Mitch4t, you contradict yourself within three sentences when you mention at the top of your post that the cost can't be the reason with $100m budgets, and then say later in your post that companies should provide the placement at no cost. Your second statement is more likely. The problem, though, is hi end audio gear is not as readily recognizable as a brand as, say, a Coke can, or an Audi or BMW badge. And, unlike a car or Coke product that can reappear over and over again throughout a film in several locations, a stereo is a location specific item that may get limited exposure, thereby bringing into question the value of paying for such high priced props.
One has to realize that the largest portion of a films' budget goes to above the line costs...specifically cast salaries.
Are you aware that the terminal building in "Terminal" was built entirely as a self-contained set in a large warehouse, and all the shops were actual functioning stores stocked with real product? In fact, some of the franchises provided free food, coffee, and ice cream for the cast and crew throughout the shoot. Now, that's product placement.
One has to realize that the largest portion of a films' budget goes to above the line costs...specifically cast salaries.
Are you aware that the terminal building in "Terminal" was built entirely as a self-contained set in a large warehouse, and all the shops were actual functioning stores stocked with real product? In fact, some of the franchises provided free food, coffee, and ice cream for the cast and crew throughout the shoot. Now, that's product placement.

