I was replying to your last question, Puncher!

There are enough ladies and gentlemen "of means" to support us. I think in the broadest terms we will see more growth once the recession is over. For now, we must focus on clients who can afford what we make and not those who can just barely afford what we don't.

As a few have posted, there is an invisible line of attainability with highly aspirational brands. Once you cross it, you get BeoSound 6s, Jaguar X types, BMW 318s, etc. Would you rather have a brand new Merc A class or a second hand E class? In a sense, the second hand market becomes the entry level. Whether or not someone would buy an older screen, we see tremendous evidence that many people would. 

fair comment  TripEnglish would one rather buy a second hand e-class merc+ quality tv or  brand new bv4-65 or bv9??

TripEnglish:

...................Whether or not someone would buy an older screen, we see tremendous evidence that many people would. 

I would find that desperately "aspirational" and deluded - but then thats just me!

Why would anyone buy a BV7 MKI now?? - There's enough mentions on this site to tell you that the picture is cr4p compare to modern TV's. So what do the second hand buyers of older BV7's think they're getting (esp. when they go next door and see Sharps/Panasonics/Samsungs etc.).- The days of B&O "upgradeable" TV's went with the Avant, they can barely fix the incompatibilities of the current TV's they sell, nevermind "update" them.

Beauty, integration, sound quality (it did have a BeoLab 7 now didn't it) to name a few. It can still integrate with a BeoSound, still work in a link room, still blow the doors off its contemporaries in just about every way. Still rotates and tilts on its stand by remote. What does a 3 year old Sony do but encourage me to replace it?

that is absolutely correct not disputing that fact,but buying a Sony or whatever every 3 years still cheaper option and more technological advanced than the outdated B&O set to start with

i had B&O avant only lasted 6 years!!!,and went and bought bv7-32 total mess picture-wise& connectivity no hdmi in£6k+ tv!!! (no shame either)!!!!!got rid of it when i could

TripEnglish:

Beauty, integration, sound quality (it did have a BeoLab 7 now didn't it) to name a few. It can still integrate with a BeoSound, still work in a link room, still blow the doors off its contemporaries in just about every way. Still rotates and tilts on its stand by remote. What does a 3 year old Sony do but encourage me to replace it?

The BL7 is a detached speaker, the rotate and tilt action is a motorised stand (both extras incidentally).

I still think only a mug would now buy a BV7 MKI.

Puncher:

TripEnglish:

Beauty, integration, sound quality (it did have a BeoLab 7 now didn't it) to name a few. It can still integrate with a BeoSound, still work in a link room, still blow the doors off its contemporaries in just about every way. Still rotates and tilts on its stand by remote. What does a 3 year old Sony do but encourage me to replace it?

The BL7 is a detached speaker, the rotate and tilt action is a motorised stand (both extras incidentally).

I still think only a mug would now buy a BV7 MKI.

 

You are correct of course.

The problem is now that B&O are not even class leaders when the products are released.  So its not long before picture quality is way surpased - which rather confirms my point that the BV7 looks good when its switched off- If one wants to buy it for that and its integration with other 'class leading' products from B&O like the BS5! then fair enough.

I know that trip feels there are enough customers that are happy to pay- problem is now though that even some of the high end customers I am dealing with are seeing a drop in sales- and they make quality products from the start.

B&O, with its traditionally staid product line (in relative terms) can not compete on a first-to-market and up-to-speed basis in the wider electronics market.  It's core strength has been to diversify and offer something different, something that exudes quality becaked up by the strength of the brand. This market sector has been identified by others now and it is difficult for B&O to justify the huge premiums for its products.  Will be interesting to see how things turn out - am sure B&O will come out strong - but I am thoroughly unsure that the Beovision 9/Beosound 5 are the way to go with things.  All IMHO of course.

My personal view is that once the speed of change in the AV world slows as flat screens/HD technologies become more mature, B&O will be able to differentiate themselves again on both design & quality. It has been difficult for them recently as they have to buy in technology which is already out of date by the time they deploy it. It is hard to be different if a product from a volume manufacturer appears to be both cheaper and better quality.

propaganda:

My personal view is that once the speed of change in the AV world slows as flat screens/HD technologies become more mature, B&O will be able to differentiate themselves again on both design & quality. It has been difficult for them recently as they have to buy in technology which is already out of date by the time they deploy it. It is hard to be different if a product from a volume manufacturer appears to be both cheaper and better quality.

Agree - do you see the pace of TV technology slowing any time soon??

Dear All:

 

The water is 'hot' again!  

INNOVATION!!  In tough economic times innovation has 'saved' many companies.  B&O needs to take a quantum leap with its product portfolio. The BS 5 is an ok-to-good start.  Its product must be desirable again.  Yes, many of the products of yesterday are still selling but something new & updated has to sit next to or replace those icons of previous years.  Also,  It cannot dial down the quality if anything it has to improve it.

For now, I will pass on the BS 5.  I am looking forward to version 2.0. 

 

Dario 

Puncher:

propaganda:

My personal view is that once the speed of change in the AV world slows as flat screens/HD technologies become more mature, B&O will be able to differentiate themselves again on both design & quality. It has been difficult for them recently as they have to buy in technology which is already out of date by the time they deploy it. It is hard to be different if a product from a volume manufacturer appears to be both cheaper and better quality.

Agree - do you see the pace of TV technology slowing any time soon??

 

difficult to say, could be some time. The Avant was so good because the technology was very mature and it was relatively easy to differentiate from other TVs. However I think the quality of the B&O offering is getting pretty good though. I decided not to buy a BV7 mk1 as i did not feel it was good enough, but recently opted for a mk3 and have been more than happy and especially pleased that SD looks so good and that HD Bluray is exceptional. I think there is a similar problem with the BS5, B&O really have to get their act together to differentiate it from home computer media server products.

kokomo:

You may well be correct with your math(s), but I can assure you 65" TVs are not what your 'normal' consumer is in the market for, at least in Europe so the comparison, whilst it may be accurate, is somewhat irrelevant.  Have you noticed a recession? Maybe even a depression? Ford, Chrysler & GM are virtually bankrupt. OK so B&O may well ride this out and prosper, selling to the very well off, rather than the comfortably well off, but at the moment, and for the foreseeable future, that is a reducing customer target audience.   

Ford, GM and Chrysler are in deep trouble in the US specifically because, while they were feeding at the SUV trough. they allowed their car lines to devolve into Lowest Common Denominator products to which no-one 'aspired.'  When oil prices began to jump sharply over the last year or so, the SUV market evaportated, and there was nothing else in the show-rooms to draw people in.  Ford in Europe, along with GM, and here in the US companies like VW, prove that you can produce 'entry level' products which are 'aspirational.'  The 'big three' are now rushing to bring us Astras, Mondeos and Festivas as fast as they can.

 B&O on the other hand, have proven before that their entry level products can be 'aspirational' as well.  The BeoSound 1, the BeoSound 2 (to my mind), and, yes the BV-8, are all desireable, competitive products which offer experiences not shared with their cheaper competition.  We all remember the MX fondly, many of us revere the Avant, both in spite of their patently 'rididculous' prices...because we understand  what else was packed into them, features, capabilities, qualities, expansions unmatched by anything else available at the time.  I find it interesting that we are here again talking about the 'premium' being paid for B&O TV's in light of the recent departure from Consumer Plasma TV manufacturing/marketing by companies which could not make a profit due to cut-throat, suicidal pricing. 

I am aware that being exiled to the Colonies, we've not tasted the bitter pill which must have been the BV-7 1 & 2, so our view is skewed somewhat....but unpacking the features, comparing the sound, image, design, PUC, expandability, networking, and the warranty...what is their not to like about the BV-7 MK 3 or, indeed, the BV-8?

Russ, do you realize that was your 355th post? Let's have a moment of silence. 

propaganda:

My personal view is that once the speed of change in the AV world slows as flat screens/HD technologies become more mature, B&O will be able to differentiate themselves again on both design & quality. It has been difficult for them recently as they have to buy in technology which is already out of date by the time they deploy it. It is hard to be different if a product from a volume manufacturer appears to be both cheaper and better quality.

B&O struggled to implement the integration of digital technology  in time ,i agree they made the best TV in analog age,however flat screen is flat screen u can not improve or alter the shape IMHO u can not make it neater smaller better design,ie going to an art gallery yes the frame will make the picture presented better but the most important thing is the picture you are viewing

ed7:

propaganda:

My personal view is that once the speed of change in the AV world slows as flat screens/HD technologies become more mature, B&O will be able to differentiate themselves again on both design & quality. It has been difficult for them recently as they have to buy in technology which is already out of date by the time they deploy it. It is hard to be different if a product from a volume manufacturer appears to be both cheaper and better quality.

B&O struggled to implement the integration of digital technology  in time ,i agree they made the best TV in analog age,however flat screen is flat screen u can not improve or alter the shape IMHO u can not make it neater smaller better design,ie going to an art gallery yes the frame will make the picture presented better but the most important thing is the picture you are viewing

Where will B&O find themselves with just two of the next innovations in TV's, Wireless transmission to screen and OLED?

In the case of the latter, much thinner than current plasma & LCD models, with sharper pictures and less energy consumption. 

RussR:

kokomo:

You may well be correct with your math(s), but I can assure you 65" TVs are not what your 'normal' consumer is in the market for, at least in Europe so the comparison, whilst it may be accurate, is somewhat irrelevant.  Have you noticed a recession? Maybe even a depression? Ford, Chrysler & GM are virtually bankrupt. OK so B&O may well ride this out and prosper, selling to the very well off, rather than the comfortably well off, but at the moment, and for the foreseeable future, that is a reducing customer target audience.   

 

 B&O on the other hand, have proven before that their entry level products can be 'aspirational' as well.  The BeoSound 1, the BeoSound 2 (to my mind), and, yes the BV-8, are all desireable, competitive products which offer experiences not shared with their cheaper competition.  We all remember the MX fondly, many of us revere the Avant, both in spite of their patently 'rididculous' prices...because we understand  what else was packed into them, features, capabilities, qualities, expansions unmatched by anything else available at the time.  I find it interesting that we are here again talking about the 'premium' being paid for B&O TV's in light of the recent departure from Consumer Plasma TV manufacturing/marketing by companies which could not make a profit due to cut-throat, suicidal pricing. 

I am aware that being exiled to the Colonies, we've not tasted the bitter pill which must have been the BV-7 1 & 2, so our view is skewed somewhat....but unpacking the features, comparing the sound, image, design, PUC, expandability, networking, and the warranty...what is their not to like about the BV-7 MK 3 or, indeed, the BV-8?

 

It is true that many brands have pulled out of their own investment in plasma as they were losing money. But to compare the millions these brands put into development with B&O is a bit far of the mark.

All B&O is doing is buying a screen from panasonic with no commercial or financial risks.

We come back to the oroginal debate, the avant was twice the price at the time of teh very best sony TV available. How much more is the BV7 now than the very best sony TV.

Fact is the price differential is to wide and quality not good enough.

for the same price as a bv7/40 i can get a sony 52" system and a pioneer 50" kuro and yamahe and denon av systems in two rooms and still have change for a dozen blu rays

bno's pricing is just daft nowadays 

the avant was based in reality , these days bno seem to be in cloud cuckoo land 

i wouldn't mind if their gear was up to spec , but the bv9 doesn't even have dual channel freeview , you can only record what you watch

sony do a £250 hd recorder that can better that ! i should know , i've got ne plugged into my avant as the hdr 1 and 2 were both utter ****

 

:( 

.

355f:

RussR:

kokomo:

You may well be correct with your math(s), but I can assure you 65" TVs are not what your 'normal' consumer is in the market for, at least in Europe so the comparison, whilst it may be accurate, is somewhat irrelevant.  Have you noticed a recession? Maybe even a depression? Ford, Chrysler & GM are virtually bankrupt. OK so B&O may well ride this out and prosper, selling to the very well off, rather than the comfortably well off, but at the moment, and for the foreseeable future, that is a reducing customer target audience.   

 

 B&O on the other hand, have proven before that their entry level products can be 'aspirational' as well.  The BeoSound 1, the BeoSound 2 (to my mind), and, yes the BV-8, are all desireable, competitive products which offer experiences not shared with their cheaper competition.  We all remember the MX fondly, many of us revere the Avant, both in spite of their patently 'rididculous' prices...because we understand  what else was packed into them, features, capabilities, qualities, expansions unmatched by anything else available at the time.  I find it interesting that we are here again talking about the 'premium' being paid for B&O TV's in light of the recent departure from Consumer Plasma TV manufacturing/marketing by companies which could not make a profit due to cut-throat, suicidal pricing. 

I am aware that being exiled to the Colonies, we've not tasted the bitter pill which must have been the BV-7 1 & 2, so our view is skewed somewhat....but unpacking the features, comparing the sound, image, design, PUC, expandability, networking, and the warranty...what is their not to like about the BV-7 MK 3 or, indeed, the BV-8?

 

It is true that many brands have pulled out of their own investment in plasma as they were losing money. But to compare the millions these brands put into development with B&O is a bit far of the mark.

All B&O is doing is buying a screen from panasonic with no commercial or financial risks.

We come back to the oroginal debate, the avant was twice the price at the time of teh very best sony TV available. How much more is the BV7 now than the very best sony TV.

Fact is the price differential is to wide and quality not good enough.

In 2000 our Avant cost $8500. What Sony or other competitor of the same size sold for $4000-$4500 at that time?

Currently the BV7 is about $9,450 in the US. Checking the Sony web page the newest top line Sony 40 inch LCD will be priced at $3,999.99.  The top Sony receiver is priced at $2500 for a total of $6,499.99.  Thus the BV7 with the included BS3 is less than 50% more than the top Sony with receiver. Just looking at the panel, the price is just a little more than double.

Thank you, Razlaw. I was about to make that point.  

unfortunately you can't compare the top of the range sony with a bno as the top of the range sony has more advanced features like led rgb backlighting and built in wi fi

the x series top of the range new 46" is c £3k in the uk , that's about the same as a bv8

nuff said 

I think Flappo has hit the proverbail nail on the head on this one.

You could say that has been the case with all manufacturers of LCD / Plasma technology.  The change has been dramatic in picture quality as engineers / LCD technology have developed the product.  This wasn't only confined to Bang.  I think that the prices of used BV7's are competitive and its a nice TV at the end of the day.

In reality, you could argue this topic forever.  The reality is technology is evolving and the nice thing is that Bang is keeping up - where as some of the larger producers pictures still do not rival the latest BV7.  I think thats not bad for a tiny manufacturer.

 If you did buy a BV7 Mk1 and wanted to improve the Picture quality, you could if you really wanted retrofit a MK2 chassis and screen - although this will cost you some currency...

 

 

At Bang & Olufsen is it really all about TVs?  Most of these discussions here revolve around the quality and price of TVs.  However I am more interested in the other higher end products like the Beolab 5s.  Is it that B&O rises and falls on TVs?

Trip.  I agree with most of your points with one exception.  The point was that B&O could always depend on the more wealthy among us.  The reality is the more wealthy among us have at least 30 percent less wealth due to the recent stock market drop.  Oh yes they still have a lot of money but are going to be more careful with it.  There are not many bonuses on Wall street this year due to government loans and the oversight that goes with it.   

On Black Friday (the big shopping day after the Thanksgiving holiday on November 28th), I had to wait almost an hour at the Apple store due to the crowds to buy an iPod touch getting what resulted in a $35 discount.  Later after lunch, I went to the local B&O store which was empty.

Everybody can draw their own conclusions about the current situation but I want an incentive to spend my money.  For B&O, it means they need a new marketing strategy and especially discounts.  Even the wealthy want a break in the price.  That how they got to be wealthy.  Isn't it?