sputnik13
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2008
- Posts
- 142
- Likes
- 15
Just a couple points I wanted to throw out... (disclaimer: I'm neither for nor against Bose products)
#1.
To consider the Bose headphones "overpriced" you have to consider a couple different points (there's more but I choose to address only 2), one of which is related to point #2. The other thing to consider is - On what basis do you consider them "overpriced"?
If the judgment of Bose being "overpriced" is due to the performance in comparison to your alternatives, then yes they may very well be overpriced. However I think an argument saying something like "all audiophile gear is overpriced thus Bose isn't any worse off" is only valid if you are of the opinion that there's a way to quantify the increments of benefit you can derive from different equipment. I don't think there's a way to quantify the benefits of "better" equipment, so the judgment on whether something is overpriced for its performance needs to be considered in comparison to your available alternatives at the same performance point.
If a product has no alternatives that provides the same performance and there's no way to quantify the incremental benefit, you can't really call it overpriced no matter the price point except to say "there's something better for lower cost". I think the point most people are making about Bose products is that there are better alternatives for the same price point, not that Bose is much more overpriced than say an HD800 or GS1000, etc.
#2.
Has anyone considered what a Grado SR-80 would cost if Grado spent as much on marketing as Bose does on their products? I personally would actually prefer that Grado spend all of their resources on developing and manufacturing high quality headphones rather than marketing, because if they were as heavily marketed as Bose I believe I would still be saving up for an SR-80 rather than enjoying them.
The business plan/strategy is obviously very different for Bose and Grado. Bose goes for the mass market knowing that the marketing message, presentation of the product, and a high quality and very visible brand combined with a reasonably good product is going to allow them to sell a much higher volume to the masses than a very high quality product with very little marketing will. Companies like Grado, on the other hand, seem to eschew mass marketing in order to focus more on developing high quality phones.
Carrying this illustration a step further, just imagine that it costs $10 to produce "medium quality" phones and $15 to produce "high quality" phones. I think Bose prefers to spend another $10 on marketing "medium quality" phones and sell them for $25 to 1000 users rather than produce $15 to produce "high quality" phones, spend $5 on marketing, and sell them for $25 to 100 users. The numbers are rather contrived of course, but just trying to accentuate the point.
I'd really like this trend to continue personally, because the people who really care about audio quality will sooner or later drift into the Grado, Sennheiser, AKG, etc camp and find much higher quality products that would otherwise be even more expensive than they are if their respective companies heavily marketed them. On the other hand, the people who are happy with reasonably good products will stay with Bose and get sound that they're happy enough with. What's so bad about that?
#1.
To consider the Bose headphones "overpriced" you have to consider a couple different points (there's more but I choose to address only 2), one of which is related to point #2. The other thing to consider is - On what basis do you consider them "overpriced"?
If the judgment of Bose being "overpriced" is due to the performance in comparison to your alternatives, then yes they may very well be overpriced. However I think an argument saying something like "all audiophile gear is overpriced thus Bose isn't any worse off" is only valid if you are of the opinion that there's a way to quantify the increments of benefit you can derive from different equipment. I don't think there's a way to quantify the benefits of "better" equipment, so the judgment on whether something is overpriced for its performance needs to be considered in comparison to your available alternatives at the same performance point.
If a product has no alternatives that provides the same performance and there's no way to quantify the incremental benefit, you can't really call it overpriced no matter the price point except to say "there's something better for lower cost". I think the point most people are making about Bose products is that there are better alternatives for the same price point, not that Bose is much more overpriced than say an HD800 or GS1000, etc.
#2.
Has anyone considered what a Grado SR-80 would cost if Grado spent as much on marketing as Bose does on their products? I personally would actually prefer that Grado spend all of their resources on developing and manufacturing high quality headphones rather than marketing, because if they were as heavily marketed as Bose I believe I would still be saving up for an SR-80 rather than enjoying them.
The business plan/strategy is obviously very different for Bose and Grado. Bose goes for the mass market knowing that the marketing message, presentation of the product, and a high quality and very visible brand combined with a reasonably good product is going to allow them to sell a much higher volume to the masses than a very high quality product with very little marketing will. Companies like Grado, on the other hand, seem to eschew mass marketing in order to focus more on developing high quality phones.
Carrying this illustration a step further, just imagine that it costs $10 to produce "medium quality" phones and $15 to produce "high quality" phones. I think Bose prefers to spend another $10 on marketing "medium quality" phones and sell them for $25 to 1000 users rather than produce $15 to produce "high quality" phones, spend $5 on marketing, and sell them for $25 to 100 users. The numbers are rather contrived of course, but just trying to accentuate the point.
I'd really like this trend to continue personally, because the people who really care about audio quality will sooner or later drift into the Grado, Sennheiser, AKG, etc camp and find much higher quality products that would otherwise be even more expensive than they are if their respective companies heavily marketed them. On the other hand, the people who are happy with reasonably good products will stay with Bose and get sound that they're happy enough with. What's so bad about that?
