Why the limit on warranty to subsequent purchasor?

business here stays on the first place to knock off the used product lovers.
once the product sold new there is a need to sell another new and care less about its used price.

You are paying for the transferrable warranty. The company builds the potential future cost into the price. Many used buyers may not know the warranty is still good, since the manual or card is gone. The company profits more.

Since most gear breaks in the first year, or not at all, the company profit again.

If you want an example, go price a new Dell Computer online. The better the warranty you choose, the more the computer costs. Dell must make a fortune on them, because computers are usually DOA or break within 6 months; or they work until obsolete.

Everyone has suggested very valid reasons why warranties are handled in the manner that they are by many companies. On top of this, i'd like to add that, the more the unit changes hands / is shipped / is hooked & unhooked, etc... the greater the potential for damage that would have to be covered under warranty by the manufacturer. As such, they cut their losses while encouraging those that are truly interested in their product to buy new. Their is NO incentive to them to offer a long warranty as it only costs them money and new sales. While some sales are gained by companies that offer long warranties, i don't think that the warranty itself is the deciding factor in such cases. it might be more frosting on the cake, but i would not buy a product that did not sound as good over one that sounded better simply because of the warranty. Sean
>

The main reason? A well-known fact to people inside the industry: By not offering a transferable warranty, you discourage resale, and encourage more people to buy new, thus producing more sales for your dealers and for you. Crank 'em out, move 'em, and make more.

Sorry, but I think it's a reprehensible and disgusting display of ultimate capitalism, especially on multi-thousand dollars items. I personally wish it would backfire on all of them and make them lose rather than gain sales. Too bad Bryston's products aren't at the cutting edge of sound quality, or I'd support such a company by buying their products. Kudos to them for this integrity and care, lacking from the majority of the others.

At least Bryston as the courage to put its money where its mouth is. Audiophiles have the nastiest habit of reading all sorts of things into all sorts of things. Why not suggest buying Chinese made tube equipment from some overnight sensation cottage industry manufacturer to feel safer? Sean has a valid point: a unit that changes hand is subjected to more stress than a unit in the hands of a single owner. The warranty you are all discussing is the contractual warranty offered by the manufacturer. Depending on the legislation in a given jurisdiction, a person may have some rights against the manufacturer even in the absence of privity of contract. Don't get your hopes up too high, as this may not hold true in many jurisdictions. The perverse nature of contractual warranties is, sometimes, to act as a limit to legal rights someone may otherwise have. Hence, the language found in the warranty's text indicating that a person may have other rights at law. Buying on line BTW is a legal quagmire.