[Mini0510]

Quote:

It doesn't matter how it sounds. All that matters is maximizing profit, which is my MAIN point.
 
I'm not claiming that these headphones don't sound great or better than the ones I tried. I'm saying that I and many others are just as happy with equed lower end ones as i we are with my upper end ones.
 
 
Law of diminishing returns does exist, especially with the gap constantly closing.

Yes and you would know Shure's strategy of releasing the SE846. Perhaps maximizing profit is not the case here. Have you considered that?
Maybe they are release the SE846 as $1k to make the consumers believe they are able to make quality products. Have you thought of this?
Don't think about one direction only.

 

[Ivabign]

Quote:

Perhaps maximizing profit is not the case here. Have you considered that?
Maybe they are release the SE846 as $1k to make the consumers believe they are able to make quality products. Have you thought of this?
Don't think about one direction only.

It is a halo item - it will make it easier to sell the 546, 446, 346 and 246 - which will, no doubt, incorporate some of the technology included with the 846. Unfortunately, the amount paid to be able to state proudly that you possess the Top Of The Line Shure product has doubled. Hence the angst pouring out from this thread.

 

[elnero]

Quote:

I think offering such things for $1000 is foolish.
Only a handful of people could get it, and only a handful of those people would get it (since most believe that $1000 for earphones is foolish even if they can afford it).

 
I think you would find the majority of people think spending more than $100 on a pair of earphones is foolish.
 
So by your reasoning does that mean companies shouldn't sell any IEM's above $100 because most consider it foolish?

 

[LFC_SL]

Let's take a step back. No-one here would know what the R&D, marketing and distribution costs are for Shure. Besides who cares how much profit they are making. It is the niche end of this particular market segment. The SE535 or any of the other top end universals from Westone, Heir etc etc  are not being discontinued. They and plenty others remain available to buy. This is not medicine that may benefit mankind. It is discretionary spending and consumer electronics. The obligation to give anything away is none.
 
55 pages about the price, about 1.5 pages of useful commentary. My betting is that when the first extensive impressions and reviews filter through the hate will melt away. This is nothing more than elitism (small Asian labels can release expensive products with nowhere near as much attention) and also misplaced loyalty borne out of familiarity with Shure's budget offerings as if Shure are morally obliged to keep to a pricing structure.

 

[Brooko]

The thing is - everything that's discussed here is pure speculation.  We don't know Shure's strategy - but you can bet that their business team has one, and that it is well thought out.  They won't work on a cost plus model - they know their market better than we do, and along with the years of research, they will have done a lot of market research as well (to gauge what consumers will be prepared to pay).  In my personal opinion - working on a cost plus scenario may show economic knowledge of cost / manufacturing - but very little knowledge of actual marketing.
 
I'll give you one possible scenario ...... again pure speculation - but shows one possible business model.
 

1. They are confident with their technical innovation - and rather than building newer iterations, and climbing the mountain over and over (higher pricing with each new release) they want to make a statement for their own TOTL offering.  Market research is done - and they are happy with price point.  The 846 is born.  It will sell well - maybe not spectacularly - but it is positioned where they want it to be positioned.  It is their medium, term pinnacle / their milestone.
2. They also have plans for a new set of releases in another 6-12 months - using much of the new technology - but maybe a on a smaller scale (a step down from the 846).  They know that the 846 will have generated huge interest - but for a large demographic, the price for the 846 is unaffordable.  They can then release these slightly lower models (think 535 with the new tech) at price point around the USD500-700 mark.  This creates an immediate second tier of interest leveraging existing technology - but more importantly allowing them to position the new upper-mid tier at a price point that recognises the tech advances and gives them value propositions in all tiers.

 
Like I said originally - Shure will have a very well researched and formulated business plan.  We just have to wait and see what evolves.  I personally am looking forward to seeing what does happen, and if better enjoyment of music is the ultimate result, then to me the journey will be worth it.

 

[dleblanc343]

Quote:

Let's assume they cost $300 to make. Then one can make more profit selling 20,000 of them at $600 than 5,000 of them at $1000 (2.5 million dollars more profit).
The object is to maximize profit, even if that means sell for lower price.

This argument is broken if you look at their entire line of product. They may sell more SE846's at a lower price and generate more profit thanks to that strategy; but that will impede on sales of their SE535 for example.
 
If the SE846 was priced at 799$ instead of 999$, they would sell more, but it would also trickle down and hurt their sales on SE535's as the price mark up isn't much larger. People who own or who are aspiring to get SE535's would be really bummed by the 799$ price tag of the SE846 (some 535 owners are already bummed to hear the news, but if the 846 was 1600$, they would definitely not be). If you price it at 999$, people will classify it as something completely different and justify it being more competent, whereas if it was priced cheaper (i.e 799), people would doubt it as a legitimate upgrade. It's all related to sales, the tactics they are using are logical, and they also have to compete with akg and senn in this sort of oligopoly (prices remain equal/ somewhat matched between companies to get more money out of market (us consumers)).
 
The halo effect is also a big reason.

 

[chengsta]

I demand that all IEM companies only make a $1 profit per iem they sell, after taxes/salaries etc.

 

[dleblanc343]

Quote:

I demand that all IEM companies only make a $1 profit per iem they sell, after taxes/salaries etc.

Then you can enjoy JVC gummies and Skullcandy ink'd.

 

[RapidPulse]

When we only had the K3003 and a couple of others, they were just some fringe anomalies at the $1000 price point. 
Now, we have a trend.  
 
I think that is what is part of what is upsetting many people. How many others are going to follow suite? It's hard not to be a little concerned with where this is leading.
How much of this is truly the cost of innovation vs "me too" pricing? We just don't know.
 
 
Anyway....in conclusion, I blame Beats for this 

 

[music_4321]

Quote:

The thing is - everything that's discussed here is pure speculation.  We don't know Shure's strategy - but you can bet that their business team has one, and that it is well thought out.  They won't work on a cost plus model - they know their market better than we do, and along with the years of research, they will have done a lot of market research as well (to gauge what consumers will be prepared to pay).  In my personal opinion - working on a cost plus scenario may show economic knowledge of cost / manufacturing - but very little knowledge of actual marketing.
 
I'll give you one possible scenario ...... again pure speculation - but shows one possible business model.
 

1. They are confident with their technical innovation - and rather than building newer iterations, and climbing the mountain over and over (higher pricing with each new release) they want to make a statement for their own TOTL offering.  Market research is done - and they are happy with price point.  The 846 is born.  It will sell well - maybe not spectacularly - but it is positioned where they want it to be positioned.  It is their medium, term pinnacle / their milestone.
2. They also have plans for a new set of releases in another 6-12 months - using much of the new technology - but maybe a on a smaller scale (a step down from the 846).  They know that the 846 will have generated huge interest - but for a large demographic, the price for the 846 is unaffordable.  They can then release these slightly lower models (think 535 with the new tech) at price point around the USD500-700 mark.  This creates an immediate second tier of interest leveraging existing technology - but more importantly allowing them to position the new upper-mid tier at a price point that recognises the tech advances and gives them value propositions in all tiers.

 
Like I said originally - Shure will have a very well researched and formulated business plan.  We just have to wait and see what evolves.  I personally am looking forward to seeing what does happen, and if better enjoyment of music is the ultimate result, then to me the journey will be worth it.

 
Excellent post!

 

[BobJS]

+1 ^^^^
 
I also liked this one:
Quote:

I demand that all IEM companies only make a $1 profit per iem they sell, after taxes/salaries etc.

 

[dweaver]

Speaking of marketing. An un-released product has garnered 800+ posts. I think Shure has already won . Just imagine what will happen if the initial reviews are all positive...

I agree with the Halo argument made earlier. Shure will wait for the reviews to backup their own internal take on the 846 and then release new 54x, 34x etc IEM's that use watered down parts of their new technology. I am sure more people own Ford Fiesta's than Mustangs but both like being identified as owning a Ford for example.

BTW for those unhappy with all the chatter. Sorry but this is what Head-fiers do while they impatiently wait for new products to actually become available. The difference is when the product is "affordable" it gets hyped and when it's "expensive" it gets thrashed LOL.

 

[rawrster]

Quote:

When we only had the K3003 and a couple of others, they were just some fringe anomalies at the $1000 price point. 
Now, we have a trend.  
 
I think that is what is part of what is upsetting many people. How many others are going to follow suite? It's hard not to be a little concerned with where this is leading.
How much of this is truly the cost of innovation vs "me too" pricing? We just don't know.
 
 
Anyway....in conclusion, I blame Beats for this 

The trend is probably already there. It's similar to the HD800 a couple years back when the flagships were a couple hundred dollars. Now you see a bunch of different models in the 1k range so it looks like the same situation here.

 

[TheGame21x]

Quote:

When we only had the K3003 and a couple of others, they were just some fringe anomalies at the $1000 price point. 
Now, we have a trend.  
 
I think that is what is part of what is upsetting many people. How many others are going to follow suite? It's hard not to be a little concerned with where this is leading.
How much of this is truly the cost of innovation vs "me too" pricing? We just don't know.
 
 
Anyway....in conclusion, I blame Beats for this 

 
And that's what worries me.
 
It's not about the price, it's about the precedent that could be established here.
 
But whatever. If the 846 is worth it, so be it.

 

[Spyro]

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

No humor intended but PLEASE put the bong down!

Besides, the ER4 is $299 not $200. ...and it actually gets beat by $100 IEM's.

Back to the SE846.......