quiz

windshieldbug · Post by **windshieldbug** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 11:31 pm

If you say so, but I would've thought it had to do with the cost of tooling up for the squashed ports and new-style valves...

iiipopes · Post by **iiipopes** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 12:16 am

Really! I guessed wrong.

Dan Schultz · Post by **Dan Schultz** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 12:48 am

bloke wrote:answer: http://i1.tinypic.com/v5vn1l.gif

What's the source of this information?

Daryl Fletcher · Post by **Daryl Fletcher** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 9:07 am

I don't get it. The graphic I see just has some text with a URL in it.

So what was it? I voted for short-action valves.

UDELBR · Post by **UDELBR** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 10:06 am

I don't get it either...

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 12:05 pm

UncleBeer wrote:I don't get it either...

It's morse code and it basically says the answer is

"the extra time required putting a finish on all of that extra surface area"

Daryl Fletcher · Post by **Daryl Fletcher** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 1:23 pm

UDELBR · Post by **UDELBR** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 2:10 pm

Chuck(G) wrote:
UncleBeer wrote:I don't get it either...
It's morse code

Really?? This is what I see:

MartyNeilan · Post by **MartyNeilan** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 2:15 pm

BUT, if you actually go there, you get this:

UDELBR · Post by **UDELBR** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 2:22 pm

Nope. Absolutely does not work in Firefox (for me at least). Not even pasting the address in the browser.

UDELBR · Post by **UDELBR** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 2:29 pm

valtuba wrote:First go here:

Thanks, but no. This joke's been thoroughly run into the ground.

windshieldbug · Post by **windshieldbug** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 3:06 pm

UncleBeer wrote:This joke's been thoroughly run into the ground.

Aw, c'mon! Everyone loves a good holiday-egg hunt!

MartyNeilan · Post by **MartyNeilan** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 3:09 pm

windshieldbug wrote:Aw, c'mon! Everyone loves a good holiday-egg hunt!

Did someone say hunt??

Joe Baker · Post by **Joe Baker** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 6:38 pm

You guys better get back to talkin' about tubers or there's gonna be black heliocopters after you!
___________________________
Joe Baker, who keeps coming back here hoping to see something interesting... *sigh*

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 8:33 pm

bloke wrote:The point simply being that given two similar tuba thingies with similar features but different sizes, the MAIN thing that will make one more expensive than the other is THE COST OF POLISHING (or sandblasting, etc.) THE EXTRA SURFACE AREA.

POLISHING - BY FAR - is the MOST EXPENSIVE FACTOR that goes into manufacturing any brass instrument.

You been buffing sousaphones, Joe?

I don't blame you!

MartyNeilan · Post by **MartyNeilan** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 8:44 pm

bloke wrote:THE COST OF POLISHING.

How much does it cost to make a tuba Polish??

tubeast · Post by **tubeast** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 8:58 pm

I can only guess as to BlokeÂ´s objective in posting this "riddle".
Bloke, are you suggesting there will be anothjer Blokeophone in "blunt finish" available for half the price of the original Buescher Helicon cut to CC ???

(which would amount to "only" approximately one leg and a third of a manÂ´s most important organ.... ....the liver )

Kevin Hendrick · Post by **Kevin Hendrick** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 8:58 pm

MartyNeilan wrote:
bloke wrote:THE COST OF POLISHING.
How much does it cost to make a tuba Polish??

I'll have to Czech on that ...

Rick Denney · Post by **Rick Denney** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:17 am

The reason the price was higher for the 20K is because people were willing to pay more for them.

The cost may have been higher, too.

Rick "not confusing price and cost" Denney

Rick Denney · Post by **Rick Denney** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 11:29 pm

bloke wrote:...but back in the late 1960's/early 1970's, thousands upon thousands of school bands across the United States were literally throwing their brass sousaphones in the trash in favor of brand-new fiberglass sousaphones. This is undeniable. As the fiberglass sousaphones were infinitely more popular than the brass sousaphones at that time, Conn possibly COULD HAVE charged more for the fiberglass versions than they did for the brass versions... ...but they never tried to do so.

But as I recall, one of the selling points of the plastic sousaphones was the low price. I suspect that Conn saw a market at a lower price point, and came up with using fiberglass as a way to keep costs below that price point by a large enough margin to make money on them. The "lighter weight" was probably just window dressing--my 14K is all brass and no heavier than many plastic sousaphones.

I suspect that the dreaded convertible tuba exists because of the same influence. The manufacturers were trying to find a way to market a dual-use instrument. Brass sousaphones have been priced too high for a long time because of high costs. That's an uneniable economic rality: The price must be higher than the cost. If that price is too high, the volume will go way down.

And it isn't always bad business to choose a really low price point even for a popular product. Often, a manufacturer who has really good control over costs will purposely choose a much lower price point than the market would bear just to discourage any potential competition.

Rick "not disputing that some manufacturers are better at making instruments than at the business of selling instruments" Denney

TubeNet

quiz

Back when C.G. Conn was making the "cadillac" model 20K 6/4 short-action sousaphone and the "econo" model 14K 4/4 sousaphone, the 20K cost MUCH more mostly because of

Re: quiz

quiz

Back when C.G. Conn was making the &quot;cadillac&quot; model 20K 6/4 short-action sousaphone and the &quot;econo&quot; model 14K 4/4 sousaphone, the 20K cost MUCH more mostly because of

Re: quiz

Back when C.G. Conn was making the "cadillac" model 20K 6/4 short-action sousaphone and the "econo" model 14K 4/4 sousaphone, the 20K cost MUCH more mostly because of