We agree. We believe our pricing is appropriate which is factored primarily on the Cost of Goods. This was a common calculation in manufacturing for decades but not so much anymore. We agree that when you look at our competitors in the highest end of the market, they're clearly using a higher multiplier when scrutinizing their visible components. And I'm confident we use far more expensive internal components as well but take that with my bias.
And parts aren't everything. You can spend a great deal of money inefficiently and produce an inferior loudspeaker.
That's why we're such firm believers in the audition. And not just for the opinion of "influencers" but the people who matter most, the actual customers. Ultimately, that's all that should matter. So to that end, we've spent the bulk of our marketing budget brining our products to shows where the rooms are horrible but also where potential customers as well as interested observers can hear them and hopefully enjoy them.
And we've been fortunate to win a large number of awards. I don't think I'm being hyperbolic at all when I say we've
won the most Best in Show awards in the last four years than any of our competitors, possibly combined. Certainly at the shows we've attended.
BUT, those "competitors' still get Product of the Year while only presenting auditions to select people and influencers in a permanent sound room with 6 to 12 months of setup. And IF they take them to a show, they set them up for static display.
We do not consider our pricing to be an apples to apples comparison to our competition and we hope others will take the chance to analyze that belief for themselves.
Thanks for the observations Leo, all the best!
