[Elephas]

There seems to be some confusion as to cause and effect.

Cause: Grado dealers complaining to Grado Labs about not being involved

Effect: another HF series headphone is unlikely

This has nothing to do with members selling HF-1's on eBay. The Grado dealers may have found out about the HF-1 through the eBay sales, but they should/would eventually have found out about it through other means.

I find it highly unlikely that the Grado dealers would never have known about the HF-1 if there had been no eBay sales.

Personal conduct in terms of loyalty to Head-Fi is a different issue. I agree HF-1's should be sold to fellow Head-Fiers, but I also believe in the right of HF-1 owners to do with it as they please.

 

[PFKMan23]

I do believe that given what has been posted about John Grado's attitude and reaction towards the Ebay sales, that those auctions of the HF-1 did play a role. Even though it might be secondary, it's still part of the equation, I think.

 

[Edwood]

In the end greed won out, and for better or worse, the HF-1's will be "special" and not be produced anymore.

But is anyone really surprised?

-Ed

 

[The Monkey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by scrypt I suppose I could be called naïve for expecting civil behavior on the internet, but you'll have to excuse me. After all, I'm gullible enough to think my friends and community are capable of more.

Naive, no; pedantic and condescending, maybe.

I am glad that Todd chose to share his thoughts about why an HF-2 is unlikely. This kind of transparency is a good thing. Todd has no obligation to let us know his decision-making process. Now, for those of us who disagree with him, it provides an opportunity to discuss the issue. Thus far, I think this portion of this thread has been useful.

That said, in the interest of being more constructive, perhaps it is more constructive for those of us who disagree with Todd to offer proposed solutions for a similar future event, if any.

Like a poster above, I thought about a minimum post count for ordering. Or maybe head-fi join date. However, I think both requirements could create resentment in this community and therefore is not worth it.

Technically, I don't think Todd or John could make a purchaser actually agree not to sell a headphone on ebay (or other outlet other than head-fi). Further, it probably just wouldn't work. Nor would a post to the effect of "please don't sell these on ebay," as I think we all can agree that the profiteers wouldn't care about that.

I think self-policing works, to a certain extent, but apparently not well enough. Maybe if a specific FS section were carved out for the HF-1? I'm not sure how much that would help, but at least it could remind people that it is preferable that the HF-1 and the like stay in the community. It would be a small step, but possibly a helpful one.

What do you all think would be an effective way to eliminate the behavior that threatens to eliminate the HF-2?

 

[PFKMan23]

I'm not going to go that much into it but I think we all know that once a headphone reaches a consumers hands, it's basically up to them to agree to "keep it in the community". Nowm I think we all know that regardless of how good we police it, basically some people are just "in it for the money". And yes I can't say I blame them, no one like loosing money and if it's possible to actually make money,, then alot of people would prefer that.

As far as the whole issue of how to avoid it. I do believe a miimum post count and join date are the only effective way to do suhc athing. However resentment is inevitable and in the endn with that requirement or not, we just have to trust in our community members. And it still will happen. In such cases profiteering is inevitable, given the limited nature of the product.

That said here's the issue that I see. And yes it's the money issue. Most people don't like loosing money, especially if there is a way to avoid that. Now traditionally it has been said on Headfi that if you want to make a profit on your posessions to go to Ebay. Now the HF-1s are precarious item given that they were made specifically for this community.

Let's take a obvious example, what if a user were selling the HF-1s on the FS forums for $410, not using the IC/auction method that is so prevalent, just a straight up FS forum with $410 as a posted price. Now we all know the original cost of the HF-1, which would be $200 from TTVJ + shipping costs. Or if you want a even nicer example, what about the FT requests for the RS1? The going rate of those used is still around $525.

So in effect, the profit made from the phone is basically the cost of the phone or more. Can anyone say that the seller wouldn't be vilified beyond belief? I mean the HF-1 in the first case, is being kept "in the family"

Obviously there's little the staff can do if it's done externally (or even through PMs), but can anyone say that they would look at or treat the seller the same? In such issues, you're damned it you do, damned if you don't, hence in such cases I guess it's better to be more upfront and just put them on Fleabay because the intent is pretty clear.

 

[kugino]

here's an example of why the hf-1 sell-off on ebay was hurtful. maybe not wrong, but hurtful to todd, grado, other members here on head-fi. it's like buying that special gift for your significant other - maybe for their b'day, valentine's, anniversary, etc. or if you have children, buying that perfect Christmas gift for that child, where you had to wait in line at 4 a.m. for that toy store to open and then endure a crazy mob once those doors opened.

significant other or child receives gift then decides that they would rather sell it on ebay. new necklace? auction. new PSP? auction. did they have the right to do it? sure, no one disputes that. but it might be hurtful to the gift-giver because of the care and effort that went into the gift. in essence, the hf-1 was a gift to the head-fi community. it was a "gift" that cost $200, but many were gladly willing to pay that for many different reasons.

there was a lot of care and effort on the part of todd and john grado to produce and distribute (and personally sign!) all the hf-1s. i can understand how it would be hurtful to see them go outside of our little community, nevermind that it's someone's "right" to do so. i'm not disputing that.

maybe todd and john could have asked from the very beginning that these headphones remain in the community...but then again, did they really have to do that? i don't think so. maybe they were naive, but that's not a bad fault to have, as it exemplifies how much trust they have in the community. i personally hope a hf-2 is not produced because i selfishly like being the owner of a one-and-only line of a product.

my 2 cents.

 

[Jahn]

When my HF-1 left my hands, I put them in another Head-fier's hands, who promptly donated $25 to head-fi and became a contributor - NOT because it was "part of the deal" but because he wanted to, in the spirit of the HF-1. I feel that #42 is in good hands, and in the process I got to check out the gold bling SR325i, so it was a win win, and Head-fi got a double contrib from that can. I'm not saying everyone who sells/trades their HF-1 should do the same, but imho Karma has a way of comin' back and kissing ya, even if it's in the form of 1911 having a HF-1 modded and dangling it in front of you as bait to go visit him

 

[omedon]

I really appreciate kugino's post. It really reflects the way I feel about the HF-1. When Todd first announced the HF-1's he told us they sounded better than 225's and that they would be sold for $25 less than those phones.

This was a remarkable gesture and hoarding by registering fake accounts or selling them for $300 (something Grado could have easily done himself) on fleabay to turn a quick profit is to act as a human parasite. Sure it is our right but it wouldn't make us less of a jerk. It is our right to call everyone we meet an *****hole but it doesn't make us decent human beings if we do.

I totally understand that Todd and John are upset. The profiteering is like spitting in their faces. They forfeited profit to to get these in more peoples hands and support the community and some ungrateful people turned around and betrayed that trust, which was completely implicit in the gesture. There was no need to spell it out; that is just an poor excuse. I swear sometimes people on these forums sound more like soulless litigation machines than human beings.


I am very pleased with #87 and go to sleep almost every night listening to them. I have said it before and I will say it again; thank you Todd for making the HF-1's happen. Your efforts have not gone unappreciated.


While not ideal my HF-2 suggestion would be to make another Grado phone similar to, but slightly better than, the HF-1 and sell it through the main distribution network at an appropriate price $300-400. That way anyone who wanted one could get as many as they like and would greatly decrease the demand and profiteering on the HF-1. Also in the case of a limited edition HF-2 I don't think post count is a fair measure. A better one would be to have a cut off registration of a day/week/month before the HF-2 was announced so people couldn't register new accounts. Keep in mind though that most, if not all, the people that took advantage of Tood & Johns generosity have pre-existing accounts and could easily do so again.

 

[Voodoochile]

In all fairness, I do believe that if you bought a pair, you are entitled to do with them as you please. Likewise, I also believe that the fact that someone sold a pair on ebay does not make that person a leech, interested only in personal gain. I would hope that anyone who sold theirs on ebay did so without thinking of the potential implications. Tall order, I know.

Fact is, I am convinced that some may very well have purchased these for the sole purpose of rolling them over at profit, and that is certainly unfortunate.

There was no contract stating you must retain ownership, or sell within the scope of the Head-Fi membership. Of course not. However, there was an implicit interest in having these be "something special for Head-Fi and it's community". While most people have either kept them, or sold them within the community, others may have chosen to seize the opportunity to garner a nice return on their investment via ebay. If that is reason enough for Grado and/or TTVJ to feel that they will therefore not be interested in doing this sort of limited run again, then that is their choice, and their entitlement. Buyers did indeed have "the right" to do with as they please, as do Todd and John. Maybe there would have been a second edition if every buyer of the first edition were forced to sign some sort of clause. What a shame it would have been to feel that was neccessary, in my opinion.

There was no need of an explanation or reasoning as to why there will or will not be another run, yet one was offered, only to then be criticized. Maybe in the future Todd will simply answer such an innocent query with a more curt response, such as "No". I surely hope that never happens, but if it ever did, the latter part of this thread will serve me as a reminder why.


EDIT: These are my opinions alone, and DO NOT represent those opinions of Head-Fi, it's moderators, nor any of it's sponsors. It's just MY nickel on the topic. I just want to make it perfectly clear that I am not speaking on anyone's behalf other than my own.

 

[Voodoochile]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elephas This has nothing to do with members selling HF-1's on eBay.

Apparently it has something to do with it, as it was listed as one of the two principal reasons for this not happening again. Whether or not selling HF-1 on ebay has "anything to do with it" is only for Grado and TTVJ to decide.

No one was required to keep them, or sell them only within the community. That said, selling them on ebay because you will reap more profit than selling them within Head-Fi is probably not a compelling gesture in the face of both manufacuturer and distributer, having produced and distributed these at greatly reduced margin.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elephas I agree HF-1's should be sold to fellow Head-Fiers, but I also believe in the right of HF-1 owners to do with it as they please.

I agree with those sentiments as well. However excercising that right might come with some repercussions, and evidently, it has.

 

[Voodoochile]

Quote:

Originally Posted by omedon It is our right to call everyone we meet an *****hole but it doesn't make us decent human beings if we do.

I like that analogy, thanks for including it here.

 

[erix]

Ain't this an entertaining thread!

I'm pretty sure Grado doesn't care who or how they are sold after they leave his plant. Ditto Todd.

I think they're both pretty chuffed with themselves that they managed to sell all of them (2000 pcs?) in a very short amount (30 days?) of time and without any advertising to speak of.

I imagine Jude is pretty happy about it too - demonstrates the power of the 'fi to move product. Advertisers, kindly take note.

To see you all pissing and moaning about who should and should not be allowed to own them is elitist entertainment of the highest order and I commend you all on your ability to (presumably) hold down a paying job while still being able to whine like a 2nd grade girl.

ok,
erix

 

[swmtnbiker]

Let me say right up front that I didn't have time to read this entire thread. If I'm repeating anything that's already been said or if I missed something in my "analysis", then please keep that in mind.

I'm going to be a bit politically incorrect here.

It bothers me that the people behind the HF-1 are letting the questionable actions of a VERY few "Head-Fiers" define the entire project. In any given group there will ALWAYS be a small percentage who don't walk the line. It would have helped the situation if that line had been properly defined at the time the HF-1 was being sold. If it was so important to the parties involved that these headphones not be sold on eBay then that should have been spelled out as a condition of sale. It was not and some people have taken advantage of the HF-1's limited production to make a profit - that's just human nature.

As for dealer complaints about the HF-1, Grado Labs should just tell them to shut up about it and sell headphones. Manufacturers offer limited edition promotional items to loyal customers as a perk or a way of saying thank you all of the time. This kind of thing has been a mainstay of business since business has been around. The number of people at Head-Fi who purchased the HF-1 is a miniscule drop in the bucket of annual Grado unit sales. Grado Labs and Todd did something special to benefit a community of people who have supported both businesses well over the years, and that's that.

But hey guys, what's done is done. Get over it. Let the egos go and move on. Instead of focusing on the glass being half empty, why not take pride in the fact that the HF-1 has been a rousing technical and popular success at Head-Fi??? 97% of us who purchased these cans are diggin' every minute we spend with them and totally appreciate that they were made available to us. Screw the other 3%!! Don't allow a very, very small minority to spoil the situation for the people who are enjoying the HF-1 in keeping with your original vision. Channel the positive energy here, not the negative.

These are just my frank personal opinions of course. If I've offended anyone then I apologize in advance.

 

[omedon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dpippel It would have helped the situation if that line had been properly defined at the time the HF-1 was being sold. If it was so important to the parties involved that these headphones not be sold on eBay then that should have been spelled out as a condition of sale. It was not and some people have taken advantage of the HF-1's limited production to make a profit - that's just human nature.

I disagree with that statement I think a better term would be sub-human nature. A lot of people I am sure, myself included, recognized the profit potential and perhaps considered getting a second pair by registering a new account or getting a head-fi buddy to order one for us. But we didn't, that is because of OUR human nature and the fact that INTENT of the HF-1 was not to make some head-fiers a little richer at the expense of John and Todd but to get the phones out to as many Head-Fiers as who wanted them.


Of course nobody knows the circumstances of the people selling the phones on ebay but they themselves. Perhaps they bought them with the greatest intentions and never meant to seperate with them but recently lost their job or suffered some other tragedy and suddenly need to raise a lot of money by any means neccessary. But experience leads us to be cynical and assume that it is sub-humans doing so rather than humans in difficult circumstances. Which is too bad

Nobody likes being taken advantage of, it must be tough on Todd seeing the ebay auctions, but perhaps we should all try to retain our faith or 'naiveity'. I would rather live in a community where stuff like the HF-1 happens than one where it doesn't because of some people who may or may not be bad apples.

 

[Jahn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dpippel If it was so important to the parties involved that these headphones not be sold on eBay then that should have been spelled out as a condition of sale.

Totally unenforceable. What would Todd/Grado say? "I saw you trying to sell the HF-1, give it back"? Such a condition wouldn't have prevented "human nature" regardless - no one here is really the Headphone Police, so it comes down to pleading to the higher qualities of our nature - assuming of course that you agree that not selling them that way is indeed the moral high ground - that's up to you and everyone else to decide that for themselves.