This was originally posted by Trancethereal at AVS forum. I posted it here because I find it to be it an excellent take on this issue.

"Wouldn't it be weird if some people's opinion while different, are equally valid.... ooohhh some really transcendental thinking.

yea.. right! Hmmm... I am sure that in a beauty contest, you would be equally right if your choice was Roseanne Barr, or if you think the Pontiac Aztec is design nirvana, or even that short sleeve reversible suits are a designer's dream.

While opinions are just that (and everyone has one), it is undeniable that some seem to fall pretty wide on the bell curve...

Again - we all accept the impeccable performance and technical merits of the Outlaw product and are amazed when the price is factored. So no one is placing aesthetics above performance - because the performance is already there! We are merely suggesting that the looks *could and should* match its technical merits.

One point was already highlighted - which I assumed was obvious - that Outlaw is a direct to consumer product. Given this, looks become a bigger factor - as it is the first experience the user will have *before* making a purchase. There is no tactile experience to further draw the customer in...

Call it superficial - but it does matter and in Outlaw's case could be an "X" factor. It could be the difference between a sale and no sale. Judgments and perceptions can be influenced negatively very quickly.

This discussion seems to divide people into three groups:

Those who think looks have no bearing - so why show the product at all? Those that claim specs only matter - wouldn't need pictures. Can you imagine buying a product that you never saw? I am sure their opinion has little weighting.

Those that put the product behind a smoked entertainment center or tucked away in a media closet - aren't you being a little disingenuous participating in the discussion - cause in the end - if it looked ten times better or worse, it would still be out of view. Again, this opinion would have little weighting.

That leaves the rest - those that desire or prefer a nice looking product or whom a nice looking product has an influence on their decision. (Again - we have already put to rest the decision based on functionality and performance!) These opinions will have greater weighting.

How many buyers or potential buyer fall in the third group? 60-80%??

And from Outlaw, the company's, perspective, if the increase in cost (if even necessary) yields higher sales, then it makes good business sense. No one has even factored what the percentage of "lost" sales are attributed to the product.

While I don't think the logo is bad - I do think the whole look and feel of the product leaves much to be desired.

It seems like there are lot who don't like the looks and little saying they can't imagine the looks could be improved upon.

If I was Outlaw, I would be concerned that my product has generated this much discussion (one way or another) on its look.

As I said before - Outlaw can hang with the best technically on a budget - so why is it so hard to design the aesthetics with the same verve?"



[This message has been edited by eskendir (edited January 22, 2003).]