In article ,
Marc Wielage wrote:

The surprise for me is that he's got two Sony 3324's up for $7000 (total),
and got absolutely no bidders.

Amazing, how digital gear worth $200,000+ ten years ago isn't worth 1/20th of
that today.

The surprise is more that it ever sold for that and that big companies
thought that is was worth developing such a beast for a limited market
where they were obviously never going to recoup their investment.
Mitsubishi learnt the hard way and so did the pro audio industry not to
trust companies like that (wanna buy an X850 cheap?). Sony still haven't
learnt.

There is a distinction between what something is sold for and what it is
worth. I don't know anybody that bought one of those dinosaurs outright,
there always seemed some sort of complex discount/lease scheme involved.
Even when it was leading edge technology it did not make business sense.

All the people that I can remember wasting huge amounts of studio time with
mixed 48 track analogue with Dolby SR together with 24/32 track digital
sessions, with all the interfacing and mix problems that invoked, now want
24 track analogue without any NR for "that analogue sound". They don't get
the "why don't you put some Dobbly on it?" joke either.

In article znr1060256186k@trad,
(Mike Rivers) wrote:

Leasing makes very good sense when you're on the leading edge of
technology. You get all the tax advantages, deducting as you pay
rather than have to plan for depreciation and disposal, and it means
you don't need a large amount of cash on hand.

That was not what I meant. I was referring to the practise of foisting
unwanted products onto the high end of the market. They are discounted, or
even given, to prominent "name" users who then arrange with a hire company
to get them leased out. The intention is to create the impression that
"everybody" is using them, when really it is only a couple running around
behind the cameras.

This may work lower down the market where there are tens of thousands of
sales, but it does not make business sense when the maximum number of world
sales is probably less than 100. It just means that the people that do
genuinely pay for them end up paying for the first ones too just as the
product is withdrawn and spares become unavailable.

I'd be happy to lease a
laptop computer for two dollars a day and turn it in for a new one
every year.

You can dream. The only problem with that is that hire companies aim to
recover their capital in three months.

In article writes:

I was referring to the practise of foisting
unwanted products onto the high end of the market. They are discounted, or
even given, to prominent "name" users who then arrange with a hire company
to get them leased out. The intention is to create the impression that
"everybody" is using them, when really it is only a couple running around
behind the cameras.

I wasn't aware of this practice of "trial" systems being leased out.
Who does this? I'm sure that all the people who I might some day hear
of who wants a copy of Nuendo can get one if they only ask. No need to
lease anything.

This may work lower down the market where there are tens of thousands of
sales, but it does not make business sense when the maximum number of world
sales is probably less than 100.

That's true, so I didn't believe that this practice you suggest is
actually happening. How many people do you see claiming to "love" the
new Telefunken 251? About five? How many do you think Telefunken can
sell in a year? Hey, they have to put their name and face in front of
the public, so they might as well get someone in the ads who say that
they've used it.

You can dream. The only problem with that is that hire companies aim to
recover their capital in three months.

Then maybe I should go into the business of leasing laptop computers
for $25/day with a 90 day minimum. Any takers?

As an aside that may have some bearing on this newsgroup, recently I
suggested to someone who was considering buying a nice D/A converter
but wondered if it would really improve his monitoring enough to be
worth while that he rent one for a couple of weeks. Out of curiosity,
I went to the web pages of a couple of rental companies to see how
much I was telling this guy to spend. Nobody had the Benchmark that he
was thinking of buying, but renting an Apogee or something of that
level would have cost him as much in two weeks as he would pay for the
Benchmark.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )

Graham Hinton wrote:

That was not what I meant. I was referring to the practise of foisting
unwanted products onto the high end of the market. They are discounted, or
even given, to prominent "name" users who then arrange with a hire company
to get them leased out. The intention is to create the impression that
"everybody" is using them, when really it is only a couple running around
behind the cameras.

This may work lower down the market where there are tens of thousands of
sales, but it does not make business sense when the maximum number of world
sales is probably less than 100. It just means that the people that do
genuinely pay for them end up paying for the first ones too just as the
product is withdrawn and spares become unavailable.

The thing is that it's hard to predict what the total sales are going to
be until items start to sell. The idea with this is that getting some
high end users interested causes good word of mouth and next thing you
know everybody else has to have one too.

It has worked with a lot of products... for some products (like the Night
Technologies EQ3) it has been pretty much the only driving force for sales
and it's been very effective.

On the other hand, with very expensive items where sales are necessarily
limited, it's not so effective. But there are a truly amazing number
of people out there who don't really know how stuff is supposed to work
or sound, who will buy whatever they hear the "big guys" have, and it
is truly amazing the amount of disposable income some of them have.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

In article znr1060380779k@trad,
(Mike Rivers) wrote:

I wasn't aware of this practice of "trial" systems being leased out.
Who does this?

I think you've got hold of the wrong end of the stick. Not the firms trying
to sell their products, but the endorsees who get them for nothing or
heavily discounted. The hire companies do not go around saying "this
belongs to so-and-so", it is a nice cosey arrangement because they have no
capital investment and the owner gets a cut back.


I'm sure that all the people who I might some day hear
of who wants a copy of Nuendo can get one if they only ask.

We were not talking about consumer products.


How many people do you see claiming to "love" the
new Telefunken 251? About five? How many do you think Telefunken can
sell in a year?

We were talking about large objects, like the 3324, and how fast they
become unsellable junk. I was thinking of the X850. A Fairlight III would
be another example.
How many Sony Oxfords out there do you think the full list price actually
exchanged hands for? What will they be worth in 5 years time?


Hey, they have to put their name and face in front of
the public, so they might as well get someone in the ads who say that
they've used it.

Does anyone believe endorsements?
Most people do it for free gear, but it is one thing for guitar strings and
quite another for high end recording gear. The complaint I hear from people
who have done endorsing is that they are asked to be involved with a
product, but when they get it to try out it is finished, boxed and the
manual printed two weeks before it hits the shops and nothing they say
about it will make any difference.


Then maybe I should go into the business of leasing laptop computers
for $25/day with a 90 day minimum. Any takers?

If you want a cheap computer look out for the end-of-lease sales when the
leasing companies dump them.

In article znr1060444177k@trad,
(Mike Rivers) wrote:

So you're saying that ES or BC don't
really use the Nuendo systems that they got in exchange for their
endorsement, but rather that they rent them out?

I'm not saying anything about Nuendo at all. I don't know why you keep
mentioning it.


I'm sure that everyone who had the money to invest in this sort of
gear thought about it real hard, and had a plan to get their money out
of it.

Buying into a new high end product is always a risk. The buyers either need
a tax loss or are desparate to stay ahead. Some buy the stuff resenting
that they have to. When the air is so rarefied that there are only a
handful of such objects ever made the support soon vanishes as soon as the
manufacturer realises that it cannot continue without further sales. I've
seen several 6 figure products launched in a blaze of publicity, but I've
also seen them ruin studio businesses and be thrown on the scrap heap
within a short period of time. That never gets the same publicity, if any
at all.


After all, if the manufacturers didn't think they
were getting their money out of giving away a product or making a long
term no-cost loan or offering a good discount, they wouldn't do it.

If the product were any good they wouldn't have to. Mainly they are just
desparate to say that somebody is using it while everybody is waiting for
everybody else to be the first. It may or may not work for the mass market,
but for the high end giving stuff away (or doing special deals) to the only
people who were likely to buy it anyway just seals the fate of the product.

In article writes:

I'm not saying anything about Nuendo at all. I don't know why you keep
mentioning it.

Because I can open up any trade magazine from the last year and see a
full page ad showing an engineer whose name I know saying how pleased
he is with Nuendo. For me, that's the product which, today, has the
greatest brand/talking head recognition. That means that someone in
their advertising department is doing a great job. I can't tell you
which product Roger Nichols or George Massenberg is endorsing these
days.

Buying into a new high end product is always a risk. The buyers either need
a tax loss or are desparate to stay ahead.

And what's wrong with taking a risk if you're a high profile engineer
with a good budget for a project, and the ability to go back to 'the
old way' if you realize that you're not getting good results with the
new product? What's wrong with taking a risk if you're on a shoestring
is that you might blow all your money on a half baked product that
never gets finished, and you fight it every step of the project
because you can't afford to back out.

Now why should I buy something because some famous engineer is
featured in an ad? Damn if I know. I'll make my own decisions, thank
you. But some people can, and do buy based only on the recommendations
of others. I get a couple of e-mails a week from people asking me (I
have no idea why) what would be the best mixer or microphone or
compressor for them to buy. I don't know. All I can tell them is what
I know that's in their price range or if something lacks a critical
capability that they need. But of course advertising copy doesn't tell
you that.

Mainly they are just
desparate to say that somebody is using it while everybody is waiting for
everybody else to be the first.

It's a standard marketing technique. Alesis and TASCAM used to run ads
with a picture and name of someone nobody every heard of (so therefore
they must be just like me) who's pleased with the product. That's
another technique. What do you expect them to put in an ad? A page of
specifications that 90% of the readers can't understand?

I keep suggesting subtly that Minnetonka Software give me a free
upgrade to my ancient copy of Fast Edit since I always mention this
program when someone asks me about a good 2-track editor, but I guess
they don't read this newsgroup and haven't taken the hint. But I
really DO use the program, for what that's worth.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )

In article znr1060601068k@trad,
(Mike Rivers) wrote:

And what's wrong with taking a risk if you're a high profile engineer
with a good budget for a project, and the ability to go back to 'the
old way' if you realize that you're not getting good results with the
new product?

Having worked on such projects I can tell you that there is plenty wrong
with it.


What's wrong with taking a risk if you're on a shoestring
is that you might blow all your money on a half baked product that
never gets finished, and you fight it every step of the project
because you can't afford to back out.

That doesn't just happen on shoestring budgets - ask the people who bought
a Focusrite Forte. Ironically the present company of that name is featuring
it in their current "revere the past" ad campaign as if the thing ever
worked.