Interestingly, Highlander does not use “other people’s money”. The partners bought Mac with their own money. So, *maybe*, they think about Mac & Sonus Faber a little differently than the average PE firm. And Mac is the longest-surviving luxury audio brand I can think of (I’m sure I’m missing something obvious) so why kill the golden goose? With no outside money, they can own as long as they want if it produces good cash flow
Highlander describes the companies as producing “functional works of art” - even the most avaricious exploitation of luxury products can take the path of “Veblen Goods” - the higher the price, the greater the demand (think Hermes). But the quality needs to be very high for that to work. So the value may not lie in cheapening the goods (the highest end luxury watch & jewelry co’s are all owned by p/e firms or enormously wealthy families. And even Hermes had to go public to raise capital)
One path would be to create clearer tiering of the product line at both companies (clear floor on pricing, more distinct tiers, creation of new “highest tiers”. Then, look for other people’s products to move through the distribution channels. And will definitely reorganize home entertainment to be a big business for both. And both probably need capital to rationalize design - ie there are probably 14 types of screws used to assemble a McIntosh chassis, because no one’s taken the time to figure out how to make it two
Or, they could fxck it all up