When did I say that? The consumer decides the value of the product. As you move up in price the performance doesn't rise at the same rate as the price, though, which is why the consumer needs to decide the value in relation to other products. If the value of the product isn't worth the expense the consumer will not buy the product. An example of this would be the Sharp XV-Z30000. There were very few people who bought that product at first because it's performance was nowhere near the asking price compared to other products that were being offered at the same price. It was only until the price came down considerably they were purchased. With projectors, most of the time, they are priced correctly in relation to value. I think JVC projectors put out a great picture and are the best value in the under $3000 market. But once you start to move up to their more expensive projectors I think their value goes down considerably. At the asking price of the 1000ES you get a product with considerably high quality components where the JVC is sort of a compromise on quality. The high end JVCs are almost the same projectors as the low end machines but use components that come the closest to spec. This is why I don't believe the value of the high end JVC is anywhere near the Sony. Yes, you get hand picked components but the cost of those components are the same as the ones used in their low end projector. That doesn't make it a bad projector but I think the quality of the components, especially the lens, is severely limited because of this. You do get the e-shift glass, more contrast and some extra processing, but I don't think those two things equate to an increase in price of several thousands more. As you can tell, I'm not the biggest fan of JVC and I'm sure my post will receive lots of responses with people telling me how wrong I am. I should rephrase that, I'm a huge fan of JVC low end projectors as I find their value to be unbeatable but I don't see the value in their higher priced units.
post #121 of 197
9/16/13 at 7:31pm