Bring Money: Vesaro's New McLaren-Based Simulator Range Now Available

[kilesa4568]

Also I dont see on their site anything about the computer setup being 2-3x the price of what you'd spend on your own.

I was just checking the specs and prices out.

http://www.vesaro.com/store/pc/viewCategories.asp?idCategory=139

http://www.vesaro.com/store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=231&idcategory=139

http://www.vesaro.com/store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=471&idcategory=139

Other than the optimizing of the motion rig, controls and graphics, they are charging way more than they should be for the spec. £3.5k for hardware costing no more than £800-900?

The top spec level 5 could be built for around £1500 but they're charging £5k for it. Why the hell they'd give you a 1000 watt PSU for that hardware is beyond me. Even if the 1080Ti was SLI'd, it's way more than you need.

Looking through all of the levels blurbs, none are designed for a tri 4k setup, only tri 1080.

 

[F Inferno]

You don't care about the target audience but you do? Since you're asking a question in regards to the target audience. Also why would the target audience always get the most expensive. I imagine a dealership would just get what they deem best fit, for giving a driving experience that doesn't have them testing an actually 200k plus car before it's sold.

So the cheaper option would be understood.

For racing teams running GT teams clearly they'd run something higher end. The assumption that none of this was tested based on whatever pc experience you have and the fact you think it wouldn't work, seems odd. I'd ask you to provide proof to the contrary before claiming this group who is working with McLaren is selling a fraudulent product. Especially after you claim they're using a 1080 and now a 1070. Both are on the same architecture both run high end visuals for gaming with no trouble. But 1080 is the recommended for multiple monitors at 4k so I think they're running 1080.

Also I dont see on their site anything about the computer setup being 2-3x the price of what you'd spend on your own.

Kilesa has given you a breakdown of the PC cost, the base model comes with a 1070 but I was looking at the best upgrade since a single GPU of any kind wouldn't have a hope in hell of running 12k and the best they offer is a 1080, it's insane. I don't know where you are looking to think they can, I have a an OC'd 980Ti which is faster than a stock 1070 and I can tell you it can't even do 4K at 60fps let alone 3x that resolution, you'd barely get double digit framerates! That is why I'm throwing the product as a package into question because it would offer a heavily compromised experience with something that should be good to go.

I also already spoke about other things which have had the prices inflated, Rift street price £500 their price £1250, Vive £760 theirs £1500. Then there is the TV cost, they are charging £5500 for £2000 worth of TVs, for that price you could get 3 4K 55" OLEDs and still have nearly a grand to spare.

I'd be surprised if the DD wheel parts weren't also being charged well over the odds, hence why I'm saying to you the target audience doesn't matter when we are talking about the prices they are claiming things cost to have.

If you were having something built for you and the shop/dealer told you it would cost 3x more than what it would cost you to do it yourself and it's something simple are you telling me you aren't going to question that?

At no point did I claim it was fraudelant those are your words not mine and I'm not sure how you got that from what I said. They are free to charge what they like just as I or anyone else is free to question why they are charging that much.

 

[kilesa4568]

...but they have McLaren branding! I'm sure if they did a Ford version, the price will be a lot more reasonable.

I love the price of the packing crate. From £2k up to £3600, or the user friendly VIP service for a meaasly £12,000...

That said, people will still buy them. Fools and their money...

 

[LearnersPermit]

This is Direct Drive wheel:

View attachment 648055 View attachment 648056

And by the looks of the mounting brackets not just any DD wheel but a Leo bodnar DD wheel

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Kilesa has given you a breakdown of the PC cost, the base model comes with a 1070 but I was looking at the best upgrade since a single GPU of any kind wouldn't have a hope in hell of running 12k and the best they offer is a 1080, it's insane. I don't know where you are looking to think they can, I have a an OC'd 980Ti which is faster than a stock 1070 and I can tell you it can't even do 4K at 60fps let alone 3x that resolution, you'd barely get double digit framerates! That is why I'm throwing the product as a package into question because it would offer a heavily compromised experience with something that should be good to go.

I also already spoke about other things which have had the prices inflated, Rift street price £500 their price £1250, Vive £760 theirs £1500. Then there is the TV cost, they are charging £5500 for £2000 worth of TVs, for that price you could get 3 4K 55" OLEDs and still have nearly a grand to spare.

I'd be surprised if the DD wheel parts weren't also being charged well over the odds, hence why I'm saying to you the target audience doesn't matter when we are talking about the prices they are claiming things cost to have.

If you were having something built for you and the shop/dealer told you it would cost 3x more than what it would cost you to do it yourself and it's something simple are you telling me you aren't going to question that?

I'm questioning more so this claim because to me it sounds like a person that either one doesn't have much stuff done for them or two hasn't dealt with the real world in any sort of extent. If this surprises you then I'm sorry. For example I've changed parts on my vehicles before (altenator, belts, even simple stuff like batteries) and to simply buy the part and put it in myself is just the price of the part. However, to have someone do it, cost the price of that part which is inflated compared to me going to an OEM and then further inflated because of labor.

Same thing here. So when you seem outraged by the price and I question your take on what seems to be implication of a scam. I of course have to ask (as anyone would) where you're basing this off of. I'm glad another member I didn't ask @kilesa4568 did the checking and found info, so thank you for that kilesa.

As for the ability to run 4k I've found sites claiming the 1080ti can do it. And that it's not all that hard for it. No where in my look up did I see them saying 4k 60fps is what you should expect out of the product, nor do they even tell buyers what on-board they're using. Is it one that is specific to just what they sell already? I can't see them saying such. Is it a specific spec that is only built for this line of products and not sold separate?

At no point did I claim it was fraudelant those are your words not mine and I'm not sure how you got that from what I said. They are free to charge what they like just as I or anyone else is free to question why they are charging that much.

It's more of the idea that you claim they can't have tested something that gives an implication of no validity. So would you like to comment on that before you made this claim that I'm putting words in your mouth. Also the shifting here is interesting, who is saying you can't question? You seem to only be saying that last line as if to detract or stop a conversation, yet it's easily understood you can question. It's a forum and that's what happens, people question things other people question them about those things and back and forth is created because of the nature of said forum. If you'd like not to continue a debate simply walk away or say so. But to me you're asking question or having suspicions on things that to some of us seem pretty easy to explain.

It's obvious why the price is what it is, but just because it's obvious doesn't make it a justification for said price. It's just a reality of the situation.

 

[F Inferno]

I'm questioning more so this claim because to me it sounds like a person that either one doesn't have much stuff done for them or two hasn't dealt with the real world in any sort of extent. If this surprises you then I'm sorry. For example I've changed parts on my vehicles before (altenator, belts, even simple stuff like batteries) and to simply buy the part and put it in myself is just the price of the part. However, to have someone do it, cost the price of that part which is inflated compared to me going to an OEM and then further inflated because of labor.

Same thing here. So when you seem outraged by the price and I question your take on what seems to be implication of a scam. I of course have to ask (as anyone would) where you're basing this off of. I'm glad another member I didn't ask @kilesa4568 did the checking and found info, so thank you for that kilesa.

As for the ability to run 4k I've found sites claiming the 1080ti can do it. And that it's not all that hard for it. No where in my look up did I see them saying 4k 60fps is what you should expect out of the product, nor do they even tell buyers what on-board they're using. Is it one that is specific to just what they sell already? I can't see them saying such. Is it a specific spec that is only built for this line of products and not sold separate?



It's more of the idea that you claim they can't have tested something that gives an implication of no validity. So would you like to comment on that before you made this claim that I'm putting words in your mouth. Also the shifting here is interesting, who is saying you can't question? You seem to only be saying that last line as if to detract or stop a conversation, yet it's easily understood you can question. It's a forum and that's what happens, people question things other people question them about those things and back and forth is created because of the nature of said forum. If you'd like not to continue a debate simply walk away or say so. But to me you're asking question or having suspicions on things that to some of us seem pretty easy to explain.

It's obvious why the price is what it is, but just because it's obvious doesn't make it a justification for said price. It's just a reality of the situation.

I'll put this as simply as I can because either you are purposely ignoring key parts of what I've said or you aren't paying attention.

1. A service of a car is not the same as buying a car so that isn't even close to equivalent.

2. I already gave examples of the inflated prices which you have conveniently glossed over twice now, I'm not going to address that again.

3. Why do you keep talking about a 1080Ti and 4K?! I told and you can either go and look or keep talking crap, the £47.5k model (top end of base version) comes with a 1070 AND triple screens which means 3x4K = 12K NOT 4K and NOT a 1080Ti which also wouldn't be able to run 12K nor would a Titan Xp unless you ran it on the lowest graphics settings so it looked like a PS2 game so please just stop. Performance is extremely important in a sim for feedback purposes which is why even consoles with limited power aim for 60fps and not 30fps.

4. They wouldn't be using custom PC parts built only for them and if you honestly think they would then you have no idea what you are talking about. It's a basic HTPC of which all of the parts already have an RRP way below what they are claiming it costs. Go on a site that builds PC and they break down the costs in the same way except they have the parts costs as RRP and then they have labour costs.

5. If it's obvious why it's priced why it is because they are just milking the McLaren brand then what are you arguing with me about?! All I said was those prices are ridiculous, not the total rig cost but the way they have broke down the costs which makes me question the whole thing.

Had they put the actual RRP of those things but the total cost was the same I wouldn't have even noticed, I would have just thought it was an expensive rig. As is though seeing the cost breakdown for that price they should be including much better hardware (Displays and PC just to be clear!)

 

[kilesa4568]

Every PC's blurb says

Every system supports triple display output at Full HD 1080p resolution

.

The monitors do 4K but they're advertising the systems as 3*1080 capable. A 1070 upwards can handle that resolution but you'd have to be a few sandwiches short of a picnic to spec 4K and run them at 1080.

 

[F Inferno]

Every PC's blurb says .

The monitors do 4K but they're advertising the systems as 3*1080 capable. A 1070 upwards can handle that resolution but you'd have to be a few sandwiches short of a picnic to spec 4K and run them at 1080.

Well that makes a lot more sense why they'd only use a 1070 then case closed on that front.

It's hard to find 55" 1080p TVs these days though unless you go really budget, you can get a Samsung 55KU6400 4KTV for £650!

 

[kilesa4568]

I'd love to know what their "McLaren TV Range" is rebranded from. I'd say the price was upper end with how slim the bezel is plus there's always a premium for the curve. I'd say around £1000 but with the mark up on the PC hardware, £3000-£4000+. It's always the case with the boutique niche products though as if it's sold without the (McLaren) branding, it'll likely be half the price.

All about the story rather than what you're actually buying.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I'll put this as simply as I can because either you are purposely ignoring key parts of what I've said or you aren't paying attention.

Such as?

1. A service of a car is not the same as buying a car so that isn't even close to equivalent.

No where do I say it is, what I used as an example is getting a car part replaced and installed by yourself as opposed to a manufacture. The difference in price is quite large. Same thing is seen in various other services.

2. I already gave examples of the inflated prices which you have conveniently glossed over twice now, I'm not going to address that again.

No I didn't, I already explained why they're allowed to inflate prices despite you not liking it.

3. Why do you keep talking about a 1080Ti and 4K?! I told and you can either go and look or keep talking crap, the £47.5k model (top end of base version) comes with a 1070 AND triple screens which means 3x4K = 12K NOT 4K and NOT a 1080Ti which also wouldn't be able to run 12K nor would a Titan Xp unless you ran it on the lowest graphics settings so it looked like a PS2 game so please just stop. Performance is extremely important in a sim for feedback purposes which is why even consoles with limited power aim for 60fps and not 30fps.

You brought up the 1080 in your first post, then you went to the 1070, I went and checked the specs to see if you could run 4k various computer sites saying it is possible so long as the hardware is also up to spec. The issue I have that you are not even addressing is that you're assuming, that this is what the McLaren rig comes with, when in reality it never says that it runs 12k 60fps.

The FPS rambling you're making has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I only asked where you saw the claimed 60fps, since you can't tell me I will understand it for now to be assumption on your part.

4. They wouldn't be using custom PC parts built only for them and if you honestly think they would then you have no idea what you are talking about. It's a basic HTPC of which all of the parts already have an RRP way below what they are claiming it costs. Go on a site that builds PC and they break down the costs in the same way except they have the parts costs as RRP and then they have labour costs.

Where do I say they're using custom PC parts only for them? You clearly are having a difficulty from reading a post and making a literate understanding, then conveying said understanding into a rebuttal. Once again there are certain parts of the line up that run the lvl 2 but all of their lvls are claimed to do 3 *1080 no where do they try to advertise that they can run 4k.

5. If it's obvious why it's priced why it is because they are just milking the McLaren brand then what are you arguing with me about?! All I said was those prices are ridiculous, not the total rig cost but the way they have broke down the costs which makes me question the whole thing.

I'm arguing because of the fact you have an issue with something that I imagine isn't geared for your consumerism, it isn't geared for me either. I'm fine with that, even if I was in the market I wouldn't buy it because it's an obvious play of marked up pricing. Do you have an issue with debate?

As for the price I'd say the better test is estimating how it compared to other full rigs with motion movement, and see if it's in the same pricing or more.

Had they put the actual RRP of those things but the total cost was the same I wouldn't have even noticed, I would have just thought it was an expensive rig. As is though seeing the cost breakdown for that price they should be including much better hardware (Displays and PC just to be clear!)

Even if they did that, what makes you think they wouldn't charge extra. No one is going to buy parts and sell it for the same sum as they paid. They'd never make money, other than on unique finish of manufacturing and labor/time. That would hardly be enough to keep them in business.

 

[F Inferno]

I'd love to know what their "McLaren TV Range" is rebranded from. I'd say the price was upper end with how slim the bezel is plus there's always a premium for the curve. I'd say around £1000 but with the mark up on the PC hardware, £3000-£4000+. It's always the case with the boutique niche products though as if it's sold without the (McLaren) branding, it'll likely be half the price.

All about the story rather than what you're actually buying.

They are just Samsung TV's I tried looking for which ones as I know I've seen them style before with the badge jutting out from the bottom but I'm sure those are a old models as I couldn't find any in this years design.

Such as?



No where do I say it is, what I used as an example is getting a car part replaced and installed by yourself as opposed to a manufacture. The difference in price is quite large. Same thing is seen in various other services.



No I didn't, I already explained why they're allowed to inflate prices despite you not liking it.



You brought up the 1080 in your first post, then you went to the 1070, I went and checked the specs to see if you could run 4k various computer sites saying it is possible so long as the hardware is also up to spec. The issue I have that you are not even addressing is that you're assuming, that this is what the McLaren rig comes with, when in reality it never says that it runs 12k 60fps.

The FPS rambling you're making has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I only asked where you saw the claimed 60fps, since you can't tell me I will understand it for now to be assumption on your part.



Where do I say they're using custom PC parts only for them? You clearly are having a difficulty from reading a post and making a literate understanding, then conveying said understanding into a rebuttal. Once again there are certain parts of the line up that run the lvl 2 but all of their lvls are claimed to do 3 *1080 no where do they try to advertise that they can run 4k.



I'm arguing because of the fact you have an issue with something that I imagine isn't geared for your consumerism, it isn't geared for me either. I'm fine with that, even if I was in the market I wouldn't buy it because it's an obvious play of marked up pricing. Do you have an issue with debate?

As for the price I'd say the better test is estimating how it compared to other full rigs with motion movement, and see if it's in the same pricing or more.



Even if they did that, what makes you think they wouldn't charge extra. No one is going to buy parts and sell it for the same sum as they paid. They'd never make money, other than on unique finish of manufacturing and labor/time. That would hardly be enough to keep them in business.

Such as I told you why I initially talked about a 1080 because that is the top PC upgrade they offer on that model as I thought it was insane to have such low specs for 3 4K TVs. You are the one who kept talking about 4K and othe GPUs not me. Also 3x1080p is 3K not 4K let's not pretend you saw they intended to run them at 1080p otherwise you would have said so earlier!

The difference is you first have to diagnose the issue before doing anything else. When you buy a TV it's already complete and if mounting and plugging it in is so difficult you could pay a shop to do it for you and it would be significantly cheaper than 2-3x the price of the TV.

Again I never said they aren't allowed to inflate their prices but again I'm allowed to point it out and say it's ridiculous.

I never claimed they said anything about performance but when something is nearly £50k and has 3 4K TVs then yes of course I assumed it would be running those at native resolution at a good framerate, you act as if me thinking that somehow makes me crazy. I assumed it was a high end simulator not just a cash grab otherwise I would have just said: "£50k for a 1070 lol", the fact I said more is out of shock.

You were talking about GPUs and performance and then went to on-board and whether it was created specifically for this product, what is that meaning then?

I hope you are joking about selling for what they buy it for. They will buy it in at cost price and then could sell it at RRP and make profit that's what RRP is for to give both the manufacturer and seller profit. Are you purposely be difficult because I know you don't think when shops have discounts they are selling for a loss!

Actual labour costs would be higher because it's a niche product and economies of scale kick in but again not at the level they are charging. If they actually need to charge that to stay in business then it's not very sustainable.

I'm actually in the market for a motion rig hence why I was looking to see if they had an option with just the rig and at what price because options seem to be more limited here in the U.K. I'm not just doing a drive by like some others which is why I don't know why you have singled out my comment or why we are 'debating' anything when we are basically saying the same thing, you are just arguing semantics.

Something doesn't become good value or not a rip-off just because someone is happy to pay the price.

Oh forgot to say you asked about other motion rigs, a full Sim Experience Stage 5 Rig which is a complete build basically the same rig specs (not sure about the PC) costs $26K in the U.S a straight price conversion to £ would still make it over £20K cheaper. So hopefully that makes my shock more understandable and why I picked apart the pricing of things I know the price of without looking it up.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Such as I told you why I initially talked about a 1080 because that is the top PC upgrade they offer on that model as I thought it was insane to have such low specs for 3 4K TVs. You are the one who kept talking about 4K and othe GPUs not me. Also 3x1080p is 3K not 4K let's not pretend you saw they intended to run them at 1080p otherwise you would have said so earlier!

Not pretending @kilesa4568 posted up the appropriate links I followed those, read what they said, then looked at what the McLaren was supposed to run when using 4k ultras, which only some of their units use. You kept on with 4k x 3 = 12k resolution on a single graphics card at 60fps, when the site no where says this. I asked you early on to show me that and you kept on using the above, as if to state I had no idea. When in fact it's pretty simple it's not something all that difficult to grasp. I asked for where this was indicated because it seemed like conjecture on your part.

The difference is you first have to diagnose the issue before doing anything else. When you buy a TV it's already complete and if mounting and plugging it in is so difficult you could pay a shop to do it for you and it would be significantly cheaper than 2-3x the price of the TV.

How did you assess the price of the TV from the entire sum of parts listed? Also it's funny how you move the goal post each time I post something or completely distort what I'm saying. Clearly the analogy I made was for your hang up on building the PC and final price. Yet now you use the TV to try and change perspective, interesting.

Again I never said they aren't allowed to inflate their prices but again I'm allowed to point it out and say it's ridiculous.

Yes, and I'm allowed to combat that with it shouldn't be all that surprising because many groups do this.

I never claimed they said anything about performance but when something is nearly £50k and has 3 4K TVs then yes of course I assumed it would be running those at native resolution at a good framerate, you act as if me thinking that somehow makes me crazy. I assumed it was a high end simulator not just a cash grab otherwise I would have just said: "£50k for a 1070 lol", the fact I said more is out of shock.

No I don't, first off before we continue, stop with the thought that their is some inferred tension here. I do this all the time on the forum, and have done it for six years now. I have no animosity toward or for you, I simply disagreed with your ideals, and pursued an intelligent conversation on the matter. If you see that as some spite or anger then discontinue. But don't assume I think you're crazy, angry or anything else. It's just a conversation.

As for what you actually said. I found it strange you would make this leap because there was nothing suggesting it, especially as I have said the site continually says otherwise.

You were talking about GPUs and performance and then went to on-board and whether it was created specifically for this product, what is that meaning then?

I was talking GPU because you originally had an issue with it. I brought up the on-board because at first I didn't see a specific lvl designation, then I checked again. Which is where again I saw the 1080 designation given and them not advertising anything but that, no 1444 or 4k. Which led me to think it probably isn't set up to run 4k and they'll probably sell something down the road.

I hope you are joking about selling for what they buy it for. They will buy it in at cost price and then could sell it at RRP and make profit that's what RRP is for to give both the manufacturer and seller profit. Are you purposely be difficult because I know you don't think when shops have discounts they are selling for a loss!

We're not talking about the shop, we're talking about the builder, Vesaro. What you're trying to get into has to deal with other things that perhaps a specialized build to order shop wouldn't, such as wholesale cost that help deal with SRP/RRP.

Actual labour costs would be higher because it's a niche product and economies of scale kick in but again not at the level they are charging. If they actually need to charge that to stay in business then it's not very sustainable.

So how do you judge what the labor cost is compared to that of the sum of parts cost before it's built?

I'm actually in the market for a motion rig hence why I was looking to see if they had an option with just the rig and at what price because options seem to be more limited here in the U.K. I'm not just doing a drive by like some others which is why I don't know why you have singled out my comment or why we are 'debating' anything when we are basically saying the same thing, you are just arguing semantics.

I haven't singled out your comment, go back and you'll see I responded to others, you're the only one to carry on. How are we saying the same thing, you think it's a rip off and is wrong. I think it's fine, even if I agree it's a rip off.

Something doesn't become good value or not a rip-off just because someone is happy to pay the price.

Yes it does because that consumerism choice is subjective there isn't an inherent measure that tells a person product A is a rip off compared to product B. Some people my think this product is worth the price simply because of it's quality in finish, the McLaren distinction, or combination. If you don't care about any of that, then you buy from someone else that meets your needs at a more reasonable price. You make that judgement in a free market by assessing like goods, however what you've already discovered is this price is probably more in line because it's an official McLaren signature item and a specialty others can't guarantee.

Oh forgot to say you asked about other motion rigs, a full Sim Experience Stage 5 Rig which is a complete build basically the same rig specs (not sure about the PC) costs $26K in the U.S a straight price conversion to £ would still make it over £20K cheaper. So hopefully that makes my shock more understandable and why I picked apart the pricing of things I know the price of without looking it up.

What is the stage five compared to in the Vesaro line up?

I understand your shock to an extent, what I don't understand is the vehement highway robbery you seem to feel as if it surprising it exists. When you can simply just ignore it and move on to something you believe is realistically worth your purchase and service.

EDIT: Also try to edit your posts so you don't double post in the future.

 

[F Inferno]

Not pretending @kilesa4568 posted up the appropriate links I followed those, read what they said, then looked at what the McLaren was supposed to run when using 4k ultras, which only some of their units use. You kept on with 4k x 3 = 12k resolution on a single graphics card at 60fps, when the site no where says this. I asked you early on to show me that and you kept on using the above, as if to state I had no idea. When in fact it's pretty simple it's not something all that difficult to grasp. I asked for where this was indicated because it seemed like conjecture on your part.



How did you assess the price of the TV from the entire sum of parts listed? Also it's funny how you move the goal post each time I post something or completely distort what I'm saying. Clearly the analogy I made was for your hang up on building the PC and final price. Yet now you use the TV to try and change perspective, interesting.



Yes, and I'm allowed to combat that with it shouldn't be all that surprising because many groups do this.



No I don't, first off before we continue, stop with the thought that their is some inferred tension here. I do this all the time on the forum, and have done it for six years now. I have no animosity toward or for you, I simply disagreed with your ideals, and pursued an intelligent conversation on the matter. If you see that as some spite or anger then discontinue. But don't assume I think you're crazy, angry or anything else. It's just a conversation.

As for what you actually said. I found it strange you would make this leap because there was nothing suggesting it, especially as I have said the site continually says otherwise.



I was talking GPU because you originally had an issue with it. I brought up the on-board because at first I didn't see a specific lvl designation, then I checked again. Which is where again I saw the 1080 designation given and them not advertising anything but that, no 1444 or 4k. Which led me to think it probably isn't set up to run 4k and they'll probably sell something down the road.



We're not talking about the shop, we're talking about the builder, Vesaro. What you're trying to get into has to deal with other things that perhaps a specialized build to order shop wouldn't, such as wholesale cost that help deal with SRP/RRP.



So how do you judge what the labor cost is compared to that of the sum of parts cost before it's built?



I haven't singled out your comment, go back and you'll see I responded to others, you're the only one to carry on. How are we saying the same thing, you think it's a rip off and is wrong. I think it's fine, even if I agree it's a rip off.



Yes it does because that consumerism choice is subjective there isn't an inherent measure that tells a person product A is a rip off compared to product B. Some people my think this product is worth the price simply because of it's quality in finish, the McLaren distinction, or combination. If you don't care about any of that, then you buy from someone else that meets your needs at a more reasonable price. You make that judgement in a free market by assessing like goods, however what you've already discovered is this price is probably more in line because it's an official McLaren signature item and a specialty others can't guarantee.



What is the stage five compared to in the Vesaro line up?

I understand your shock to an extent, what I don't understand is the vehement highway robbery you seem to feel as if it surprising it exists. When you can simply just ignore it and move on to something you believe is realistically worth your purchase and service.

EDIT: Also try to edit your posts so you don't double post in the future.

I'm using my phone hence why I just made a new message as it's an absolute ball ache to scroll up to remind myself what I'm replying to and sometimes it doesn't let me edit. You started and continued to be patronising I've just responded accordingly.

I didn't say it was wrong I just said they can't justify charging that much for the specific things I pointed out and as I said because they are charging that much for things I know the price of the ones I don't know the cost of I assume are inflated too.

I was comparing it to the top base line as that's the only one I've looked at, I knew the ultimate wasn't worth looking at for me especially after seeing the base prices.

No you kept asking where my proof was that it couldn't run 4K and repeatedly argued something I wasn't talking about. At no point did you ask what you are now claiming.

The price of the TVs show if you switch to VR with no monitors then you can see the add-on price of 3 screens at £5500. Just taking RRP of the things I've already said would give you the pre-built cost and their labour cost of 2-3x component cost.

Anyway I'm just repeating myself so I think it's time to just leave it there as it's really not important.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I'm using my phone hence why I just made a new message as it's an absolute ball ache to scroll up to remind myself what I'm replying to and sometimes it doesn't let me edit. You started and continued to be patronising I've just responded accordingly.

Patronizing you? Once again as I just said any animosity or tension you're conveying is on you and only you, I'm just having a debate I don't even know you so why would I have any preconceived feelings toward you. A

I didn't say it was wrong I just said they can't justify charging that much for the specific things I pointed out and as I said because they are charging that much for things I know the price of the ones I don't know the cost of I assume are inflated too.

They'll just claim it has to do with the branding or something else that others don't have. I already agreed it's quite a steep cost but one they can make.

I was comparing it to the top base line as that's the only one I've looked at, I knew the ultimate wasn't worth looking at for me especially after seeing the base prices.

Then perhaps you should look at them all?

No you kept asking where my proof was that it couldn't run 4K and repeatedly argued something I wasn't talking about. At no point did you ask what you are now claiming.

Yes I have, I've asked a couple times where I could fine evidence that suggest they're claiming native 4k and 60fps. Unless you're claiming I'm asking you to provide proof for something else, if so it might be easier for you to just break down my post instead of lumping it. Meaning waiting until your on a computer perhaps.

The price of the TVs show if you switch to VR with no monitors then you can see the add-on price of 3 screens at £5500. Just taking RRP of the things I've already said would give you the pre-built cost and their labour cost of 2-3x component cost.

Okay I didn't see that listing so that's why I was asking.

The SRP on a 65 inch LED curved like on their comes out to be 4000 USD at a local retailer, which would make it a little more than 3000 British Pounds, so I compared that to what they offer and the mark up for that is less then 500 more. So if I were to translate that to their other offerings I imagine it should be linear, thus I'm still not seeing this massive rip off. I agree it's expensive not really something I'd invest in since there probably are less costly equivalents.

Anyway I'm just repeating myself so I think it's time to just leave it there as it's really not important.

Okay.

 

[Stotty]

I'd love to know what their "McLaren TV Range" is rebranded from. I'd say the price was upper end with how slim the bezel is plus there's always a premium for the curve. I'd say around £1000 but with the mark up on the PC hardware, £3000-£4000+. It's always the case with the boutique niche products though as if it's sold without the (McLaren) branding, it'll likely be half the price.

All about the story rather than what you're actually buying.

The TV's are Samsung's of some description.

 

[F Inferno]

Yes I have, I've asked a couple times where I could fine evidence that suggest they're claiming native 4k and 60fps. Unless you're claiming I'm asking you to provide proof for something else, if so it might be easier for you to just break down my post instead of lumping it.

The SRP on a 65 inch LED curved like on their comes out to be 4000 USD at a local retailer, which would make it a little more than 3000 British Pounds, so I compared that to what they offer and the mark up for that is less then 500 more. So if I were to translate that to their other offerings I imagine it should be linear, thus I'm still not seeing this massive rip off. I agree it's expensive not really something I'd invest in since there probably are less costly equivalents

I can't help myself so I'll answer these two as they are literally the only reason this has been going on so long as you keep on making up your own arguments which have nothing to do with anything I've said.

First point, I kept telling you I never said anything about 4K performance and yet you kept going on about it. 4K performance had no relevance when I was talking about 12K triple screens from the start, go back and look. You kept taking things of on a tangent and I kept trying to get back to my original point which at no point did you concede what I said was true because it can't run 12K and the very fact they are running at 3K proves that.

I never said they claimed it would I simply said it wouldn't have a hope of running 12K at a decent performance and they can't have tested it. The only part of that which is wrong is that they have in fact tested it and know definitively that it can't do 12K.

Second point why are you looking at 65" TVs now when it includes 55"? Please just stick to what is in the package! Not only that those are not Q series Samsungs which is what I assume you got that price from and I actually got the prices wrong they are charging £2700 per screen so £8100 for triples. Even if it were a Q7 they are £2300 RRP so a £400 markup which actually £1200 overall wouldn't be that bad when talking about setting up triples getting the FOV right and calibration.

However they aren't, the back of the Q series is solid brushed aluminium with no screws (https://goo.gl/images/AJ9zhr), you can see the screws on these and fan holes, the Samsung badge also has a black surround the Q series is white/clear. I did actually look at what range they are but couldn't find them but they are 100% not from the top range from this or last year, therefore the markup is much higher than £400.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I can't help myself so I'll answer these two as they are literally the only reason this has been going on so long as you keep on making up your own arguments which have nothing to do with anything I've said.

Like what? I've argued the same thing and only have adjusted when you have asked me questions on stuff you've shifted on because you seem to want to keep moving the goal posts on your ideals about the realistic pricing this company has decided upon. The entire argument in a nutshell is this is an outrageous price and unreasonable to ask for, at least on your part. I only have agreed that yes in some sense the price is asinine, but doesn't make it unacceptable due to the key things I've already said in prior posts.

First point, I kept telling you I never said anything about 4K performance and yet you kept going on about it. 4K performance had no relevance when I was talking about 12K triple screens from the start, go back and look. You kept taking things of on a tangent and I kept trying to get back to my original point which at no point did you concede what I said was true because it can't run 12K and the very fact they are running at 3K proves that.

You said that the system couldn't perform at 4k 60 fps, a couple times, and it was pointed out to you that no where was this claim made, it's interesting you admit this to another user, but when I bring it up more than once and ask you where you see it you shift the conversation. So either you have a lack on what me and you are getting at (which is strange cause you also claimed we're saying the same thing), or in your own phrasing "ignoring parts of my post"

I never said they claimed it would I simply said it wouldn't have a hope of running 12K at a decent performance and they can't have tested it. The only part of that which is wrong is that they have in fact tested it and know definitively that it can't do 12K.

Which is a moot point to bring up considering yet again they never say they had the ability which is yet again why I asked you about it.

Second point why are you looking at 65" TVs now when it includes 55"? Please just stick to what is in the package! Not only that those are not Q series Samsungs which is what I assume you got that price from and I actually got the prices wrong they are charging £2700 per screen so £8100 for triples. Even if it were a Q7 they are £2300 RRP so a £400 markup which actually £1200 overall wouldn't be that bad when talking about setting up triples getting the FOV right and calibration.

I'm only following the area you told me to see pricing. I picked a tv and priced matched it with what I could by on my own, then converted the currency. So no I wont stick with what's in the package because there is a correlation that shows that pricing of one will be similar to others. In other words if they're pricing the 65" with in reason of what a person could by on their own. Yes it was the Q series, so please don't tell me, you seem to think yourself an authority figure on this stuff as if it's not something simple to look up. We're talking pricing differences not something hard to grasp. I took the lowest price I found which was slightly less than 4k and rounded it up, the others I found were actually charging 4.3k USD.

You yourself have even had to claim that you calculated wrong (which is fine) and that the TVs are less and not as extreme a mark up as you claimed prior. Which was the point of my last post. So it's funny how you say this but still try to make it seem like I'm wrong or checking prices in a manner you don't agree with. You just proved my method valid even if it wasn't with a TV from that package.

However they aren't, the back of the Q series is solid brushed aluminium with no screws (https://goo.gl/images/AJ9zhr), you can see the screws on these and fan holes, the Samsung badge also has a black surround the Q series is white/clear. I did actually look at what range they are but couldn't find them but they are 100% not from the top range from this or last year, therefore the markup is much higher than £400.

Compared to what, like for like images to prove this would be nice, seems like a stretch without actually emailing them and asking.

 

[F Inferno]

Like what? I've argued the same thing and only have adjusted when you have asked me questions on stuff you've shifted on because you seem to want to keep moving the goal posts on your ideals about the realistic pricing this company has decided upon. The entire argument in a nutshell is this is an outrageous price and unreasonable to ask for, at least on your part. I only have agreed that yes in some sense the price is asinine, but doesn't make it unacceptable due to the key things I've already said in prior posts.



You said that the system couldn't perform at 4k 60 fps, a couple times, and it was pointed out to you that no where was this claim made, it's interesting you admit this to another user, but when I bring it up more than once and ask you where you see it you shift the conversation. So either you have a lack on what me and you are getting at (which is strange cause you also claimed we're saying the same thing), or in your own phrasing "ignoring parts of my post"



Which is a moot point to bring up considering yet again they never say they had the ability which is yet again why I asked you about it.



I'm only following the area you told me to see pricing. I picked a tv and priced matched it with what I could by on my own, then converted the currency. So no I wont stick with what's in the package because there is a correlation that shows that pricing of one will be similar to others. In other words if they're pricing the 65" with in reason of what a person could by on their own. Yes it was the Q series, so please don't tell me, you seem to think yourself an authority figure on this stuff as if it's not something simple to look up. We're talking pricing differences not something hard to grasp. I took the lowest price I found which was slightly less than 4k and rounded it up, the others I found were actually charging 4.3k USD.

You yourself have even had to claim that you calculated wrong (which is fine) and that the TVs are less and not as extreme a mark up as you claimed prior. Which was the point of my last post. So it's funny how you say this but still try to make it seem like I'm wrong or checking prices in a manner you don't agree with. You just proved my method valid even if it wasn't with a TV from that package.



Compared to what, like for like images to prove this would be nice, seems like a stretch without actually emailing them and asking.

Why do you argue things I've explained in the post, you ask for examples I've given just below what you first quoted?!

No my argument as I keep saying is the markup on the specific things I've pointed out is outrageous which therefore makes me wonder what else has been marked up and throws the whole package into question. Just like if you went into any other shop to buy something you are not intimately familiar with but they are selling something you do know for 3x the price you know it costs then you'll question everything else.

I adjusted because you kept arguing something different to what I was saying which is what you aren't getting, I changed it in the hope you would understand. Instead you kept banging on about the same thing despite me saying each time no that's not what I'm talking about.

The times I was talking about 4K 60 was to point out that if a 1070 or my 980Ti couldn't do that then something with 0.75 times more power (a Titan XP or 1080Ti) couldn't run something that needed 3x more pixels and therefore 3x more GPU power. All you kept saying is oh I've seen 4K benchmarks when I was talking about 12K which again I never claimed anything about what they said I simply said a 1070 could not run 12K and it can't. You are unwilling to admit you are wrong though that's fine but you still can't tell me what relevance 4K has to anything I said because the system is running at 3K, the only time 4K would ever be on the cards is for a single screen which I never discussed.

It's not the Q series I'm not even going to argue with you about that as they all have a single sheet of aluminium on the back with no fans, only slots for cooling and no screws same as last years 8000 series and up. The ones in the pictures from side profile you clearly see the back panel has screws and a fan vent just below the middle, the Samsung badge also has a black surround which the q7 is white/clear plastic. The q8 and q9 don't have black frames so it's also not either of those and as I said before the TVs (in those pictures at least) look to be the design they used a few years ago. Given they are using a CPU which is over 1.5 years old it wouldn't surprise me if they used older LCDs if they could source them cheaper as old stock.

I can't tell if you a purposely trying to annoy me now. My original calculation was £5500 for triple screens, but actually I went back and looked and it is £8100 (£2700 per TV) that's and increase of £2600.....

I didn't validate anything you said, I said if those were Q7's that wouldn't be an outrageous markup but it is clear to see they are not. I will humour you and get pictures though but I bet you will still deny the truth.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Why do you argue things I've explained in the post, you ask for examples I've given just below what you first quoted?!

No my argument as I keep saying is the markup on the specific things I've pointed out is outrageous which therefore makes me wonder what else has been marked up and throws the whole package into question. Just like if you went into any other shop to buy something you are not intimately familiar with but they are selling something you do know for 3x the price you know it costs then you'll question everything else.

I adjusted because you kept arguing something different to what I was saying which is what you aren't getting, I changed it in the hope you would understand. Instead you kept banging on about the same thing despite me saying each time no that's not what I'm talking about.

The times I was talking about 4K 60 was to point out that if a 1070 or my 980Ti couldn't do that then something with 0.75 times more power (a Titan XP or 1080Ti) couldn't run something that needed 3x more pixels and therefore 3x more GPU power. All you kept saying is oh I've seen 4K benchmarks when I was talking about 12K which again I never claimed anything about what they said I simply said a 1070 could not run 12K and it can't. You are unwilling to admit you are wrong though that's fine but you still can't tell me what relevance 4K has to anything I said because the system is running at 3K, the only time 4K would ever be on the cards is for a single screen which I never discussed.

It's not the Q series I'm not even going to argue with you about that as they all have a single sheet of aluminium on the back with no fans, only slots for cooling and no screws same as last years 8000 series and up. The ones in the pictures from side profile you clearly see the back panel has screws and a fan vent just below the middle, the Samsung badge also has a black surround which the q7 is white/clear plastic. The q8 and q9 don't have black frames so it's also not either of those and as I said before the TVs (in those pictures at least) look to be the design they used a few years ago. Given they are using a CPU which is over 1.5 years old it wouldn't surprise me if they used older LCDs if they could source them cheaper as old stock.

I can't tell if you a purposely trying to annoy me now. My original calculation was £5500 for triple screens, but actually I went back and looked and it is £8100 (£2700 per TV) that's and increase of £2600.....

I didn't validate anything you said, I said if those were Q7's that wouldn't be an outrageous markup but it is clear to see they are not. I will humour you and get pictures though but I bet you will still deny the truth.

Deny what truth you've jumped around this entire time, and then you've claimed that no your argument was exactly what I claimed it to be. Which is you find the pricing a ripoff and wrong. That simple, I disagree with that for various reasons on why it's wrong, but I do agree it's outrageous as well. Once again how would you know for sure that those TVs aren't Q7s? Because of a picture that is used to give a general idea of what the user can expect in a setup looks wise, without just simply reading a list of summed parts?

Like I said I'm arguing cause I disagree, and you've not really proved anything other than what you feel is wrong, since you have no possible way to measure the price of this product since there isn't another McLaren signature series on the market or similar partnership. End of.

 

[F Inferno]

Deny what truth you've jumped around this entire time, and then you've claimed that no your argument was exactly what I claimed it to be. Which is you find the pricing a ripoff and wrong. That simple, I disagree with that for various reasons on why it's wrong, but I do agree it's outrageous as well. Once again how would you know for sure that those TVs aren't Q7s? Because of a picture that is used to give a general idea of what the user can expect in a setup looks wise, without just simply reading a list of summed parts?

Like I said I'm arguing cause I disagree, and you've not really proved anything other than what you feel is wrong, since you have no possible way to measure the price of this product since there isn't another McLaren signature series on the market or similar partnership. End of.

No you keep saying I said it's wrong and I keep saying no I didn't say that. As I keep telling you the only reason we are still debating anything is because you keep interpreting things wrong or saying I've said things I haven't and me correcting you on what I actually said.

The first thing I said was the mark-up was insanely high with what I pointed out and it made me wonder what the actual cost was, I followed that with I didn't think they had any real justification for it on those specific items and you basically said the justification is because someone will pay it, which is just a nothing reason. That's the equivalent of asking why someone did something and the only answer you get is because they can. That's not me saying it's wrong anywhere, I'm saying I don't understand why they are inflating the prices on those specific things so much, at the very least it's poor marketing and they should hide the cost elsewhere in the rig.

I can only go by what I see, if they aren't going to show the full specs then I can only go by images, the fact I'm not even sure what model those TV's are is actually more intriguing to me than anything else. I just find it amusing you instantly look at the more expensive line of Samsung TV's as proof they aren't marked up when based on other products that would be a foolish assumption. The Vive and Rift are both 2x or more expensive than RRP as is the PC so it's fair to assume the TV's are most likely to be too, what wouldn't be fair is if I looked at the cheapest Samsung as proof it's a rip-off without knowing the model. All I can definitively say is those are not the top end models but they have been priced as if they are.

I've attached my proof those aren't the latest Q range but I see you've already backtracked on that after asking for images because you now full well I'm about to prove you wrong,. Makes me wonder why you asked for pictures in the first place as I knew you would try to claim the pictures are only representative, so predictable, perhaps you thought I wouldn't bother taking the time to do it?

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

No you keep saying I said it's wrong and I keep saying no I didn't say that. As I keep telling you the only reason we are still debating anything is because you keep interpreting things wrong or saying I've said things I haven't and me correcting you on what I actually said.

The first thing I said was the mark-up was insanely high with what I pointed out and it made me wonder what the actual cost was, I followed that with I didn't think they had any real justification for it on those specific items and you basically said the justification is because someone will pay it, which is just a nothing reason. That's the equivalent of asking why someone did something and the only answer you get is because they can. That's not me saying it's wrong anywhere, I'm saying I don't understand why they are inflating the prices on those specific things so much, at the very least it's poor marketing and they should hide the cost elsewhere in the rig.

I can only go by what I see, if they aren't going to show the full specs then I can only go by images, the fact I'm not even sure what model those TV's are is actually more intriguing to me than anything else. I just find it amusing you instantly look at the more expensive line of Samsung TV's as proof they aren't marked up when based on other products that would be a foolish assumption. The Vive and Rift are both 2x or more expensive than RRP as is the PC so it's fair to assume the TV's are most likely to be too, what wouldn't be fair is if I looked at the cheapest Samsung as proof it's a rip-off without knowing the model. All I can definitively say is those are not the top end models but they have been priced as if they are.

I've attached my proof those aren't the latest Q range but I see you've already backtracked on that after asking for images because you now full well I'm about to prove you wrong,. Makes me wonder why you asked for pictures in the first place as I knew you would try to claim the pictures are only representative, so predictable, perhaps you thought I wouldn't bother taking the time to do it?

View attachment 648662 View attachment 648663 View attachment 648664 View attachment 648666 View attachment 648667 View attachment 648668 View attachment 648670 View attachment 648671

Everything you just said is essentially how I've paraphrased your posts...not understanding how you saying it is different from my understanding of it and reposting it back to you.

Also good comparison, it doesn't prove that they're not using or using a certain tv cause they could have done things to get a fitment for their rig, that obscures features or something else. Once again it's better to just email the company with interest and ask for more detailed specs because your in the market, rather than assume.

Anyways as you said some posts ago you were done and the rehashing has me bored too so thanks for the debate/conversation, I'll move on.