My suspicion is it's a wider indicator of the state of the market, i.e. everyone who wants the existing stuff has already bought it, few new punters are coming in at the bottom, so that leaves little option but to introduce ever more expensive and "better" kit in the hope that owners of the current (hardly cheap) top-end stuff will upgrade. I'm not singling Naim out here. This seems to be market-wide with many companies moving ever-upwards to cater for what appears to be a rapidly declining yet ever-older and more wealthy market. This strategy is clearly unsustainable long-term as it will die with that generation. One needs to get the kids & school-leavers interested in order to have a natural flow throughout a product range, but the conventional audio market has almost entirely failed to connect here for a couple of decades room.
Young girl scoffs at silly young people.As many young, bright people (who are into music) keep telling me, "if it doesn't fit in my backpack, what good is it?".
Joe.
Science proves that those speakers are too close together.
It certainly is.
I'd venture to suggest that's because MP3 (as in iTunes+) isn't quite as shitty as we make out, and high res lossless not as superior.
It certainly is.
I'd venture to suggest that's because MP3 (as in iTunes+) isn't quite as shitty as we make out, and high res lossless not as superior.
So then how is Naim increasing turnover every year since the recession?
I'd prefer to not focus on Naim specifically, rather consider the high-end audio market as a whole. They are after all but one player of many following an ever-upwards path into the realms of stratospheric pricing, and far from the first or most extreme. One could just as easily pick items at random from an issue of Stereophile featuring any number of absurdly priced US high-end monster amps, massive record decks, enormous blingy tube amps, cables costing £thousands etc. These appear either from obscure boutique manufacturers or one-great companies clearly feeling the pinch of market contraction. It doesn't take that great an economic mind to figure that fewer units sold at a much higher price / markup equates to maintaining or even increasing turnover. The problem comes with chasing an ever-aging ever-more-wealthy customer if no one fresh is coming in at the bottom end to replace them. Without fresh blood it inevitably ends when the old rich folk who actually want this stuff die off. It is a ridiculously short-term strategy.
Mike,
But a rug that ties the room together.
Joe
Isn't the same true for cars? Just look at Ferrari, Lambo, Pagani, Aston Martin, even the latest products from Jaguar Land Rover. How many footballers are there in the world?
Where da crazy hi-fi money is coming from, 'splained in grapholar form --
![]()
Joe
Not for me. The pricing relationship of top cars against the median has most likely remained relatively stable over the years - with the exception of the Veyron. I could be wrong but it certainly seems that way to me.