by your carrier to the tune of several hundred dollars in the US and in turn you commit to a time contract. I can only imagine the outcry if we had to pay MSRP for them without subsidy being an option. If I'm not mistaken, the iPhone 5 costs $168 for parts only, no other expenses factored in. An unlocked and unsubsidized iPhone is $650. I'm sure the retail markup for resellers is very low. With a normal retail markup, that would put them in the 1k range.

The point is the analogies are weak at best and we are all making large assumptions with very little public information to zero inside information. To think we know expenses, mark up and profit margins here is just blowing smoke out our backsides. Having been involved in costs assessments for projects in a very large, fortune 500 corporation, the complexities can be staggering and completely aggravating.
post #790 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuzzy1969 View Post

Well not completely true, apple designs and manufactures the new A6 or something the also bought out instrinsity who specialise in optimising ARM's holdings design. but Im going to shut up now.

 

This is entirely off topic, but Apple designs the A6, Samsung manufactures it :p This might not stay for the A7 (if it comes out) :p

 

Eke's, I understand what you are saying.  You were wanting the new Shure to be the price of the 535, effectively replace it.  I don't think the 846 will replace it, I feel Shure simply created a new IEM a tier above the 535 (maybe a few tiers up :p).


Edited by tinyman392 - 5/15/13 at 8:52am
post #791 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by gkanai View Post

 

Fwiw, Lexus sold every one of the LFAs that they made. So for Toyota it was a success.


Perhaps it was a success for them selling the limited production slate they decided on - but I imagine they did not recoup the development costs associated with the LFA - but that wasn't the point - it was a halo vehicle meant to drive sales of lesser models. It also was meant to introduce the new styling language for the entire Lexus line of automobiles, and in that respect, I (IMHO) it was a failure from an aesthetic POV - Too damned busy. The hourglass grilles tacked on their newest vehicles are blots on some otherwise nicely styled cars. 

post #792 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post

 

This is entirely off topic, but Apple designs the A6, Samsung manufactures it :p This might not stay for the A7 (if it comes out) :p

 

Eke's, I understand what you are saying.  You were wanting the new Shure to be the price of the 535, effectively replace it.  I don't think the 846 will replace it, I feel Shure simply created a new IEM a tier above the 535 (maybe a few tiers up :p).

 

Then that explains everything. It opens up another can of worms though...mid tier for $500?! tongue.gif

 

For the record, I'm seeing this discussion as a gentleman's argument. No hurt feelings involved, just intense discussion.

post #793 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

 

Then that explains everything. It opens up another can of worms though...mid tier for $500?! tongue.gif

 

For the record, I'm seeing this discussion as a gentleman's argument. No hurt feelings involved, just intense discussion.

 

No one said the 535 was mid tier...  Shure has just created a tier above 535.  Think of it as a higher premium. 

post #794 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

 

 

 

For the record, I'm seeing this discussion as a gentleman's argument. No hurt feelings involved, just intense discussion.

+1

post #795 of 3180
Funny thing about the 1000$+ iems is that they still get beaten by iems in the 200$ price range, they just haven't been as far apart in performance as the price suggests. FYI I only haven't heard the Ultrasone IQ, but fwir it's one of the lesser ones. Regardless, there are reasons why these manufacturers priced like they did as we can merely speculate as to why
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Shure SE846: A New In-Ear Flagship From Shure. Finally! (Impressions p26-28)