Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/09/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Thu, 11 Sep 1997, Roger Beamon wrote: > On 10 Sep 97, David W. Almy wrote: > > <snip> > > >Odd, though, that it would be placed in a lifestyles of the > >self-indulgent-type magazine, rather than a photo mag. Mmmmm. > > Ah, the new sin, self-indulgence! Best that we disband this list and > all go to entry level Canon, Nikon, Minolta et al. > > -- > Roger Beamon > Naturalist & Photographer > Leica Historical Society Of America > mailto:beamon@primenet.com > > Thought for the day: > Intuition (n): an uncanny sixth sense which tells people > that they are right, whether they are or not. > > The theory behind advertising in non-photo magazines is that the photo enthusiasts already know about the expensive cameras. Ad agencies for the camera makers show that they can expand the market with these upscale magazine ads. Also, by advertising in more markets, the ad agencies get more fees, as their fees are usually based on the amount of money they spend, in addition to the costs of producing the ads.The down-side of selling expensive cameras to people who don't need them and who cannot even learn to use them properly is that they don't necessarily buy additional bodies or even other lenses. And from what I have been told by the camera makers, profit is made mostly on the lenses. Ed Meyers