Value - Some Worthless Questions.

Posted by: Adam Meredith on 28 September 2005

In fact - it all ties in with a debate I wanted to start on the foundations of value.

Product X contains a mystery chip and a magnet - transforms the sound of your system

Product Y contains diamond resonance controlling dust, gold screws, 4 of the last 527 remaining legendary Rhondidium MosValves (as developed by NASA but dropped as being uneconomic) and sounds surprisingly mediocre.

Product Z contains fairly ordinary wires, off the shelf components but took one man three lifetimes to develop - sounds two lifetimes out of date.

Product 2 required 729 PhD students to design and is as good as an iPod.

Product iLLpo9 was knocked up on the back of a fag packet by a hifi world acknowledged genius and so on.

What determines value, when do we feel ripped off? Why do we not like "found art" and pay more for a painting that took a week to paint than a brick wall that took two to construct?

Why is a diamond more valuable than a petrified turd?

Does the mind rule the body - I dunno.
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by graham55
At least you're calling it value, rather than price - which too many people seem obsessed with these days.

Oscar Wilde had a typically pithy opinion on the difference.

Graham
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Tam
Which was? (for the benefit of those of us who can't remember or be bothered to look it upWinker)
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by graham55
From memory: A cynic is a person who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.

But I stand to be corrected.

G
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Tam
Thanks Graham, that sounds familiar.


regards,

Tam
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Deane F
Adam

Perhaps the problem is not amenable to a reasoned approach?

A petrified turd is less valuable than a diamond because of a consensus of opinion.
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Stevea
quote:
Originally posted by Adam Meredith:
Why is a diamond more valuable than a petrified turd?

Because more people desire to have a diamond than desire to have a petrified turd.

People initially desired diamonds because they were shiney and stood out. Now they also desire diamonds because the possession of them indicates wealth, and wealth indicated success, and success indicates strength and virility - which helps attract mates. So it is all about sex really.

Steve
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Tam
It's worth pointing out, though, that the price of diamonds is largely (though less so that it used to be) controlled by a cartel.

Perhaps if De Beers got together and limited the supply of petrified turd, we'd pay more for it. Then again, maybe not.....


regards,

Tam
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Stuart M
quote:
A petrified turd is less valuable than a diamond because of a consensus of opinion.


Well take an industrial diamond and compare it to dried elephant dung used to make a work of art. Value is in the eye of the beholder . I.e their perception.

For example if will soon offer for sale (not on here of course) my special Intelligently Designed hyper quantum noodly appendage devices for your (Insert your problem/obsession here) . Many people experience improvements by the problem diminishing or the obsession being reduced and this can be up to or OVER 60% (especially where surgery is involved – those Naim transistors are difficult to fit but effective).

This AMAZING change is put down to the placebo effect by the scientists. However us true believers KNOW that its FSM adjusting reality via his noodly appendage that makes all the difference.

By at least 3 days of work, special (Non GM) tomatoes and a way of combining seafood AND meatballs at a quantum level and application of hyper noodle and little Italian grandmother technology I will soon have a product ready. I will soon be accepting pre orders for Noodly "Envy" DVD/CD enhancing pasta sauce and his sauciness’ meatball CD and LP clamps". (Prices start from a reasonable £500 and finish at £500,000 for the white truffle LP12 record clamp with free Italian grandmother – accommodation not included)



All profits to me (and Auntie Dee Dee if she'll be nice to me and go for 89% extra auntieness)
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Tam
quote:
Originally posted by Stuart M:
For example if I sell you a quantum hyper spagheti monsterism


Then I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about....
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Stuart M
Read again - hit save to early Roll Eyes
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Adam Meredith
Now I know how Wittgenstein felt.

400 closely reasoned pages in exploration of mentation - all anyone remembers is the petrified turd.
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by David Dever
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Earwicker
Adam,

I'm sensing a definite pang of despair in your posts today!

Value is market price (what folk will pay); price (or fiscal value, if you like) is material cost or production price.

I don't mind paying far more than the material price for rare objects - eg works of art. When someone just marks up a product to a ludicrous degree, I have to protest.

I wouldn't argue that a fine painting is worth the price of the canvass and oils, for eg.

A piece of wire is worth - well, a few quid, basically.

EW
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Earwicker
quote:
Originally posted by David Dever:
Of this, one shall remain silent.

Whereof one cannot speak? Winker
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Tam
EW,

Value is NOT market price. The two things are very different. The whole point about value is that it is a matter of perspective.

Value is, to a particular person, what they are prepared to pay for somethings. That may well be more or less than the market place.

Of course, that's just financial value. There are plenty of things you can't put a price on. What's the value of that favourite photograph of your family?



regards,

Tam
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Deane F
quote:
Originally posted by Stuart M:
quote:
A petrified turd is less valuable than a diamond because of a consensus of opinion.


Well take an industrial diamond and compare it to dried elephant dung used to make a work of art. Value is in the eye of the beholder . I.e their perception.


Thank you for reiterating my point.
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Deane F
Perhaps Adam wants to debate value theory and aesthetics rather than very old turds?
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Adam Meredith
A glass of water to a drowning man.

Today I was briefly reminded of my time at HiFi Review.

A period of time during which I was finally able to hear some of the products made legendary by other reviewers. What I discovered there was no amount of hype could make that well "storied" product into a gem if it fell at the first hurdle - that of making music.

It is difficult to compare the "value" of a component stuffed unit unable to hold a tune with another box which does the business - whatever the component count.

Any piece of equipment can be changed by substituting more expensive components - it is a lot harder to make that change work for the better.
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Nime
Why is it that Naim kit holds its value? You can open the case but you're really none the wiser. Without a lot of experience one cannot make any value judgement of the innards. Though almost anyone might reasonably say say it is neatly put together and sounds very nice in action. Of course a lot of the secondhand value lies in its ready "renewability" by recapping.

But I bet if the case was scuffed and scratched it wouldn't hold its value at all well. Now what does that tell us about perceived value? Nothing has changed within and it still makes the same nice noises....?

So, anybody got a badly-scuffed, recently-recapped olive Hicap they'll flog for a fiver? I'll pay the postage. Big Grin
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Stuart M
Got my NAPSC v1 for a song as the dealer scratched a 4cm by 0.5 cm on the side while fitting it.

Could be a problem if I sold but works for me (and is hidden as far away from the 102 as possible).
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Steve2701
Actual value vs perceived value vs value as to what someone is prepared to pay.

I have sat in amongst my cd collection some 'centre pin reels' (The old fashioned sort that is a simple drum spinning on a central pin)

They vary in price from about £90.00 to well over £300 each.

1 is made in the uk by a company using excellent quality materials on cad/cam lathes etc, and then simply assembled by hand, to tight tolerances.

1 is made in the far east to some exacting standards entirely by machine, that can produce millions, all precisely the same, to an exacting tolerance.

1 is made entirely by hand by one man. He hand makes every single component to tolerances that are un heard of.. (he allows just half a thou tolerance on the spindle, to allow for the lubricating oil)The materials are the very best that can be obtained. Each one takes a minimum of 40 hours to create. The most he can produce in a year, if ever he went full time would be 50. I actually watched him face off some 2mm x 3mm screws for final assembly on his lathe. there are 24 of these on each reel! Talk about 'Morgan esque'!

Now all three of these reels do exactly the same job, and when correctly run in, lubricated and treated with tlc will work prety much the same, and to a large extent the average person would be hard pressed to know which was which when in use.

So which one cost the most? Which do I get the most pleasure in using (Yes, they all get an outing) and which would I part with most easily?

The materials cost per each reel is remarkably similar.. somewhere between £5 & £10.

Bear in mind 1 of the reels is produced in minutes, & will very probably have millions of brothers & sisters, but on tools costing a fortune.....
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Martin D
Just had a thought: If a 1p bit of damp string was terminated at either end by 20p connectors from the local Spar shop, but sounded like a £555 product when listened to blind, then i suppose its worth is the £555. Information is not knowledge, knowledge is not truth, truth is not wisdom...........
Anyone read Zen And The Art Of Motorcycle Maintenance?
Martin
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Martin D
Just came across this:
Value = Benefit per unit cost
Spose that summs up what I'm on about
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by Jim Lawson
Nime

"renewability"

Why the quotation marks?

Jim
Posted on: 28 September 2005 by u5227470736789439
Value, price...

Surely price amounts to the amount of money. That is easily assessed in a free society. Competion sees to it that it is not too much, generally, and sharp practice sees to it that it is, sometimes. It is a question of supply and demand.

Value can be used as a word to describe the same thing, but also something much vaguer. Above, mention was made of Art. Art, say a painting, will acheive a much higher price than its material costs plus a profit if it contains an message of Artistic (read here, perhaps, phylosophic) value, upon which only a guess can ever be put in terms of price. It may be too high or too low.

Then we consider objects which are manufactured, for this is I guess where Adam was coming from with this Thread. Why is a Bosch washing machine priced higher than a Hotpoint or whatever. Better manufacturing and materials, perhaps, and thus it may well prove no more costly to run over its life compared to the less pricey machine. Another reason may be snob-value, where it the fashionable choice for those with money to spare. Advertising plays a part here.

Where does that leave luxury durable such as gramophone equipemt. It is certainly not a necessity for daily life, but it conveys music, which for some certainly IS necessary for a happy day to pass...

The price of good gramophones is high; even so high one might consider the money better spent, morally, on medical aid to the Third World or whatever...

But hold on. How do any of us know how the good purchasers of fine gramophone have done in this direction. It little behoves anyone to critcise another on that account without all the facts...

So is a CDS555 more valuable to its purchaser than a less pricey player. That depends on the person, and their motivations in buying it, but I see no reasonn to believe that it cannot be.

Is the new BLUE interconnect worth the money? I don't know, and I almost certainly won't do a comparative listen, but I can't worry too much about that. Anyone pays their money and makes their choice.

All I can say is that in lifetime so far not two thirds run with luck, I can think of no more valuable (to me I would totally agree) aquisition than my gramophone. Its financing actually was impossible without a remarkable bit of luck and a determination to comemorate my music making of the good days. My lovely five string bass financed the 52, and my grandmother gave me the CDS2 as her parting shot: The most she could do under difficult legal conditions with a potentially contested will. That is how much my set means to me. It opens up a great world of music making in a fashion that has a value, but which is "priceless."

Getting it was the one really fine descision I have made in my life so far, and even with hindsight... This is not a recomendation of the pieces, but it IS true. So long as I can hear I shall be glad I did what I did. And the activity of studying and adoring music is not very harmful by the standards of modern life. In my view this is a good empirical description of the value of music and my means of accessing it. The price did not and does not matter.

Sincerely, Fredrik