Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[lowland]

TotalSonic wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 22:32

crna59 wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 17:01 Stubblebine/Romanowski just got the $180k Grande Utopias. I also strongly feel that $150,000 of that cash could have been contributed to charity (or their kid's college fund) with $30k remaining for speakers and the results of their work would not be diminished one tiny iota.

Nicely put, Steve.

Edit: principle applies even if the Grande Utopias were heavily discounted.

[Thomas W. Bethel]

Jerry Tubb wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 17:15

crna59 wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 16:01 Stubblebine/Romanowski just got the $180k Grande Utopias. At some point I realized that perhaps not all mastering operations (and other studios) actually have to turn a profit. JT

You mean we are suppose to make a profit. I knew I was doing something wrong all these years...Thanks for the heads up!

[Schallfeldnebel]

MASSIVE Mastering wrote on Sun, 29 November 2009 11:33

Let's say he got them at half off...  That's still $90k.   Although I'll have to remember those next time I make any major upgrades (so I have something to show the wife to say "Hey, at least I'm not getting these...").

Let's say, they got them for costs of the materials. How much would that be, anyone who could estimate?

[Waltz Mastering]

Schallfeldnebel wrote on Sun, 29 November 2009 08:23

Let's say, they got them for costs of the materials. How much would that be, anyone who could estimate?

What does a 50lb. Multiferrite magnet, and pure Beryllium go for these days?  Times that by whatever, add in 70 - 100 linear feet of 1" thick mdf and adjustable spines, etc. and your probably around 10 - 20,000 in parts.  just a wild guess...

[Geoff Emerick de Fake]

Since they manufacture most of the components, their cost excluding cabinetry is about $1200 per speaker. They pay between $2000 and $ 4000 for the cabinet, depending on finition/wood choice. But it takes them about 200 hours per pair to assemble, test, verify, clean, refinish if needed (very labour-extensive final phase because the product must be immaculate); the crate and cartons are also very expensive.
But all in all, their cost must be around 7-10k. They have to apply 50% margin at least, that is a 100% mark up, so the ex-factory price would normally be 28-40k a pair. That means a landed cost of 35-50k for the US distributor, who gives 40% discount to the dealers and 10% for the reps, which comes to a MSRP of 75-100k.
BUT... there is a lot of marketing expenses, which are to be spread on a very small number sold, and anyway, putting the price in stratospheric territory is part of making the market bubble.

[Greg Reierson]

I have a few friends in the hi-fi market who tell me MSRP is about 6x manufacturing cost.

GR

[turtletone]

I've listened to these and I have to say that they sound marvelous. (the grand Utopia's). $150k is a bit steep, but divide that cost over the life of the speakers and it's not "out of the question" IMO.

[cass anawaty]

No doubt you need special cables for these.

[MASSIVE Mastering]

TotalSonic wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 22:12

MASSIVE Mastering wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 22:33 Let's say he got them at half off...  That's still $90k.   Although I'll have to remember those next time I make any major upgrades (so I have something to show the wife to say "Hey, at least I'm not getting these..."). Nice strategy! I keep running the numbers on spending around $30k to get a lathe in here and I still can't justify it (although it is possible my interest in doing it might override my common sense).  Again - how can anyone justify what could be the budget for a decent studio build out on just monitors? Best regards, Steve Berson

There go go.  Now put that into practice --- You really want those $180,000 speakers and figure you can get them for $90,000 so it's almost a perfect deal.  But then change your mind and get the lathe for $30k.  You just saved another $60,000.  How can anyone argue with that?  

[crna59]

TotalSonic wrote on Sun, 29 November 2009 00:52

No diss on Mike and Paul as I'm sure they're doing excellent work from their studio - but it seems it's the folks who spend the inordinate amount of cash that are the ones likely to make Mix mag's cover -

Yeah... I can't believe all the advertising dollars they've spent in magazines and online.


Regards,

[Bob Olhsson]

If you figure in the value of the dollar vs. the Euro and inflation, they probably cost no more than Duntech Sovreigns did back in the late '80s. They may have gotten them used for considerably less too.

[crna59]

Bob Olhsson wrote on Sun, 29 November 2009 13:20

They may have gotten them used for considerably less too.

Bob Hodas is a dealer for Focal Professional and they were purchased new from him.


Regards,

[TotalSonic]

crna59 wrote on Sun, 29 November 2009 14:11

TotalSonic wrote on Sun, 29 November 2009 00:52 No diss on Mike and Paul as I'm sure they're doing excellent work from their studio - but it seems it's the folks who spend the inordinate amount of cash that are the ones likely to make Mix mag's cover - Yeah... I can't believe all the advertising dollars they've spent in magazines and online. Regards,

Bruce -
You're misunderstanding me.  I wasn't talking regarding whether they spent any substantial advertising dollars with Mix or the other magazines/websites associated with Mix, as I agree with you that afaik Mike and Paul haven't done that at all.  

What I was referring instead to is that to my perspective Mix magazine is lost still in the 90's where the focus on their cover is featuring studios that have spent a fortune on their equipment or facilities.  This is all fine and dandy on having a picture that makes you go all goo goo gah gah and slightly green with envy (i.e. "gear porn") - so I can see the appeal to Mix's editors to follow what is their already established format - but for me a magazine like TapeOp which developed it's reputation because of its greater focus on the people behind the gear instead of the gear itself is much more appealing and much more realistic towards what type of facility and philosophy will actually continue into the future.  I think Mix's readership has definitely been diminishing (as has its thickness) - perhaps not connecting with their potential readership is part of it.

Again - not a diss on what Mike and Paul are doing as I'm sure they are both doing excellent sounding work - but in my previous post I was expressing the thought that they got speakers costing an exorbitant sum way beyond what other comparable options for their studio is possibly indeed one small factor on why Mix magazine chose them for their cover.  It's very possible I'm wrong in this though.

A decent example of what I'm trying to convey is looking at Daptone Record's own studio in Bushwick, Brooklyn - a place put together as diy effort by the owners on the cheap - but with care put into all the elements that matter.  Versus a place like Germano Studios in Manhattan where no expense was spared in outfitting it.  Guess which one is way more successful now in terms of both return on investment and imho also the quality of music being made in it??
Then guess which one that is more likely to be featured on the cover of Mix.  

I don't begrudge the  "spare no expense" places that are done for the love of the art of it all - but without a decent business plan the reality is these places don't have longevity - witness the recent closings of places like Allaire Studios  - and in the current and pending economic climates the need for discretion and intelligence in investments and purchases has never been greater.  

Dubai's another great example of what I'm talking about - a spare no expense fantasy world in the making funded with super high leveraging - and one that is close to defaulting on a substantial amount of its debt.  

Sorry to be so rambling in these various thoughts about this issue - and again to be clear I wish no ill will to Mr. Stubblebine and Mr. Romanowski whatsoever and do in fact hope that against all odds their investment in these speakers will pan out well for them.  They are certainly to be congratulated for getting some recognition of their achievements with a cover feature also.  

Anyway - again to be clear if someone wants to use their own money to make purchases of whatever they like is all good by me.  But for me a purchase that has a negative bang for buck ratio isn't to be envied - instead the intelligence behind the making of that purchase is to be questioned.  Obviously OMMV!!

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[TotalSonic]

Bob Olhsson wrote on Sun, 29 November 2009 14:20

If you figure in the value of the dollar vs. the Euro and inflation, they probably cost no more than Duntech Sovreigns did back in the late '80s. They may have gotten them used for considerably less too.

Mastering studios simply are not getting the rates and returns that they could charge in the 80's and 90's.  If you factor in Dollar vs. Euro exchange rates actually increases costs, not diminshes them.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[TotalSonic]

MASSIVE Mastering wrote on Sun, 29 November 2009 13:12

There you go.  Now put that into practice --- You really want those $180,000 speakers and figure you can get them for $90,000 so it's almost a perfect deal.  But then change your mind and get the lathe for $30k.  You just saved another $60,000.  How can anyone argue with that?

I like it!  Luckily my wife is a musician and understands the need of gear purchases - but if I buy a major upgrade myself then it means I probably have to add another $5k or so at the same time so she can get that electric violin midi-synth system she's had her eye on.  Which would still be ok only I could only convince my landlords that I can pay them with this magical $60k that I just saved even though it never existed in the first place!  

Best regards,
Steve Berson