Taurus Firearm Forum banner
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
356 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I remember from my marketing classes examining the relationship between 'quality' (as perceived by the consumer) and 'price'; there was typically a close correspondence between how much a person paid for something and the degree of 'quality' perceived in that thing. Two shirts from the same manufacturer (sans identifying labels), one priced cheaply and the other priced expensively were regularly ranked accordingly: the cheap one was, well, 'cheap', poorly made, of poor material, etc., while the expensive one was rated as high quality, of good material and workmanship, and expected to last longer.

This had a secondary affect, which re-enforced this attitude: goods which were expensive were carefully maintained, sometimes seldom used and often kept in service even when it might otherwise be considered 'worn out'; contra-wise, the 'cheap' goods were typically treated more casually, received less attention and care, and were disposed of as soon as signs of wear and tear appeared.

I submit that Taurus is a victim of this syndrome - and may explain why the brand gets more than it's share of complaints and negative attitudes. I think it also explains the reluctance of some dealers to sell them - if for no other reason than the customers to whom they sell them are quicker to perceive fault and failure in them, as opposed to a 'higher quality' firearm. Unhappy customers bring things back and are hard to satisfy. Ironically, many of those customers were buying the Taurus for the 'good' price, and then blame the dealer/gun/somebody else for any and all faults in that gun, whatever the actual reason.

Taurus has a no-win situation here - sell at a good price and you get hypercritical attention - sell at a high price and their sales volume goes down... and by now, Taurus is too closely associated with the 'value' pricing to go that way anyway.

My 2 cents.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,334 Posts
I remembered reading an article recently that discussed this phenomenon with drugs. I did a Google search and found this article:

http://consumerist.com/365437/expensive-placebos-work-better-than-cheap-ones

Your Stupid Brain
"Expensive" Placebos Work Better Than "Cheap" Ones

A new study published in the American Medical Association has a new and astonishing demonstration of just how much your perception becomes your reality when it comes to prices. People in the study thought they were trying out a new kind of pain med. Instead, they got sugar pills. However, some were told their sugar pills cost $2.50, and the others were told the pills cost $0.10. People with the "pricey" sugar pill had their pain reduced much more than the "cheap" sugar pill.

/end of story

It seems science backs you up on this one, kansas_plainsman. A more extensive article is here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/05/h....html?_r=3&oref=login&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,000 Posts
i'd stay this is plasuable except if you know that brand makes up a lot of the cost.

is it not surprising that many top brands also own other less expensive brands?
is it also not surprising that often the cheaper name brand is made in the same factories as the more expensive parent brand?

this applies from every thing from clothes, to electronics, to food.

but most people dont realize this.

there are times when quality really is quality, usually only applies to hand made stuff.. which is an extremely minority of goods on the market.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
I personnaly think that whatever YOU like and can afford is what is best......

Sure the big names can jack up their prices because they have a devoted following... but if it works for you... that is all that matters...

I like the fact that the warranty is for the gun... not the original owner... so when I get my gun "second hand" it will still have the same warranty as the original owner...

If it aint broke... dont fix it....
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top