gscace wrote:The amount of buzz on the web has been quite a wakeup call, as I understand it, and this buzz may help propel the project to market.
This is part of my point - the buzz (engineered or not) may very well support a higher price point. And as - presumably - good business people, they would be remiss to not consider this in setting a price. If the GS3 comes out at $6500 and the market accepts it, then LM would be foolish not to price it as such - I'd be disappointed, but mostly because that is more than I can justify for home espresso.
The only part of this where I would cast aspersions toward LM was if the $4500 price was floated in a guerilla marketing effort to (1) generate buzz by floating a price that might be palatable to high-end consumers, and (2) see whether it stuck. These aspersions would be based on their taking advantage of the goodwill of the espresso enthusiasts here, not on their being good capitalists by charging what the market will bear.
gscace wrote:As far as I'm concerned, the buzz has been created by the competence of the machine.
I'm not for 1 second doubting the machine's performance, and your 100% correct that it's the performance that's driving the buzz. However, do you think there would be as much buzz if, along with the performance and photos, there was a $8000 price tag floating with it? Rather than a parade of "sign me up"s I think we'd be seeing a parade of "wow, I hope the 10 people that buy them will enjoy it" - admiration, but not buzz.
My comments are almost entirely based on the statement by Woofy that ESI is talking to pricing that is "much greater" than the $4500 floated price point. If this proves untrue, obviously my concerns are assuaged. If it IS true, I think these are reasonable questions to be asked.





