Price Setting vs Price Fixing

[pidgeon92]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Hm. My Shures are over the ear as well, with a wire in the cable to keep the correct form.

It's the one thing I don't really like because I wear glasses.

I wear glasses, too. I have to take them off to get the things over my ears, but they aren't uncomfortable when I put my glasses back on.

[chaley]

Before you shell out the money for Bose, be sure to put on a set and wear it for 5 minutes or so. When I did that I found that the "sensation of pressure" that the Bose noise cancellation system is famous for was very disturbing. I ended the experiment with a splitting headache. I did the same experiment a day later with Sony's MDR-10RNC and had no problem. My son has Bose QC-15s and likes them, but he confirmed that our Sonys have much less apparent pressure. Edit: I should have mentioned that the Sonys work well, tested on multple >10 hour flights.

I also have Sony MDR-NC60s that I was given when I worked in an open plan office. They work very well and are (were) cheaper, but they are now hard to get.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

No, they're not the same, but many people use the terms earbud and in-ear interchangeably.

Earbud: a disc that 'clips' into your ear, using the ear's nooks and crannies to hang in there. These don't provide any sealing, and you'll hear everything around you and others will hear your music.

(I *hate* these. They are always too big, never stay put, and they hurt my ears. I never try them and put them away with the packaging, so I have them should I want to sell the device they came with.)

In-Ear: It literally sits *IN* your ear; you shove it into the hearing canal. If you have a high(er)-end model such as the Shures (and many others), which come with many different sealing tips, you can create a seal that is so good you'll hear nothing but your music, and nobody can hear what you are listening to.

(I *love* these. I have 12 pairs of spare tips for my Shure's, and I'll buy some more later on. That's the only downside; the tips need to be cleaned, and thus wear down.)

Judging by the product names on the packages of most of them, I'm not sure if the manufactures would necessarily agree that the terms should not "really" be used interchangeably, and I'd be curious to see evidence that "ear bud" was coined with intention of only referring to the type of ear phone you say.
But even if it is not so, it SHOULD be so. So I'll back you. Consider me a member of the Earphone Disambiguation Brigade!

And I agree with you on all the rest, too.

While some people will never be comfortable with in-ears, the key for many is to choose the correct size and shape of inserts. One size does not fit all!

[GlenBarrington]

Originally Posted by EndlessWaves

Are you sure? I thought manufacturers determining what prices their goods were sold at in shops was illegal most of the time? Didn't they outlaw that in the 50s here in the UK?

I personally don't think price setting ALWAYS works against the consumer. I would point you to the Camera industry. Local camera shops have been disappearing from all but the largest cities at an alarming rate. The only place people have to view and hold cameras any more to determine what they want are the 'big box' stores with their obligatory pathetic, dusty, Tethered Canikon display of 2 mid-level DSLRs with missing or broken lenses.

If "Best Buy" didn't sell it, it simply didn't exist. People were forced to buy serious gear off the internet, sight unseen or buy the mid level gear the BB stores sold. But the manufacturers have started enforcing their agreements with the sellers regarding the range at which that gear can be sold. providing an economic incentive for shops to sell and promote the brands and models banished from the Big Box stores. People are now buying those brands and competition is slowly returning to the camera market.

I wrote two articles for my personal photography blog that might have some relevance, if you are interested. They aren't TOO photo-geeky, I don't think.

http://glenbarrington.blogspot.com/2...mera-shop.html

http://glenbarrington.blogspot.com/2...future-of.html

[drjenkins]

While Wikipedia may not be authoritative, I think they got it right on this one.

Earbuds are very small headphones that are fitted directly in the outer ear, facing but not inserted in the ear canal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earbud#Earbuds

In-ear headphones, also known as in-ear monitors (IEMs) or canalphones, are small headphones with similar portability to earbuds which are inserted in the ear canal itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earbud#In-ear_headphones

[ApK]

Originally Posted by drjenkins

While Wikipedia may not be authoritative

The Wikipedia article doesn't even cite the source of that definition. It could have come from this thread for all the value it has.

My recollection is that the term "ear bud" only appeared with the advent of those hangy-things, so it MAY in fact be that whoever coined the term did mean it to apply specifically to that particular style of ear phone. And for the sake of clear communication, I think that SHOULD be so.

My point is only that the people who make and sell such things now clearly do NOT restrict the term to that particular style, so it may not be clear to just use the term and expect most people to know exactly what you mean with out specifying.

ApK

[ApK]

Originally Posted by GlenBarrington

I personally don't think price setting ALWAYS works against the consumer. [...] People are now buying those brands and competition is slowly returning to the camera market.

Interesting. I agree, that's a good example.

And, ultimately good or bad for the consumer, I don't have a legal or ethical issue with one company price-setting it's own products. It's only when the multiple entities, who should be competing to create the market, collude against the consumer that I have a problem.

ApK

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by ApK

And, ultimately good or bad for the consumer, I don't have a legal or ethical issue with one company price-setting it's own products.

Unfortunately, English law DOES have a problem with it . A manufacturer can certainly set a "recommended retail price" (RRP), but it's illegal for them to prevent a retailer from selling at a different price, whether that be lower or higher than the RRP.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Unfortunately, English law DOES have a problem with it . A manufacturer can certainly set a "recommended retail price" (RRP), but it's illegal for them to prevent a retailer from selling at a different price, whether that be lower or higher than the RRP.

I'm sure an interesting discussion could be had in the P&R forum about the implementation details and the philosophical differences between here and there.

[GlenBarrington]

Originally Posted by ApK

I'm sure an interesting discussion could be had in the P&R forum about the implementation details and the philosophical differences between here and there.

Don't worry about me! I don't know enough to carry on an extended dialog on this subject. Once I've fired off my opinion, I've got no ammo left! Then again, I've never been one to let ignorance stand in my way.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Unfortunately, English law DOES have a problem with it . A manufacturer can certainly set a "recommended retail price" (RRP), but it's illegal for them to prevent a retailer from selling at a different price, whether that be lower or higher than the RRP.

P.S...Any good deals on Bose headphones over there?

[soulfuldog]

Originally Posted by ApK

P.S...Any good deals on Bose headphones over there?

The model mentioned in the original post - Bose QC20i.

Bose, Amazon & John Lewis all sell them for £259.95 (although they have been reduced to £240 and once to £230 at Amazon in the past year). You can find the odd retailer discounting them a little but not by much. The most reputable seller I can see right now with a discount is Peter Tyson for £230.

So that'll be a no.

[Katsunami]

It's still almost 12% cheaper. Maybe it's not an epic deal but it's still significantly cheaper in my book.

[soulfuldog]

Maybe so...... but for the most part they are around £255-259 everywhere. Though it's possible just me not being able to see past the price. £230 for a pair of earphones is still a ridiculous price even if the RRP is £259.

[HarryT]

Some people would probably think that owning three devices on which to read books is equally ridiculous . Bose are not in the mass consumer market; they have a very specific target audience who are willing to pay the premium prices they sell their products for. You've never encountered an audiophile if you think £230 is a high price.