The Monster Cables Public Relations department sent in a two-page response to our post, “Monster Cables, Monster Ripoff. Without a shadow of a doubt, this is one issue that they are definitely taking seriously. Read their official company rebuttal statement, inside…
Response from Monster Cable on Article in the Consumerist
Monster would like to acknowledge and respond to the publishing of the Monster pricing from an employee at RadioShack in the article titled “Monster Cables, Monster Ripoff: 80% markups.”
The article can be misread that consumers are paying inappropriate prices charged by our retailers for Monster Cable products. The article misleads the reader in citing retailer markups of 80% as if the retailer makes 80% profit margin on products that they sell. Anyone in retail knows that one does not calculate profit by markups, but by profit margins made on the sale as a ratio of what they paid for it. So in the example of the 19ft. HDMI-DVI cable that was highlighted as Retail $179.95, wholesale of $99.40, that’s a profit margin of 44%, which is totally in line with what retailers choose to sell accessory items like Monster Cable. Also the DVI and the S-Video cable cited are both discontinued products using old cable technology. Most of the products listed in the article are 37% to 39% profit margins. This is much less than profit margins on other consumer products like clothing, jewelry, furniture, and accessories to other consumer products.
It’s also misleading when the tone of the article alludes to Monster Cable ripping off consumers, when Monster cannot legally set retail pricing. This is clearly up to the retailer. However in defense of retailers of consumer electronics, it is typical that small items warrant higher profit margins, while large items like TV’s have small profit margins. The consumer clearly wins in the electronics category.
We would also like to point out that Monster makes the highest quality cables in the world, but always with a variety of price points for the consumer to choose from. For example, with today’s most popular digital connection, HDMI, the consumer has a wide range of performance choices with four models of Monster Advanced Speed Rated HDMI Cables, ranging from $49.95 to $99.95. The performance of each of these Speed Rated cables is independently verified by Simplay Labs http://www.simplayhd.com, so our customers know exactly the performance they are paying for. In addition, these prices are in line or lower than other high performance cables offered by Monster’s competitors at retail locations throughout the country.
There is also a comment about digital cables not making a difference and that the only difference in digital cables is the price. This is simply not the case. HDMI Licensing, LLC, the group that develops the HDMI specification, has published two different cable speeds for the current 1.3 specification: Standard Speed at 2.23 Gbps, and High Speed at 4.95 Gbps, which is known as HDMI 1.3 Category 2. For more information, go to http://www.hdmi.org.
In fact, Steve Venuti, Vice President of Marketing for HDMI Licensing, LLC, stated in a recent Widescreen Review article:
http://www2.widescreenreview.com/127venuti.pdf
“…HDMI evolves as it continues to react to the demands of the marketplace. With the introduction of HDMI 1.3 in 2006, HDMI doubled the bandwidth of the specification, and with that, gave manufacturers the ability to design products that can output and receive signals at unprecedented levels…And where there is increased bandwidth, there is increased demand on the cable to deliver the HDMI signal.”
This clearly states that not all HDMI digital cables are the same. Buying the best cables possible will insure that one always gets the best possible digital picture for the components they own.
For those who want to get the real facts on HDMI, please visit http://www.monstercable.com/HDMI/advancedhdmi.asp for the following videos:
1. The Constant Evolution of HDMI with Steve Venuti, Vice President of Marketing, HDMI Licensing, LLC
2. Certified HDMI Cable Performance with Joseph Lias, President of Simplay Labs, LLCFor those who want technical information on why there are different levels of HDMI Cables, one can reference the white paper on HDMI at http://www.monstercable.com/HDMI/whitepaper.asp, where you will learn about why different HDMI cables are needed.
For those who want to get an inside look on the testing of Monster’s HDMI cables, visit http://www.monstercable.com/HDMI/advancedhdmi.asp for an eye opening video of Monster’s quality R&D and testing.
The digital TV revolution is moving fast, as one sees from the introduction of 240Hz displays from TI and Ultra High Definition Displays from Samsung at CES this year. These advanced displays paves the way for vastly improved high definition components that will need even higher speed HDMI cables, all of which are available today from Monster’s Advanced Speed Rated cables.
For those who want to know more about higher definition, Monster and Disney have partnered together on a DVD that educates customers on the various levels of higher definition and how to buy and set up for higher definition TV. The DVD is called The Higher Definition Home Theater Experience, and we would like to offer it at no charge to everyone who is visiting this site by sending your shipping address to the following email: pr@monstercable.com.
Monster has always made the highest quality products at reasonable prices. We stand behind the retailers that offer great service and advice to our customers at a fair profit and we hope that this additional information clarifies some of the confusion that the article might have generated.
Response from Consumerist on Monster Cable Response on Article in the Consumerist
1. As decided in Leegin v. PSKS, this statement, “Monster cannot legally set retail pricing. This is clearly up to the retailer…” is patently false. See “Supreme Court Allows Manufacturers To Dictate Minimum Prices, Screws Consumers”
2. Their response neatly sidesteps a giant section of the original post, so I’ll reproduce it here:
The worst part isn’t really the markup. Stereo equipment routinely has markups of 80 to 100 to 200% by the time it hits the shelves. It’s the initial inflated price, and how gadget stores try to push the cables so hard, telling people that Monster cables offer superior picture and sound then what you would get with another cable. But that simply isn’t the case. Our sister site Gizmodo ran a battery of tests and found Monster cables are for the most part, completely unnecessary. (see The Truth About Monster Cable – Grand Finale (Part III), HDMI Cable Battlemodo Resumes, The Truth About Monster Cable, Part 2 (Verdict: Cheap Cables Keep Up…Usually), and The Truth About Monster Cable).
3. So the paragons of the truth about HDMI cables are a Vice President of Marketing, and the Disney corporation?
4. Monoprice.com.
PREVIOUSLY: Monster Cables, Monster Ripoff: 80% Markups
More From Consumerist
-
Monster Energy Assumes Consumers Can’t Distinguish Energy Drinks From Fish Tanks
-
This HDMI Cable Represents The Edge Of Human Stupidity
-
A ‘List Price’ Isn’t Real Just Because Some Company Says It Is
-
Even If It Breaks Up Viacom Bundle, Cablevision Won’t Commit To A La Carte Cable
-
New 49ers Stadium To Carry The Levi’s Name
@TechnoDestructo:
Please. This isn’t the power cord to your dialysis machine we’re talking about. People can’t wait 5 days to see your new television or, god forbid, be forward-thinking and order the cable ahead of time?
As for misinformation, I put forward the “this belonged to an old lady that only drove it on Sunday” counterargument. Should you believe that car salesman?
@Aesteval: A more accurate way of saying it would be “since Monster broke into the consumer electronics cable market.” Isn’t this just a function of the current market? I don’t see how it is Monster’s fault that other companies are hiking their prices. I think HDMI cable prices will be reasonable when HD-mania has passed and customers start making educated purchases.
I just hate it that one of my top favorite companies ever that makes one of the few products that I am confident to stand up for has to get raked over the coals just because consumers don’t educate themselves.
Just a quick note on digital cables and signal quality.
HDMI cables follow the same rules as Ethernet cables. Anyone who has worked with Ethernet knows there is a quality difference between CAT5, CAT5E and CAT6 cable ratings.
CAT5 cables are rated for 10/100MB/s over 100M (330FT), CAT5E is rated for 10/100/1000MB/s (gigabit) over 100M and CAT6 is qualified to 10GB and video.
I’m not defending Monster Cable here, because I do believe their prices are exorbitant, but you could argue that a higher “quality” cable can carry an HDMI signal at greater distances with less signal degradation, or transmit higher levels of bandwidth at a shorter distance.
Although you will not see any difference between 6ft cables, try these tests with a 75ft cable or 100ft cable and will more than likely notice a difference.
I have to defend one thing about Monster Cable when it comes to the biasedness of “The Consumerist”. Monster Cable did not deny that they have no minimum sale price, they only said that they do not require the stores to sell the items at the retail price.
Wow what a concept that retail businesses are there to make a profit, who knew? I always thought that they were only there as a non-profit org.
Thanks for all the references to monoprice. Didn’t know they existed.
@dlab:
Here’s a more accurate way of saying it “MONSTER BROKE THE CONSUMERS”.
The PR e-mail address in the article is not accepting delivery…
Public Relations
The message reached the recipient’s e-mail system, but delivery was refused. Attempt to resend the message. If it still fails, contact your system administrator.
hey, markups on cables and peripherals are ALWAYS high. why should we be surprised that monster’s markups are that way too? if you’re willing to pay for the cables, fine. if not, go buy something cheaper (with the same percentage markup, i might add). don’t go bitching at Monster just because they and the retailers are trying to make money. i have a friend who used to work at Best Buy and he told me they actually lose money on some of the big ticket items and make most of the profit on cables, etc, just like everyone else. if you’re that concerned about the markup buy them from an online retailer with a lower markup. and stop crying.
Okay, fellow consumerists, this post is going to make War and Peace look short, so for all of you not interested in FAR TOO MUCH DETAIL, just skip to the last paragraph for the summary.
And anyone in retail, especially retail marketing, knows that the overwhelming majority of consumers talk about prices & profits in terms of markup. And this is, after all, a consumer oriented site. Nowhere does the article say, or even imply, anything about profit margins. It talks consistently about markups, even going so far as to point out that markups of this magnitude are commonplace in the world of audio and electronics retailing.
So changing the topic to “profit margin” – a term well understood by retailers and accountants, but little used by actual consumers – is just an attempt to muddy the waters and minimize the outrageous sounding numbers. “See? it’s only 44%, not 80%! That’s not bad at all! See?” If there is any intent to mislead here, it is by you, and is intentional. Frankly, this is pretty sleazy, but not surprising from a large corporate marketing department.
“… the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that it was not au… This ruling ( Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc.) is more than 6 moths old. Do you actually expect us to believe that you are unaware of this? Pardon my bluntness, but that’s bullshit, pure and simple. Once again, the only person trying to mislead here is you. It’s still slimy, and it’s still unsurprising.
Gee willikers! The HIGHEST quality? Wow.
Holy crap. you can’t even write one single paragraph without spewing some sleazy marketing lie, can you? You and I both know exactly why this quote is a dishonest line of crap. But for all the other readers out there, this brief article sums it up nicely.
The original article discusses the demonstrated fact that there is little or no difference between cables of the same HDMI version from different manufacturers. You respond by waving around the fact that there are different versions shouting “SEE? There ARE differences!” It’s nothing more than a red herring, an intentional distraction, an attempt to make it seem as though you rebutted the article when you are actually talking about something comletely different. Four paragraphs, Four lies.
Steve Venuti? Steve Venuti???!!! You’re actually quoting STEVE motherfucking VENUTI to try and impress us with how “not all digital cables are the same?”
Mr Venuti is sicussing diffenernces between different versions of HDMI. The consumerist article discussed cables OF THE SAME VERSION from different manufacturers. Dishonest quote mining is nothing new from marketing departments. So let’s look ata few quotes from Mr Venuti concerning HDMI cables that are actually relevant to the original Consumerist artive:
“Digital cables are either compliant or they are not; they either work or they don’t.”
“…there is no such thing as an HDMI cable that makes the digital audio or video data come out better than another.”
“most home users will see no issues at all in 2-3 meter cables, regardless of the manufacturer. “
Sigh. I give up. It’s too much. Pointing out and rebutting each lie as you tell it is far too time consuming for me to keep it up to the end of your 900 word marketing excrapaganza.
For all you readers who couldn’t stand to read this entire war and peace sized anti-Monster rant, let me sum it up as succinctly as I can:
Eat a bag of dicks, Monster.
@dlab: If Monster Cable has a problem with retailers who misrepresent their product, then Monster Cable should clamp down on them before their reputation is destroyed by excessive hype.
Seriously, though. Come on. You know the bulk of the complaint here is about audio/video cables for consumers. Monster is just making a profit? Great! Just provide me some proportional value for the extra price, or don’t whine when people call Monster Cable a ripoff for charging something far in excess of any value they bring to the table.
@Adam Hyland: This is closer to the truth than what Ben originally wrote (“patently false”!!!), but still not entirely correct. The Leegin decision (linked to by Ben) only goes so far as to eliminate the automatic prohibition on “resale price maintenance” agreements, and apply the “rule of reason” analysis.
The law, actually, is closer to what Monster’s flack said that what Ben thinks. Manufacturers can announce an MSRP, and can refuse to sell to retailers who undercut it. What they couldn’t do (before), was reach an agreement with the store that they’d honor the MSRP. The change in the law simply lets a defendant argue that there is some sort of pro-consumer effect of the MSRP agreement.
(I’ve personally never found any such argument persuasive, but the Court left the door open for one).
To all of you defending the “sale” of these cables, I’ll submit the issue is that more than one of us have stood at a cash register in an argument with a combative, undereducated Radio Shack twerp who tried to force us to agree that there could be a “better” digital signal in a purple cable.
I’m a electrical engineer but I’m perfectly content to let crap like that go most of the time. I’m not a purist and I understand market place reality sometimes trumps truth. No biggie. Barnum’s target audience buys TVs too. What pisses me off is the unapproved waste of my time when some kid that needs to find Clearsil in his local grocery store tells me there can be a better delivery of a square wave through a cable because some moron spray painted it purple.
Retailers – Radio Shack especially – have taken to supplement their failing business models by shoving these cables down their customer’s throats. For those of you fond of arguing from a pure economic capatialist perspective I’ll present it this way: The opportunity cost of listing to Poindexter Zitface try to shovel 80% markup out of my pocket after I’ve arleady said “no” is too high, it’s pissed me off and when I do still shop at Radio Shack (which is considerably less than ten years ago) I silently berrate myself for not planning ahead well enough to order what I needed online.
And now I’m taking great pleasure in watching Radio Shack, Monster and every other jerk that stole my time wallow around in the feces filled pit of consumer rage after their “magic numbers” have been exposed.
Monster: “Waaaaah! I’ll have to buy the 14K Gold Rolls Royce instead of the Diamond encrusted 14K Gold Rolls Royce! Waaaah!”
@dlab: “Fault” isn’t necessarily required to
create a negative feeling towards a company that contributed to the
current market, especially one that contributed in a major way. Are
there other factors? Sure, but this posting is about Monster, not the
other factors and I’ll give Monster as much flack as I feel inclined to
for not being able to go into a store and pick up a 3 – 6 foot
extension USB cable (note, Monster’s not involved in USB cables are
they and yet their itanium plated jewel encrusted excessive product
features spilled over) for a reasonable price.
Everybody line up and get yourself a free dvd.. just like AOL! YAY!
NOT.
The place I work at… our margin on the Monster brand cables is 30% minimum to 40% maximum, not 80%. So I am not sure what other retail places charge but yeah 30 to 40%.
every single “Monster Cable” i ever purchased when i was young and dumb was a piece of shit. now, i learned how to make all my own audio cables, and just pick up what ever video doesn’t make me pull a second mortgage just to buy it. most people can’t even tell the difference in audio or video quality to begin with. spend that money on beer instead.
If Monster cable is the best of all cables, how come the commercial broadcasting industry does not use monster branded cables? Just b/c a cable is O2 free and has braided shielding doesn’t mean squat in-terms of quality, the “professional broadcast grade” cables are typically generic not branded like Monster or Acoustic Research. A lot of the features the branded cables champion typically have no impact at all on your system, unless you are using ALL THX certified equipment (which req. THX certified cables).
My roommate works at Best Buy, and their cable markup is unbelievable but his discount (which is just above cost) helps out big time. He agrees that Monster overrated and his discount is about ~60% on avg for Monster cables (the discount amount depends on the Cost BB pays for the cable). The AR cables are much more reasonable and he gets a larger discount on those cables. He bought us a Dynex (BB store brand) power cleaner/ surge protector that retailed for $130, after discount it was $30, now thats a ridiculous markup.
Monster claims not to set retailer pricing, but they do have a MAP policy. MAP = Minimum Advertised Price. So retailers can sell the cables for whatever they want, but they can only advertise at a certain price. This is why you see “Click here for pricing” on some products around the web.
This is how companies get around anti-competitive / price fixing laws.
Monster cables are sold on the racing stripe factor. They look important and guys get told by people in electronics stores that they are better and a must have.
The $6 cable I got at Target works just fine thanks.
@stre: Yeah! What’s wrong with 80% markups? Might as well make them 160% markup, and if that happens I also have a pre-emptive “stop crying” to anyone who complains.
/sarcasm
There’s a difference between bitching and informing. The former has no utility (besides being irritating) while the latter enables one to make a better decision in the future. And I think the knowledge of ridiculously high markups only helps the consumer steer towards places like monoprice.com , but only if they have the correct information (in this case, the high price isn’t correlative to high quality) and they don’t shoot the messenger by calling it “bitching.”
@dlab: As one who has plugged and unplugged, literally, millions if not billions of a multitude of types and brands of “professional” / “broadcast” quality cables, I must admit, being in “the industry,” I have never once witnessed any professional (individual or organization), no matter the budget or penchant for quality, waste the money for a Monster cable.
You have two cables.
See whut I did thar?
I bought some Monoprice cables ($14) when I purchased my new HDTV. The picture was excellent. Out of curiosity, I then mail ordered some Monster cables ($105) just to see what the difference might be. The result: ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER.
I sent the Monster cables back for a refund. Fuck that.
Despite that antagonizing remark, yeah, I’m still taking my business to monoprice. Heavily shielded HDMI 1.3 cable for $4? Same quality, a billion dollars less? The choice is obvious, you’re a towel.
Oh, and if you can find a pile of old server power cords, fashion your own 13-gauge wires for free. Enjoy!
all retail / service/ restaurant employees are bred to ‘upsale’ a high profit item with every purchase. i’m waiting for someone at BB or CC to tell me “would you like a coke and fries with your HDTV”???
as a general rule i NEVER purchase a suggested ‘accessory’… because i usually know what i need to go with it…. i’d rather go home and find out i don’t need something than go home with something i don’t need.
I emailed them for the DVD.
This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification.
Delivery to the following recipients failed.
pr@monstercable.com
Good job, Monster.
@mantari: I agree that they might want to look into shady salespeople who misrepresent their product, but show me the company with the resources to do that — what are they gonna do, go and offer free training for all Best Buy employees so that they don’t make more commissions by deceiving customers? As for proportional value… you get a lifetime warranty! Replace it for free if it ever breaks. Ever. Same as with Craftsman garden hoses, Filson hats, and Maui Jim sunglasses.
@Aesteval: I don’t see how “the current market” of uninformed consumers who will pay ungodly amounts for HDMI cables was somehow created by Monster. Also, you can get 6ft USB cables for $1.99 from pretty much any online retailer — not as convenient as walking into a store, but then again, you know better than to pay too much for it, right?
@avconsumer: I see that you resorted to calling me an amateur since you wanted to open your mouth and didn’t have anything intelligent to say. I am certainly an amateur (since I don’t work in “the industry” like you) but I believe I am entitled to my opinion, which I’ve come to after years of playing guitar onstage through all kinds of crappy, noisy cables.
it’s easy to blame monster but this sort of thing happens across all industries. it’s the educated consumer that benefits, if you do a little research you could find the same product but at a far more price that is fair for most goods. it only takes 10 minutes on google and anybody can make an informed decision regarding monster and hdmi cables.
great article and it’s been fun following this story.
Monster Cables are always ripoffs. Go monoprice.com.
HEY MONSTER: You’re full of it, and everyone here knows it.
The $10 cables I bought online perform just as well as your (outrageously overpriced) products. The only reason I bought them online, instead of at a store, is because of the criminal precedent your company has set — now there are no major “brick and mortar” stores left that carry reasonably priced cabling, only Monster products and products that emulate your preposterous pricing.
Oh, and your petulant insistence that “clothing, jewelry, furniture, and accessories to other consumer products” have a similar mark-up might hold some water if it weren’t for the fact that none of those products used to cost 1/8th their current price just a few years ago.
You know Monster, if you’re not even going to come up with some GOOD bullshit to defend your reprehensible business practices, you may as well not even try.
Wow! As if Monster didn’t get enough bad PR from the first consumerist post… They went out of their way to try to “fix” the problem with a rebuttal, but only found more bad PR.
Lick your wounds and move on Monster. The perception of your products is being replaced by the reality. I hear Monoprice is doing good business. You might want to consider a merging or buying some stock.
*bunklung winks at executive reading this*
@dlab: Yes. The damage has been done, but training for Best Buy and Circuit City employees (removing false claims) would go a long ways. And we both know that vendors love to supply training to salespeople. Especially when it gives them more truthful* selling points for the product, am I right?
Personally, I have to cheer on Monster Cables and those companies behind the Warranty Plans. Because the companies are expecting so much profit from these little items, I can run in and get the big ticket items for a song! So hats off to the MC/WP buyers?
Example: I was told by a former Best Buy employee that regular cables are inferior because the low frequency sound waves do not move through the cables as quick as the high frequency sound waves, so it loses some quality and becomes slightly distorted when you play things back. “No really, it is simple physics!”
Happily, he informed me, Monster Cables do not have that problem at all. I need Monster Cables.
If you really want to make a difference in the world, focus your efforts on the diamond industry, their markups, and their market manipulation.
There are many brands that “overcharge” consumers. Why get so worked up about one company when there are so many alternatives?
Monster cables aren’t worth the money- we get it. What’s next?
While the consumer has, in general, a personal responsibility to be informed, one should not have to navigate through a minefield of deception created by companies that profiteer from consumer ignorance. Otherwise I could turn the tables and say it’s okay for the consumer to steal merchandise as long as he can get away with it. Really, it’s the same logic.
@mantari: Dude it sounds like you just need to disregard whatever the sales guy says — nobody in retail knows what they are talking about. Well, not the front lines anyway…
@coreynyc:
Mac OS is worth the price difference alone. I’m not a vehement Apple defender, but I “switched” a couple of years ago – once you go Mac you never go back.
Guy’s got a point on the jewelry and furniture markup…they far exceed any Monster cable markup. Still, Monster is a ripoff and they’re just upset because the cat’s out of the bag.
Now let’s do the same with jewelry…
Well, Monster has a lot to protect. They have built a brand based on telling folks there is a difference. But as a broadcaster, I can tell you it’s all marketing. There are a hundred stories on the web all showing that Monster cables do no more than any others. cablestogo.com sells great cables far cheaper than Monster. If they were so good, we’d use them in our broadcast work. We don’t!
[gizmodo.com]
ANd my favorite comment and the one I most agree with as a person with the same engineering qualifications:
BY S1965 AT 06/06/07 06:28 PM
I am a 25-year veteran of the broadcast and audio/visual industry. I’ve been observing the deal with Monster Cable, ever since it came out. The answer between me and my colleagues is simple: People are stupid…and no matter what you tell them they will continue to be stupid. I remember back in the early 90s, when Monster made only their overpriced speaker cable. I colleague of mine who had a pretty heavy-duty electronics shop in his business. They did a very complete “sweep” of the cable and they found that any difference in quality was neglibile, and essentially nullified by commonly bad installation, lousy equipment, poor signal management, and improper use. It’s prettymuch the same way today.
Monster resorts to a commonly used practice known as “specs-manship”. If you can prove on paper that your product performs in a certain way, under certain circumstances (usually in a laboratory environment), you can claim superior performance and a resulting premium market price. Total nonsense. Lordargent made an accurate statement in the prior posting: “Who uses 33 feet of cable?” Most people need about 5 feet. I recently outfitted my masterbedroom with a nice Sharp Aquos 1080p LCD with all the trimmings. I balked at the non-sensical price of Monster Cable. Instead, I purchased some $7 HDMI cables online. They work perfectly. No artifacting…no dropouts. Oh yeah…and for anyone who talks about Monster having greater “clarity”, tell them to get their head examined! Just as we discovered in the 90s that Monster speaker cable produced frequency performance advantages that were beyond the physical capabilities of most people to hear, if you can see bit-related errors from an HDMI signal, you need to get a job with the circus.
All kidding aside, here is my advice. Go to a retailer, buy the cheapest one, if it doesn’t work, take it back and get the next better product. (For HDMI cables at Best Buy, this means you have three levels of pricing choice for the same type of product.) If you’re really smart, buy the cheap ones that get endorsed here on Gizmodo.
And my favorite comment and the one I most agree with as a person with the same real world TV engineering experience:
BY S1965 AT 06/06/07 06:28 PM
I am a 25-year veteran of the broadcast and audio/visual industry. I’ve been observing the deal with Monster Cable, ever since it came out. The answer between me and my colleagues is simple: People are stupid…and no matter what you tell them they will continue to be stupid. I remember back in the early 90s, when Monster made only their overpriced speaker cable. I colleague of mine who had a pretty heavy-duty electronics shop in his business. They did a very complete “sweep” of the cable and they found that any difference in quality was neglibile, and essentially nullified by commonly bad installation, lousy equipment, poor signal management, and improper use. It’s prettymuch the same way today.
Monster resorts to a commonly used practice known as “specs-manship”. If you can prove on paper that your product performs in a certain way, under certain circumstances (usually in a laboratory environment), you can claim superior performance and a resulting premium market price. Total nonsense. Lordargent made an accurate statement in the prior posting: “Who uses 33 feet of cable?” Most people need about 5 feet. I recently outfitted my masterbedroom with a nice Sharp Aquos 1080p LCD with all the trimmings. I balked at the non-sensical price of Monster Cable. Instead, I purchased some $7 HDMI cables online. They work perfectly. No artifacting…no dropouts. Oh yeah…and for anyone who talks about Monster having greater “clarity”, tell them to get their head examined! Just as we discovered in the 90s that Monster speaker cable produced frequency performance advantages that were beyond the physical capabilities of most people to hear, if you can see bit-related errors from an HDMI signal, you need to get a job with the circus.
All kidding aside, here is my advice. Go to a retailer, buy the cheapest one, if it doesn’t work, take it back and get the next better product. (For HDMI cables at Best Buy, this means you have three levels of pricing choice for the same type of product.) If you’re really smart, buy the cheap ones that get endorsed here on Gizmodo.
@Instigator: Just so you know, it’s “au contraire”.
I guess buying my USB cables at the dollar store instead of paying best-buy 30.00 is really slowing down the transfer of my illegally downloaded music to my MP3 player. Or maybe I would get better printing quality if I had a “real” USB cable attached to my printer…
If the dollar store had HDMI cables I’d buy them there too.
And last Sunday I watched the Daytona 500 on my HDTV by tuning in the over-the-air digital signal I received on my dollar store UHF antenna. I guess I was missing something by not having a 100.00 self tuning, self aiming antenna.
Regardless of what standard they want to claim, the bottom line is I can get at monoprice a 6ft HDMI 1.3a CL2 rated cable for like 12 bucks whereas Monster charges something like ten times that. By my, and most practical peoples definitions -thats a…. wait for it… RIPOFF. I just ordered four HDMI cables online and with shipping it was still less than half of what one such cable would’ve cost from Monster.
why do they even bother defending themselves? just keep on producing overpriced cables and f$#@ing your clients, Monster – that’s what you do best, so do it while you still can.
d-bags.
@ecwis: bite moi, te derriere. (jk) heh heh heh
With regard to the confusion over the arithmetic, many trades use jargon that is industry specific. The retail trade uses a specialized meaning for markup that is at variance with the usage found in the way the rest of the world uses percentages. When retailers speak amongst themselves they should feel free to use their jargon, but not when they are talking to the rest of us.
As your typical capitalist pig, I have no problem with Monster selling cables for whatever price they can get. HOWEVER, lying or misleading information is wrong and even illegal under certain conditions.
Many have claimed that the cable doesn’t matter, others disagree. The confusion is in the definition. Better cables transmit data better. But the standard is in, well, the defined standard. So is Monster cable better than el-cheapo? Not if they both meet the same standard.
The standard is what is critical here. Network cables are where I have more experience. Cat-3 cable has a different standard than Cat-6. It has to do with wire gauge, jacket/insulation, and the ever critical twist. Data moving at different speeds produces different effects in the cable, mostly capacitance, and the standards take that into account. Cat-6 cable is designed for a higher bandwidth than Cat-3.
So the cable does make a difference, but if the manufacturer making the cable lives up to the promise implied in claiming to adhere to the standards, then it doesn’t matter who or where you get it from.