Why did high end audio manufacturers take the wrong path in manufacturing gear?


We all know that high end audio manufacturers took the route of "my gear is the most expensive with only a few made, so it must be the best and the best value" and we wonder why so many high end manufacturers are having financial trouble. Does Classe, Auralic, MBL, darTZeel, and others come to mind? If we would apply this same manufacturing process to computers and cars (build low volume items so the price is high), your computer would cost you tens of thousands of $$ and your Toyota Corolla would cost you $100,000. 

If you compare audio equipment to say a car, the audio gear doesn't have that many pieces that would justify the high cost. For example: How many pieces are in a speaker? 100? 200? The Koenigsegg carbon wheel (it is hand made, takes 3 days to make each wheel) is comprised of 350 pieces (for each wheel,) and 4 of these wheels cost $65k. That's 12 man days of labor, Caron fiber is expensive, and over 1200 pieces of material. Compare that to say 1 of the high end brand $700,000 speakers. Probably take less many hours to make a speaker, with less parts. 

I know, I know, some of the high end manufacturers will say they have R&D costs to make their widget, but doesn't everybody have these same costs? How many designers does a car manufacturer hire? How many clay models do they produce? How many cars are made, tested, tweaked, then destroyed for safety reasons during development? It's public knowledge that it cost Toyota $500M to $1B to develop a new car. How much does it cost the high end speaker company to develop a new speaker? Peanuts compared to what it costs a car manufacturer. So if Toyota has this much upfront cost, plus the cost of all of their thousands and thousands of employees, plant costs/maintenance, how can they charge only $20k for a Corolla? Remember, there are many tasks to build a car that are hand made: engines, transmissions, etc. IMO, if you would apply the Toyota development process to high end audio, you wouldn't have any piece of gear that would cost more than $10k, maybe even $5k. 

Now, if you agree with me that high end is way overpriced for what goes into each piece, answer me this: Would you buy a new home or a stock knowing that the value would drop 50% tomorrow? So why do people buy high end equipment knowing that it is a commodity that will be worth 50% less the day after you bought it?  PLUS: you have people buying audio equipment on credit, maybe paying 10% interest. So not only are you underwater paying cash, you will drown by buying audio gear on credit. IMO, the only people that should be buying high end audio equipment are those that have true financial freedom. But even then, why would I buy a $700k speaker, even if I have financial freedom, when I can invest that money and double it within a few months? Since early last year, I have increased my stock investments value by 100-300%. 

I know what people are going to say: my car value goes down when it leaves the showroom and I'm underwater if I take a loan out for the car. 90% of the time this is correct, that's why you always pay cash for a car. Let me talk about the other 10%: if I would have purchased the Porsche 918 Spyder back in 2015 for the same price that the high end speakers cost, around $750k, you would be able to sell the Porsche today for $3.5M. Too rich, if you would have purchased the 2019 Porsche Speedster for $500k, you would be able to sell it today for $750k or more. How much would a 5 or 10 year old $700k speaker sell for today? 

I love audio, love listening to a very nice systems, but I think most manufacturers took/take the wrong approach on the manufacturing process.

p05129

The high end of the market is governed by the same iron law of economics as the low end-supply and demand. If there is insufficient demand, the products go away. If, however, there are enough willing buyers who find that the products represent value to them at the price offered-that's a successful product. Obviously others have a different view, but I don't feel the need to critique how people spend their money. I feel no resentment toward those who buy more expensive gear than me, nor do I look down on those who choose to spend less. At worst, it doesn't impact me. At best, sometimes technology from higher end products trickles down to less expensive gear, which is a good thing.

I suppose I'm an audiophile libertarian-do what makes you happy-spend as little or as much as you choose-not for me to judge. If you like tubes-great, solid state, great. Vinyl or streaming-whatever works for you. There is something for everybody.

Why did high end audio manufacturers take the wrong path in manufacturing gear?

Don’t tell me it was bad parenting!

Porsche Panamera $110k 

Nice luxury speaker like Wilson, Magico, Marten also $100k

 Input cost vs price charged the Porsche wins obviously. 

Depreciation in 1 year 20% for the Porsche and 50% for the speakers.

long term they are both expensive and highly depreciating consumables.

Are you willing to spend money on either one? Your personal decision, there are plenty of cheaper cars and speakers.  

Same goes for luxury shoes, watches, homes, jewelry, bikes etc. 

I like to marvel at people that spend 100k for these Borrenson standmount 2 ways for example. 
 

In the end it’s all relative to your income.

 

 

 

 

How many cars are made, tested, tweaked, then destroyed for safety reasons during development? 

In Australia (a very small car market) we had four local manufacturers, though all were ultimately owned overseas.

As a free-trade country, we had to be efficient to compete.  Holden was our top manufacturer, owned by GM.  Eventually Holden was given free rein to design for Australia. They used Computer Aided Design and Computer Aided Manufacturing, and no physical cars were made, tested, tweaked or destroyed during development.  It was all done with computer simulations.  The first physical car came off the production line.  In V8 form it was exported to the USA where it became popular amongst police forces as a pursuit vehicle.  It also dominated saloon-car motor racing in Australia.

Our dollar shot up against the US dollar, which hurt exports.  GM demanded $250-million to keep manufacturing in Australia, which the government paid.  Then GM pulled out anyway.  Without GM’s volume, local parts suppliers looked dodgy, so Mitsubishi, then Ford, then Toyota all pulled out of manufacturing in Australia.  But we still operate design centres for GM and Ford.

Porsche is 75% owned by the WV Group, one of the biggest car companies in the world. If you want a niche auto manufacturer comparable to niche high-end audio makers, look for ones using English wheels to shape their panels!

I’d turn the question round a bit, and ask why it is so hard for world-class designers like Holbo to sell direct into the US market, at prices dramatically lower than their competition?  Why do audiophiles seem have a herd mentality when it comes to evaluating equipment?  Why are they so risk averse?

Seems too much to cover for the OP’s post: economies of scale, niche market, target market, supply and demand, increasing costs, luxury goods reaction to market movements, strictly blaming management when it could be other factors….