[Wonderboy @ Jan 12th 2007 11:58AM]

This is exactly what I'm getting at... I have very little preference on who makes the product I buy as long as I can trust the quality. So yeah, price is a huge separator. So the way I see it is Sony (and other companies, Sony is just an example) should be smarter with their advertising to save money that could be used elsewhere to either lower prices or invest in R&D.

Monster Cable spent 10-15% of it's annual advertising budget at CES. Samsung is spending $875,000 just for the floor space of their booth this year, not to mention set-up, equipment, staffing, insurance, travel, hotels, food, hand-outs, other displays, and more that all goes for a premium during CES week.

That's a lot of money, and at the end of the day there's not a single product at CES that I am more likely to buy than before it all started, if I didn't read about a company's booth at CES it won't affect me at all when I swing into the store to pick up my next gadget.

Sure some people get caught up in the hype and are influenced, but is Monster Cable really going to see in increase of sales proportionate to it's expenditures of CES? I'd guess not... but then, who am I?

[Matt B @ Jan 12th 2007 1:07PM]

Being that I will never buy a 3 foot cable for $100+ pretty much says that Monster will not have any of my money. :)

[wow. @ Jan 12th 2007 3:46PM]

Well, it depends. The educated consumer goes to play with the gadgets, not to make a decision about them, mainly because the decision has already been made, for the most part. This, however, only accounts for a small percentage of the population.

People react to what they can see and hear, so if you can afford to be the Times Square of CES, then you're guaranteeing that you will be seen and heard. People in your situation who are scoffing have already MADE their decisions, and yep, in those cases, you're right, it wouldn't affect anything, unless something you thought was great turned out to be a dud, or vice versa.