[[email protected]]

Norman Schwartz wrote:
On Sep 4, 7:50 am, Dick Pierce wrote:
It should also be noted that I have been hired as an
expert witness in several legal cases where, among other
things, the issue of the relationship between direct
and indirect costs and suggested retail price was a
significant part of the litigation. In at least one
of those cases, my expertise and the corroborative
data I provided played a crucial role in determining
the outcome.


We all know of litigation against fast food outlets for making people
become obese, but can we also sue for having paid too much for audio
equipment?
,
Don't know if it's the situation in Dick's case, but contracts with
CMO's (contract manufacturing organizations) are often written on a
"cost of goods +" basis, e.g., COG + 15%. The CMO is obligated to track
materials and direct labor costs to determine COG and the subsequent
sales price. Sometimes the CMO is...less than rigorous...in COG
calculations, and litigation results at times. Not unheard of in the
pharma world, but I'm not sure how common it is in the audio world. I
imagine Dick has a better idea.

Keith Hughes