|
|
Post by geebo on Dec 27, 2015 12:32:30 GMT -5
First, glad you concede on the first point. And I don't think you are alone in questioning the cost. As for whether you said they were lying or not, technically you did not. That said, via application of Boolean alegbra, you effectively did. Unless we add in the possibility that Dan forgot he said it would be at cost... Mark What I'm saying is as far as Emotiva (not me) is concerned they never did or did they forget they said it. Here is what he said: " Also, our HDMI 2.0 card will be out our BEFORE so please don't worry about this either. We'll be making it available at our cost for existing XMC-1 owners. " They said they will MAKE IT AVAILABLE and AT OUR COST. They did not say they will PUT IT UP FOR SALE AT COST PRICE. MAKE IT AVAILABLE AT OUR COST only promises that they will make it available. Not that it is going to be sold at cost price. Making it "available at our cost" means it will be available at their cost. Whatever their cost is, that's what we can get it for. If it meant free, what would "below cost" mean? |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs 
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,101
|
Post by klinemj on Dec 27, 2015 12:34:23 GMT -5
They said they will MAKE IT AVAILABLE and AT OUR COST. They did not say they will PUT IT UP FOR SALE AT COST PRICE. MAKE IT AVAILABLE AT OUR COST only promises that they will make it available. Not that it is going to be sold at cost price. I honestly have no clue what you are try to say, but it looks like you are back to saying it should be free. I mean, if they make it available but don't sell it...then it either has to be free or not provided to people. Right? And, if it's not provided to people, then it is not available...which is not possible from what Emotiva stated. And yet in a prior post you concede they didn't mean free. Ever study Boolean algebra? Things don't have to be stated to be concluded from words that are said. In this case, the words are leading in a circle. Mark |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,101
|
Post by klinemj on Dec 27, 2015 12:41:35 GMT -5
I would love for them to clarified. Do you mean you are still looking for them to clarify something or wish they would have clarified earlier? If it is the first, what is not clear? And why not call them to ask Monday? If it is the second, they clarified 5 months prior to the first sale it would be 1.4b, not 2.0 and that an upgrade board would be made available later for some cost. Back then, they didn't know the cost because they didn't know what it would take to do it given the uncertainty of the spec/equipment at the time. Now they know, so now they have clarified. Mark |
|
|
|
Post by villock on Dec 27, 2015 12:41:44 GMT -5
They said they will MAKE IT AVAILABLE and AT OUR COST. They did not say they will PUT IT UP FOR SALE AT COST PRICE. MAKE IT AVAILABLE AT OUR COST only promises that they will make it available. Not that it is going to be sold at cost price. I honestly have no clue what you are try to say, but it looks like you are back to saying it should be free. I mean, if they make it available but don't sell it...then it either has to be free or not provided to people. Right? And, if it's not provided to people, then it is not available...which is not possible from what Emotiva stated. And yet in a prior post you concede they didn't mean free. Ever study Boolean algebra? Things don't have to be stated to be concluded from words that are said. In this case, the words are leading in a circle. Mark Mark, he is saying that they will make it available. And is is available for what it cost them to arrive at your doorstep. He is also saying that as far as his argument, that it is available to the public whithout it costing you anything. So if you call Emotiva and ask for one, they will send it to you. And that we will get it to our door at no cost to us but when it arrives, it will be tallyied and that final number will be Emotiva's cost to get it to us. OK I have a popsicle headache from all thuis back and forth. Nothing like the Super Bowl Champs plaing in 18 minutes to make me feel better  |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Dec 27, 2015 12:43:30 GMT -5
They said they will MAKE IT AVAILABLE and AT OUR COST. They did not say they will PUT IT UP FOR SALE AT COST PRICE. MAKE IT AVAILABLE AT OUR COST only promises that they will make it available. Not that it is going to be sold at cost price. I honestly have no clue what you are try to say, but it looks like you are back to saying it should be free. I mean, if they make it available but don't sell it...then it either has to be free or not provided to people. Right? And, if it's not provided to people, then it is not available...which is not possible from what Emotiva stated. And yet in a prior post you concede they didn't mean free. Ever study Boolean algebra? Things don't have to be stated to be concluded from words that are said. In this case, the words are leading in a circle. Mark No I mean the cost to make it availlable. To BRING IT TO MARKET. It won't appear on the website by magic. Not the cost to get it to your doorstep ( villock). It costs money to introduce the product before they ever sell it. Like buying the parts. R&D. Paying the website guy to put it up on their website. The price of introducing a new product. They spent that money that is their cost. Then they made it available for purchsae. That's as far as that sentence goes "make it available at our cost." That's it. It's available. And it cost them. Nobody has pruchased anything yet. That's all that's implied. Now the freedom is for us to purchase it at whatever price they set. And that price has nothing to do with cost price. Not it couldn't be cost price but I think it's somewhat obvious that it's not. It's a regular for profit item. Making it avaialbe for existing XMC-1 owners was what cost them. They will recuperate this cost from the profits. But it cost them money up front. Now I can see where people can read it as "cost price" and we're going to give it to you and foot the cost (which is where I was looking at it). But if you read it carefully it can mean none of those two things but merely mean we're going to spend money to make it available for purchase (which we'll sell for profit). |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,101
|
Post by klinemj on Dec 27, 2015 12:45:21 GMT -5
I won't debate whether they are making a profit or not...just glad you are off the "free" thing.
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Dec 27, 2015 12:47:07 GMT -5
I won't debate whether they are making a profit or not...just glad you are off the "free" thing. Mark I'm still of the opinion that that's how it reads - maybe not how they intended it to come off - that's what In either case it means not what you think it does (cost price). It means it's a for profit item brought to market at their cost. And like I said it's not a lie. It's just a carefully worded statement. Which as you can see nobody understood the exact meaning but lots of people see that it's not a at cost pricing item. |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Dec 27, 2015 12:48:20 GMT -5
You know what, the discussion (to use the word in a broad sense) in this thread is like a homeowner's association meeting. And then we wonder why it takes congress forever to get anything done, or why our income tax code is so hopefully contorted and screwed up? Just look at what goes on here talking about a simple upgrade to the XMC-1! $299 is what it is and if you don't like it then no one is forcing you to take it. Just go out and buy another processor that already has it and maybe you'll get Atmos with it as an added plus. Or, wait until the XMC-1's are produced with the board already in them at the same price they are going for now and then sell the old outdated obsolete XMC-1 you now own and go buy one of those with the new board so that you can think you are getting a bargain. sort of... |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Dec 27, 2015 12:50:49 GMT -5
I won't debate whether they are making a profit or not...just glad you are off the "free" thing. Mark I'm still of the opinion that that's how it reads - maybe not how they intended it to come off - that's what I concede. Unless you take a fine toothed comb and pick apart the wording. In that case it means not what you think it does (cost price). It means it's a for profit item brought to market at their cost. Well now why don't we all stand in a movie theater line debating this and then someone can go pull Big Dan out from behind a kiosk so he can clarify all this? |
|
|
|
Post by villock on Dec 27, 2015 12:53:00 GMT -5
I won't debate whether they are making a profit or not...just glad you are off the "free" thing. Mark I do not believe he is off the "free" thing  |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Dec 27, 2015 12:56:50 GMT -5
I won't debate whether they are making a profit or not...just glad you are off the "free" thing. Mark I do not believe he is off the "free" thing Where The Free Things Are  |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Dec 27, 2015 13:15:15 GMT -5
lol! Okay so I talked to my wife. She also thought the wording should mean sold at cost price (not free). So I'll concede that maybe free is not a sound judgment to decipher from it. However I stand firm that it's obviously not being sold at cost. So the only sound judgment is that the product is made available at their cost to be sold for whatever for profit price they state.
Also note that this doesn't conflict with the upgrade information for the XMC-1. Nowhere in the product ads were it advertised that the upgrades would be sold at cost price. Only in that post that Dan put where it seems most people feel (understandably so from the reading) that it's at cost.
But if you intepret it as being made available at their cost (at whatever for profit price they set) then it doesn't conflict with their ads. There's just nothing special about the pricing.
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Dec 27, 2015 13:15:46 GMT -5
You know what, the discussion (to use the word in a broad sense) in this thread is like a homeowner's association meeting. And then we wonder why it takes congress forever to get anything done, or why our income tax code is so hopefully contorted and screwed up? ... Yes, these have been my thoughts while reading this latest discussion. Without trying to disparage a profession, we have been overly influenced by those who make a living dissecting words and using them against others for profit. Our language is complex, it allows for great expression and precision, but because we're not all elegant writers we often end up saying things too simply, or with such precision that others glaze over the details. Either way we end up debating the meaning, and sitting behind a screen we now have the propensity to challenge each other's interpretations. I'm concerned about the current trend for brevity in discussion, it used to just be acronyms (how often do we want to spell out High Definition Multimedia Interface), but now words and sentences are often condensed to a few letters (though it's not all new ... OU812). Now though the word of the year is  ?, what would we be discussing if Dan had said this is how we'll feel when we hear the price of the HDMI upgrade? (apologies to any who don't see the emoji properly, another way we can misinterpret meaning) Edit: I see my emoji was lost, I guess I made my point, here it is.  |
|
|
|
Post by geebo on Dec 27, 2015 13:32:23 GMT -5
lol! Okay so I talked to my wife. She also thought the wording should mean sold at cost price (not free). So I'll concede that maybe free is not a sound judgment to decipher from it. However I stand firm that it's obviously not being sold at cost. So the only sound judgment is that the product is made available at their cost to be sold for whatever for profit price they state. Also note that this doesn't conflict with the upgrade information for the XMC-1. Nowhere in the product ads were it advertised that the upgrades would be sold at cost price. Only in that post that Dan put where it seems most people feel (understandably so from the reading) that it's at cost. But if you intepret it as being made available at their cost (at whatever for profit price they set) then it doesn't conflict with their ads. There's just nothing special about the pricing. If it's "obviously not being sold at cost", then what is their total cost? |
|
|
|
Post by copperpipe on Dec 27, 2015 13:44:20 GMT -5
lol! Okay so I talked to my wife. She also thought the wording should mean sold at cost price (not free). So I'll concede that maybe free is not a sound judgment to decipher from it. However I stand firm that it's obviously not being sold at cost. So the only sound judgment is that the product is made available at their cost to be sold for whatever for profit price they state. Also note that this doesn't conflict with the upgrade information for the XMC-1. Nowhere in the product ads were it advertised that the upgrades would be sold at cost price. Only in that post that Dan put where it seems most people feel (understandably so from the reading) that it's at cost. But if you intepret it as being made available at their cost (at whatever for profit price they set) then it doesn't conflict with their ads. There's just nothing special about the pricing. If it's "obviously not being sold at cost", then what is their total cost? He has no idea, just that it can't (obviously) be 299  What's obvious to me, however, is that most of the complainers here have never run a business nor worked retail. They just got their toys and stuff and complain incessantly about whatever it is they feel is wronging them. And this 2 days after Christmas... |
|
|
|
Post by Thunderduck on Dec 27, 2015 13:51:01 GMT -5
"We'll be making it available at our cost for existing XMC-1 owners."
Heck, everyone else has chimed in on what "at our cost" means, so here goes. Whatever it cost Emotiva to bring the board to the point were it is production ready, that is what would be the cost. In effect, no profit and no loss. BUT, you have to read the rest of what was said. "for existing XMC-1 owners. " That along with the rest of the statement seems to imply that there will/would be 2 different prices, 1 for existing XMC-1 owners and one for those that buy the XMC with the board already installed. In effect, existing XMC-1 owners would pay the "at our cost" price and those that buy an XMC-1 with the board already installed would pay a different price.
I will be the first to admit that I very well may be reading to much into the above statement and could be way off base (look out for that pickoff play). It will definitely be interesting to hear from someone in the know from Emotiva that can explain exactly what was meant by the original statement above.
And I use to hate English grammar when in school. Kind of wish I had paid more attention now.
Regards to all,
Steve |
|
|
|
Post by geebo on Dec 27, 2015 14:04:31 GMT -5
"We'll be making it available at our cost for existing XMC-1 owners."
Heck, everyone else has chimed in on what "at our cost" means, so here goes. Whatever it cost Emotiva to bring the board to the point were it is production ready, that is what would be the cost. In effect, no profit and no loss. BUT, you have to read the rest of what was said. "for existing XMC-1 owners. " That along with the rest of the statement seems to imply that there will/would be 2 different prices, 1 for existing XMC-1 owners and one for those that buy the XMC with the board already installed. In effect, existing XMC-1 owners would pay the "at our cost" price and those that buy an XMC-1 with the board already installed would pay a different price.
I will be the first to admit that I very well may be reading to much into the above statement and could be way off base (look out for that pickoff play). It will definitely be interesting to hear from someone in the know from Emotiva that can explain exactly what was meant by the original statement above.
And I use to hate English grammar when in school. Kind of wish I had paid more attention now.
Regards to all,
Steve Or it could be a higher price for nonexisting XMC-1 owners. That could mean an XMC-1 owner that does not exist...  |
|
hemster
Global Moderator 
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,952
|
Post by hemster on Dec 27, 2015 14:09:02 GMT -5
"We'll be making it available at our cost for existing XMC-1 owners."
Heck, everyone else has chimed in on what "at our cost" means, so here goes. Whatever it cost Emotiva to bring the board to the point were it is production ready, that is what would be the cost. In effect, no profit and no loss. BUT, you have to read the rest of what was said. "for existing XMC-1 owners. " That along with the rest of the statement seems to imply that there will/would be 2 different prices, 1 for existing XMC-1 owners and one for those that buy the XMC with the board already installed. In effect, existing XMC-1 owners would pay the "at our cost" price and those that buy an XMC-1 with the board already installed would pay a different price.
I will be the first to admit that I very well may be reading to much into the above statement and could be way off base (look out for that pickoff play). It will definitely be interesting to hear from someone in the know from Emotiva that can explain exactly what was meant by the original statement above.
And I use to hate English grammar when in school. Kind of wish I had paid more attention now.
Regards to all,
Steve Or it could be a higher price for nonexisting XMC-1 owners. That could mean an XMC-1 owner that does not exist... Precisely! And some of them nonexisting owners have been ranting here...  I say they should get a nonexisting discount! |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,276
|
Post by KeithL on Dec 27, 2015 14:12:08 GMT -5
You should go listen to the Podcast...... If you send in your XMC-1, we will install the board, update your firmware (if it needs it), and run your XMC-1 through Final Test again to make sure it's working up to spec. If you don't send it in, we'll send you the board, and you can install it yourself. We need clarification. Is there a different price for DIY versus sending it in? My understanding initially was that the board would be an easy install and that you could send your unit in if you were uncomfortable doing it yourself. It seems to be the opposite now. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,276
|
Post by KeithL on Dec 27, 2015 14:14:36 GMT -5
The XMC-1 is currently ON SALE... for $500 off. So, when the sale is over, it will cost $500 more than it does today. So, buying an XMC-1 today, for $1999, plus buying a board today for $299, will cost $200 less than buying an XMC-1 after the sale. (Even if the new board is included with the XMC-1 when it goes back up to $2499) OK, ill pile on a little more,,,,,,,,,, So a new XMC-1 offered after the new boards are installed and sold by Emotiva will cost a minimum of $300.00 more then the retail price of the unit today? Thats my question! |
|
?, what would we be discussing if Dan had said this is how we'll feel when we hear the price of the HDMI upgrade?
