Looking at audiophile retailing from a civilian's perspective.

[Neil McCauley]

A criterion recently identified elsewhere on this forum by a magazine editor regarding how a product is deselected from being short listed for a review has taken me by surprise. On the face of it, if there isn’t a defined retail network, then the chances of that product being reviewed are compromised.

To me this seems archaic. For example, what about makers who decide to sell direct to the public, which in turn reduces the RRP by a substantial amount by eliminating dealer margins, transport costs, transit insurance and so on?

As a retailer myself, naturally I’d be a little uncomfortable about direct selling as I have invested many 10s of £thousands in demo stock.

However as a ‘civilian’ I would find direct purchase very attractive because of (a) the very substantial cost-saving and (b) the fact that by law I as a consumer have a 28 day refund facility if unsatisfied whereas some conventional dealers would prefer / insist on offer a credit note.

Thus could it be legitimately argued that an editorial policy that looks negatively on products which are responsibly and efficiently supplied at no-risk direct to audiophile consumers, is counterproductive to the best interests of that magazine’s readership?

Despite my vested interest as a ‘conventional’ retailer, I do believe that such an editorial policy is in today's market counterproductive. But am I alone in this view?

Regards

HP

[Colin]

In a way I support the magazines view. I may be in the minority, but I actualy prefer the distributor/retail system. It may cost me more as a customer of the system in terms of cash paid for the product, BUT against that the actual overall cost is probably less.

Given the methology I would have to use if everything was purchased direct, can you iamgine the logistics of arranging for 3 or 4 direct vendors to supply me amps and speakers to try at home. The initial problem of actually having them delivered, how many days off work would that be to receive them. Then again to have the items returned.

Be prepared to have the cost of 3 or 4 items charged out of your account for however long it takes for them to be evaluated in your system, and returned, and the monies credited back.

Having the house turned into a demonstration room while everything is evaluated etc.

It starts to make the margins charged by the retailer look reasonable. You also have the added safety blanket, that if a piece needs repair, during, or after its warranty period a decent dealer will normally lend you a spare while the repair is carried out.

The direct route appeals to the wallet, the retailer route appeals to everything else.

[Clive]

Howard,

Possibly I'm not reading the same posting you are referring to. I read:

* is it available for purchase by the general public?

I didn't take this are meaning a defined retail network. Surely a website would suffice. The Evolution tangential tracking arm by Trans-Fi (Vic) was reviewed in HFW (the arm is now replaced by the Terminator). This is only for sale via a website.

There's also World Designs - linked but I don't think owned by HFW; but that's no doubt a very special case.

[Neil McCauley]

Thank you Colin. a very interesting response.

Sincerely

Howard

[Neil McCauley]

Howard,

Possibly I'm not reading the same posting you are referring to. I read:

* is it available for purchase by the general public?

I didn't take this are meaning a defined retail network. Surely a website would suffice. The Evolution tangential tracking arm by Trans-Fi (Vic) was reviewed in HFW (the arm is now replaced by the Terminator). This is only for sale via a website.

There's also World Designs - linked but I don't think owned by HFW; but that's no doubt a very special case.

The original piece that was the catalyst for my post reads as follows: "So how many dealers do you have? "Ermm, none"

I agree that a website would suffice. However editorial policy might not agree. As for the reviews (and in my experience, fully justified) of World Designs, forgive me if I quote from George Orwell's 'Animal Farm' - "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." It sums up my view completely.

[anthonyTD]

A criterion recently identified elsewhere on this forum by a magazine editor regarding how a product is deselected from being short listed for a review has taken me by surprise. On the face of it, if there isn’t a defined retail network, then the chances of that product being reviewed are compromised.

To me this seems archaic. For example, what about makers who decide to sell direct to the public, which in turn reduces the RRP by a substantial amount by eliminating dealer margins, transport costs, transit insurance and so on?

As a retailer myself, naturally I’d be a little uncomfortable about direct selling as I have invested many 10s of £thousands in demo stock.

However as a ‘civilian’ I would find direct purchase very attractive because of (a) the very substantial cost-saving and (b) the fact that by law I as a consumer have a 28 day refund facility if unsatisfied whereas some conventional dealers would prefer / insist on offer a credit note.

Thus could it be legitimately argued that an editorial policy that looks negatively on products which are responsibly and efficiently supplied at no-risk direct to audiophile consumers, is counterproductive to the best interests of that magazine’s readership?

Despite my vested interest as a ‘conventional’ retailer, I do believe that such an editorial policy is in today's market counterproductive. But am I alone in this view?

Regards

HP

hi howard,
you make a good point, but having had experience with reviewers and magazines through out my career, i can also see it from their point of view too, one of the first audio products i had reviewed under the Tube Distinctions brand was in 1998, and it was by jason kenedy of then hi fi choice, his criterier was first and foremost that it had to be a product that was to be put into production, and also i had to advise him of how the genral public would be able to purchase the product, and through what avenues they would be sold.
only after i had convinced him that it would be a viable product for him to review did he agree, the amplifier in question was one from the copper series [now marco's own amp] it turned out to be very well received by all who auditioned it while with jason, needless to say he gave it the big thumbs up in the review.
my point is, reviewers have to be open minded to a point, but they also have to make sure that they dont commit them selves to something that may later leave them with egg on their faces.
regards,anthony,TD...

[Neil McCauley]

But that was 10 years ago. The World in general and Internet sales in particular have changed. Whereas editorial policy - in terms of delivering tangible reader benefits - rather than the needs of others, seems rooted in the 1990s. My guess is that no one can buck market forces!

[John]

As a Cilvian I want the maximum performance at the a fair price Sometimes I buy direct from the manufacturer eg Trans Fi other times via a dealerit will depend on product performance ratio and the knowledge I can the item repaired or even upgraded in the future I tend to now also to buy my cable needs from ebay and so far had no issues with using this method
I thimk HIFI World are planning to review Vic's Terminator in the future

[Primalsea]

I would imagine that the mags (especially Hifi world, as they seem more down to earth than others) get a constantly badgered by people wanting them to review their stuff. At some point some consistant policy has to be put in place to determine what gets a review. I dont edit magazines but I know from my work I don't have time to invest a lot of time in completely unknown quantities. I would stick my neck out and say this is the same for people (yes they are just people) who write for the mags. I cant imagine anyone would want to review everything that gets thrown their way with the knowledge that a large part of it would be a waste of time. Especially when there are deadlines and other commitments.

On the other hand I can imagine that a lot of what gets reviewed is from a stable list contacts that has been built up over the years. Everyone tends to live and work in their comfort zones. I know from experience that most of the time there is no conspiracy, just gravitation towards the centre of the comfort zone. I have seen some interesting reviews in Hifi World though. There was the wooden tonearm, the AM Terminator tonearm, a Buffer Stage to use with equipment with less than optimum output impedances or long cables.

On the other post, when I first started in Hifi my main concern was to buy at the best price possible. This seems like a good idea but you do end up comprimising your system. This is where good dealers come into play. OK you have to pay a bit more than if you could buy direct but where else can you listen to a wide range of equipment easily. Good dealers (yes they do exist) know their stuff and don't talk bollocks abnd give good advice. Sales departments of a manufacturer won't say" well your best bet is out amp but with our main competitiors CD palyer".

[Ali Tait]

Perhaps an exception to the rule,but Stan has had his dac reviewed.