Swarovski prices going up 7%? (1 Viewer)

[Paultricounty]

Anybody else here about Swarovski‘s price increases after the new year? I’m being told by a reliable source. Buy now in stock Swaros or pay later.

Happy holidays.

 

[Richard D]

Wouldn't be surprised - inflation in the UK and Europe is about 11%. Presumably the 7% is cost to retailers and how much they pass on is up to them?

 

[Mike Crawley]

Seems reasonable as Richard says

 

[Richard D]

I'd expect similar rises from Leica and Zeiss (although maybe their outsourced production might not be as affected - I don't know what inflation is like in China and Japan).

 

[quincy88]

Wow. I understand that inflation affects everyone, but for a product that is already so expensive that is a bummer. But, I guess the Swarovski's that I already own are going up in value also.

 

[tehri]

 

[Maljunulo]

I guess the Swarovski's that I already own are going up in value also.

Actually, the money is going down in “value” because it takes more of it to buy the same item.

 

[Jos Stratford]

Wouldn't be surprised - inflation in the UK and Europe is about 11%.

20% in Lithuania and some other European countries

 

[Troubador]

Wouldn't be surprised - inflation in the UK and Europe is about 11%. Presumably the 7% is cost to retailers and how much they pass on is up to them?

We don't normally get to hear about wholesale prices i.e. the price paid by the dealer to the local branch of the binocular manufacturer, so I would guess that the 7% increase is on the recommended retail price.

Lee

 

[quincy88]

Actually, the money is going down in “value” because it takes more of it to buy the same item.

The sentence quoted is not about the value of money.
But yeah, my comment is probably nonsense. I, along with most, have no idea how the economy works.

 

[Maljunulo]

Inflation devalues currency, it does not increase the value of goods sold.

 

[Scott98]

Bottom line: in inflationary times, buy more optics! They will hold value better than your fiat currency paper bills. The Federal Reserve is printing money, not making binoculars

 

[gcole]

Swarovski,Zeiss and Leica are already over priced, how much longer will they be able to maintain these asking prices with their competitors from China and Japan supplying near Alpha quality optics at a fraction of the cost.

 

[Canip]

Swarovski,Zeiss and Leica are already over priced, how much longer will they be able to maintain these asking prices with their competitors from China and Japan supplying near Alpha quality optics at a fraction of the cost.

My guess:
if they can keep quality and customer service up, their premium offerings will stay around for quite some time.

 

[Troubador]

My guess:
if they can keep quality and customer service up, their premium offerings will stay around for quite some time.

My guess is: you're right.

Lee

 

[Birdister]

I appreciate that Swarovski can do what they like (and they are very successful at what they do) but I feel there is a danger with any further price increases of their binoculars simply becoming too expensive to risk using in the field. Their top of the range binocular in 2009 (a 42mm EL) cost the equivalent of £1,642 in today's money. That was already very expensive. But their top of the range binocular in 2023 (a 42mm NL Pure) will in theory now cost £2,632 (£2,460 for the 8x42 model * 1.07). This for something which is going to get slung into a car, bumped around, etc.

 

[jgraider]

Swarovski,Zeiss and Leica are already over priced, how much longer will they be able to maintain these asking prices with their competitors from China and Japan supplying near Alpha quality optics at a fraction of the cost.

I agree completely. The Chicom's will continue to gobble up market share in the optics industry, just like they do everything else. Buyer's want cheap predominately, not expensive.

 

[pm42]

But their top of the range binocular in 2023 (a 42mm NL Pure) will in theory now cost £2,632 (£2,460 for the 8x42 model * 1.07).

and s worth every penny as far as I'm concerned. If you find it too expensive there are plenty of more affordable yet very good binoculars.

 

[Maljunulo]

I still say “If you can’t see any difference, perhaps you should consider visiting an ophthalmologist.”

All the arguments, spec sheet wars, and hand waving aside, as a general statement, I believe that more expensive optics are better than less expensive optics. The word “better” seems to have as many definitions as the number of people using it.

In the minds of many, this makes me a snob, but I do see a difference, and I delight in it every time.

 

[Canip]

I still say “If you can’t see any difference, perhaps you should consider visiting an ophthalmologist.”

I think it’s not a shame if someone cannot see the difference. He or she may in fact be very lucky, because they get satisfaction out of a cheaper binocular and don’t have to spend big money on a bino.

I like good wine, but openly admit that a 200 $ bottle of Château Margaux is totally lost on me, my taste buds are just not sensitive enough to distinguish it from a nice 30 $ bottle of red wine. On the other hand, I believe I can still see the difference between good and very good optics and am willing to pay the price for the latter (as long as I can afford them 😐).

As to „more expensive optics are better than less expensive optics“, in general I fully agree (including the qualification of the term „better“), but perhaps we could also say it the other way around: „Better optics tend to be more expensive than cheaper ones.“

Canip