MQA and the Sponsor Wars

[witchdoctor]

To summarize then, MQA increases costs and decreases competitive advantage while adding 0 benefits because it does not sound better or worse. That sounds like they should NOT sponsor any publishers or market at all so MQA becomes a "non issue". Is that right?
Thanks Shadders. 

[PeterSt]

21 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

while adding 0 benefits because it does not sound better or worse.

 

What did you try to say here ?

[Shadders]

6 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

To summarize then, MQA increases costs and decreases competitive advantage while adding 0 benefits because it does not sound better or worse. That sounds like they should NOT sponsor any publishers or market at all so MQA becomes a "non issue". Is that right?
Thanks Shadders. 

Hi,

Yes - that is part of the issue - MQA offers no real benefit sound wise (Archimago tests) yet costs more to implement with regards to hardware.

With regards to sponsoring - the sponsors were sponsoring this site and others, before MQA. Adding MQA to their specification is just a tick box exercise. Sponsors fund this site and others as they have equipment to sell, they are not selling MQA.

 

What you seem to be inferring is that if the site owner does not suppress anything but a pro-MQA stance, that sponsors should withdraw their sponsorship.

 

This is not acceptable. No one should be suppressed with regards to free speech, and i am certain that sponsors are aware of the pros and cons of MQA. Some of the sponsors have implemented MQA. Some of the sponsors have stated that they will not be implementing MQA, and are against it.

 

Are you stating that those who have implemented MQA should abandon sponsorship of this site due to a few threads stating the reality of MQA ? (which you deem negative)

 

Or

 

Are you stating those people who have not implemented MQA and/or are against it, should abandon sponsorship since this site mentions MQA (abeit positively and negatively based on who is posting) ?

 

As such, i do not see sponsorship as an issue - since the sponsors are selling equipment,  not MQA.

 

Regards,

Shadders.

[witchdoctor]

Thanks  Shadders, I don't have the answers, that is why I started this thread, to get opinions.

[witchdoctor]

24 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

What did you try to say here ?

Read the post prior to that one and ask Shadders, the post you referenced was a summary of the previous one

[PeterSt]

29 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

51 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

while adding 0 benefits because it does not sound better or worse.

 

What did you try to say here ?

 

Does this help you in understanding what I was asking ?

[witchdoctor]

1 minute ago, PeterSt said:

 

Does this help you in understanding what I was asking ?

If you want to help please answer the question in the first post, thanks

[PeterSt]

Just now, witchdoctor said:

If you want to help please answer the question in the first post, thanks

 

Why would I do that ?

[miguelito]

On 10/28/2017 at 10:52 AM, witchdoctor said:

Let me tell you how you market any product. Rule number one is you TARGET people who WANT the solution you are offering. Has anyone noticed that roughly 50% of the sponsors of Computer Audiophile are MQA partners? These are the BEST companies in audio that are offering bleeding edge products to sophisticated music lovers.Looking at the banner on the right side of the home page and in sponsored circles there is: dCS, Auralic, Lumin, Pro-Ject, Mytek and iFi. Then you have the number one hirez content site which will soon be offering MQA streaming HD Tracks.

What the WD sees on CA is largely a bunch of members that HATE all things MQA. The MQA is Vaporware thread is not exactly an MQA love fest shall we say?  

Now that is all good, the members here are certainly passionate in their opinions. This thread is about sponsor wars.

Does it make any sense for companies that have embraced MQA to market to a bunch of people that hate MQA? 
If the answer is yes will those sponsors have success? Will those marketing dollars actually be spent wisely marketing on the malcontent members here to convert them to MQA?

Will those sponsors move on to a more friendly audio crowd? 

If YOU were an MQA partner would how would you spend YOUR sponsorship dollars? Where members dislike MQA or on a resource like Stereophile or Darko which have embraced MQA? There are tons of publishers that are fighting for the sponsorship dollars spent by MQA partners. 
I don't know the answer, would anyone like to chime in? 

What IS your point exactly? We should shut up instead of expressing our concerns with the licensing and technical merits of MQA?

 

I think the MQA haters (as you call them) have some strong technical and licensing arguments against MQA. I agree with those for the most part.

 

Me personally, I am in wait and see mode. I just moved to a DAC that will hopefully do MQA decoding in the near future. We'll see. That aspect contributed in part to me choosing that DAC.

 

In my opinion, MQA will live or die based on their ability to negotiate. As of now they have shown little ability to fend off the criticism. Tidal/Audirvana first unfold seemed to shed some hope. We will see.

[PeterSt]

OK, suite yourself.

 

On 28-10-2017 at 4:52 PM, witchdoctor said:

Let me tell you how you market any product. Rule number one is you TARGET people who WANT the solution you are offering

 

Oh, is that YOUR number one rule eh ? well, it isn't mine so you must be incorrect.

 

On 28-10-2017 at 4:52 PM, witchdoctor said:

Has anyone noticed that roughly 50% of the sponsors of Computer Audiophile are MQA partners?

 

And have you noticed that roughly 99,9999% of CA readers does not advertise MQA ?

 

And did you count how many of those readers is actually trying to shillsell you MQA.

 

Did you count yourself in ?

 

Can you tell me who I myself target ?

 

On 28-10-2017 at 4:52 PM, witchdoctor said:

These are the BEST companies in audio that are offering bleeding edge products to sophisticated music lovers.

 

Come on, you make no sense. How can they be the BEST when I already am that ?

 

On 28-10-2017 at 4:52 PM, witchdoctor said:

Then you have the number one hirez content site which will soon be offering MQA streaming HD Tracks.

 

You really think you know all, do you. Well, you know nothing much as HDTracks is the WORST of Hires. Proof me otherwise if you think I am wrong.

 

On 28-10-2017 at 4:52 PM, witchdoctor said:

What the WD sees on CA is largely a bunch of members that HATE all things MQA.

 

Ah, correct ! What does he think about me, for example ?

 

On 28-10-2017 at 4:52 PM, witchdoctor said:

Does it make any sense for companies that have embraced MQA to market to a bunch of people that hate MQA?

 

I don't see those sponsors marketing MQA really. Even an ad yu so happily linked to of some LG failing phone does not refer to MQA anyhwere. Of course you thought it did, but it really doesn't. You dream a lot, I guess. It is all in your mind. Sponsor war.

 

On 28-10-2017 at 4:52 PM, witchdoctor said:

If YOU were an MQA partner would how would you spend YOUR sponsorship dollars?

 

Yes, in my pocket. Btw, this is your most valuable answer of your thread. Believe it or not.

 

On 28-10-2017 at 4:52 PM, witchdoctor said:

Where members dislike MQA or on a resource like Stereophile or Darko which have embraced MQA?

 

The former. And you just learned about MY rule #1.

 

Anything else ?

[witchdoctor]

14 minutes ago, miguelito said:

What IS your point exactly?

This thread is about learning more about the marketing side of MQA. There is already a thread for the technical side and the skeptical side. Thanks for posting.

[kumakuma]

13 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

This thread is about learning more about the marketing side of MQA. There is already a thread for the technical side and the skeptical side. Thanks for posting.

 

You forgot to mention that you've been banned from the other MQA threads on this site for excessive shilling.

[witchdoctor]

Their is an aspect to branding called the "halo effect". What type of "halo" do you think surrounds the brands of the companies that have chosen to partner with MQA?
My opinion is their common halo is primarily luxury, quality, and consistency. What's your opinion? 

http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/our-partners

[PeterSt]

35 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

What type of "halo" do you think surrounds the brands of the companies that have chosen to partner with MQA?

 

They suck you in.

 

YOU.

[witchdoctor]

23 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

They suck you in.

 

YOU.

I see you have your brand in your signature. PeterSt as a vendor have you ever sponsored a site like CA before? Why or why not? Thanks for weighing in. 

[miguelito]

1 hour ago, witchdoctor said:

This thread is about learning more about the marketing side of MQA. There is already a thread for the technical side and the skeptical side. Thanks for posting.

Fair enough.

[DrN]

WD your all shill theatrics.

You got time out on the other site for doing the same there.

Leave already!

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 hour ago, DrN said:

WD your all shill theatrics.

You got time out on the other site for doing the same there.

Leave already!

 

He was honing is craft over at Audiocircle before bringing the MQA Shill Show over here.

[witchdoctor]

1 hour ago, DrN said:

WD your all shill theatrics.

You got time out on the other site for doing the same there.

Leave already!

For "theatrics" please see the immersive audio thread.  

No one forced you to click on my thread, you can leave now, thanks!!

 

BTW, thanks for copying my handle DrN, but the doctor in the house is the witchdoctor:

 

 

[Samuel T Cogley]

Here's another thread over at Audiocircle that has all the familiar WD MQA shilling.

[witchdoctor]

8 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

Here's another thread over at Audiocircle that has all the familiar WD MQA shilling.

I don't think it is polite to refer members here to another similar site.
If you have a question about MQA and marketing feel free to post. If you are just a stalker that's ok too.  

[Speed Racer]

1 minute ago, witchdoctor said:

I don't think it is politically correct to refer members here to another site.
If you have a question about MQA and marketing feel free to post. If you are just a stalker that's ok too.  

 

PC? You don't get to decide what can and can't be done here. It certainly shows a trend that was painfully obvious without the outside example....

[witchdoctor]

2 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

 

PC? You don't get to decide what can and can't be done here. It certainly shows a trend that was painfully obvious without the outside example....

OK, I edited to "not polite"
Speed Racer thanks for posting. Can you answer the question in the first post in this thread?
Thanks

[Speed Racer]

24 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

Can you answer the question in the first post in this thread?
Thanks

 

Sure!

 

If I were an MQA sponsor, I wouldn't care if people liked or disliked MQA and it wouldn't drive where I spent my advertising budget. Why? Because the only reason I would add MQA to my product, and thus become a sponsor, is that I wouldn't want to lose sales because MQA wasn't on my checklist of features.

 

I certainly wouldn't want people like you going around pushing MQA hard and pissing everyone off. I would want none of my customers or potential customers alienated by MQA or it supporters and shills.

 

How's that?

[witchdoctor]

8 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

 

Sure!

 

If I were an MQA sponsor, I wouldn't care if people liked or disliked MQA and it wouldn't drive where I spent my advertising budget. Why? Because the only reason I would add MQA to my product, and thus become a sponsor, is that I would want to lose sales because MQA wasn't on my checklist of features.

 

I certainly wouldn't want people like you going around pushing MQA hard and pissing everyone off. I would want none of my customers or potential customers alienated by MQA or it supporters and shills.

 

How's that?

You said you would WANT to lose sales. Did you mean NOT want to lose sales??