The Problem with Synergistic Research


The problem is one that a number of cable makers suffer from. I preface my remarks by noting this not a problem that is exclusive to Synergistic Research. I use SR as an example because I am more familiar with their cables than with the cables of other companies that have the same problem.

The problem is the cost of incremental improvements. SR makes some great products. But, in spite of their copy writing, not all SR products are great, IMO. Some SR products have made great improvements in my system -- like the Tesla SE Hologram D power cord. That having been said, in retrospect, despite the bally-hoo that surrounds SR product launches, most of their products have brought no more than incremental improvements to my system. Products from other cable companies have brought equal or greater improvements for me -- often at much lower cost.

The problem is that SR has such fast-paced marketing with products coming out at a gallop supplanting recently released products -- such as the SR line of PowerCell conditioners -- that I sometimes feel I have been left in the dust.

We cannot stop the relentless march of technology. But at the high price of most of SR's offerings one is often left with sense of being left out instead of left in when new products come on the heels of products one has just purchased. The SR trade-up program does not remedy this problem at all, IMO.

There are many other cable companies without fast-paced marketing that provide equal or better value for the money, IMO. Companies like Bybee, HiDiamond and Cardas. I am probably not the only one who feels as I do about SR and other companies with fast-paced marketing.
sabai
I've read this post's development with a bit of bafflement. Sabai, I get your desire for the best trade-in, price structure, customer service, etc. We all want that for every product we buy, don't we? However, in the end, every business owner has to to balance his customer's wish lists against market realities and the need to make a decent profit. If they get the balance right, the customers stay happy and the business thrives. If not, the competitive nature of the market place will weed out those guilty of constant miscalculation. I think Sabai has more than amply made his points of contention clear and if sufficient numbers of other customers feel the same way, Mr. Denney would need adjust his business practices. If sufficient numbers remain happy with SR products and pricing, Sabai's just going to have to buck up and accept he's been left behind.
Regarding SR's trade-up policy, it is clearly a good deal for those who have the cash and who want to purchase more than one new SR product. But it puts those on a modest budget in a bind.

Firstly, when SR brings out a new product to replace a current product the latter has already depreciated in value by a significant amount due to the new product being introduced. OK, this is normal. But then SR requires you to purchase a product twice the value of the one you want to trade-up for.

So, for instance, if you want to purchase the latest version of the PowerCell, you have to purchase $10,000 in SR products to take advantage of the SR trade-up program. Well, that's a lot of money for many of us. And what if the PowerCell is the only product you wish to purchase? You are left with having to sell your PowerCell off on the glutted aftermarket where the price of PowerCells has dropped drastically.

You are lucky to get much more than $2000 for a used PowerCell these days on Audiogon. But you are better off in the end because if you do get $2500 for your PowerCell you have to come up with $2500 for the new PowerCell instead of $6500 with SR. In the end, unless you are really hot on a new SR product besides the PowerCell, you are much better off not going the trade-up route. It is no gift to customers of modest means.

SR might want to consider two options to make their policy user friendly to audiophiles of modest means. They could introduce an upgrade policy for some of their products such as the PowerCell. They could formulate a policy that does not require the purchase of a product that is fully double the price of the new product a customer wishes to purchase.

In the end, a more "understanding" policy would end up being be a win-win situation. It would not be as profitable for SR but it would come back to them in volume to make up for the lower mark-up. Most importantly, it would sow the seeds of goodwill. This act of generosity would be appreciated by many audiophiles and would end up bringing many happy customers to SR that they would not otherwise have seen. And, over time, the results would naturally be compounded.

These suggestions are meant to be helpful.