Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/04/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
At 06:53 +0200 26/04/99, Nathan Wajsman wrote:
>Jim,
>
>I used to own a Hasselblad (the basic model, 501C) and I think it is a
>wonderful
>system. It shares many of the virtues of Leica: great lenses, mechanical
>operation, it is a classic. [ ... ]
People don't seem to realize that launching any new photo
product line is FAR more involved that just throwing
some lump sum of money at a problem: it has to
be and remain a viable business in an extremely
competitive world-wide market environment.
It simply would be suicide for LEICA to get itself
in the MF format where every single customer
literally means jobs at the other end for the brand
he (she) decides on. Profits margins are spreading
extra thin these days and it would have to be
a very large conglomerate that could simply "enter"
the MF market.
What MF market segment was left open, it would seem,
got "covered" by the new Contax 645 autofocus
camera system with Carl Zeiss lenses. This corporate
move may weaken Hasselblad significantly by diverting
Hasselblad's profit margin clients to Contax, witness
the Hasselblad family selling most, if not all, of their
financial stakes in their namesake corporation.
What market(s) would provide good and
significant business opportunities for LEICA ?
I have considered the matter and it might eventually
make sense to develop professional lenses for
the HDTV / cinema industry, both on camera
and for projectors, and yet, you still have Schneider
and Zeiss to contend with, not to mention Cooke,
Angenieux, Canon and Panavision. What room does
that leave for profits when most movie houses get
"standard grade" lenses and still charge their
obscene $8.oo per customer and $2.00 for 10 cents
worth of popcorn... ! ? ! So, would it make sense
for LEICA to go that way, develop and refine ( ! ! ! )
a series of high grade lenses, and merely cover the
investment? Hardly !
If someone really wants a top grade MF camera,
what risk would it be to go for Hasselblad ?
- traditional quality and dependability,
- difficult to beat lenses,
- no nonsense everything,
- prices to match ...
They are not LEICA brand but definitely represent
to MF what much of LEICA stands for in 35mm,
and there certainly are some professionals who
would like to have LEICA have quality as good
as Hasselblad's: not a negative comment, but, at one
point, such photo equipment gets to reach a peak
for precision and dependability, then saleability.
Very serious and competent people opt for Nikon
or Canon, for example: it's their privilege.
What work$ for them is a different equation
than LEICA's and I presume most are sensible enough
to appreciate the LEICA philosophy and products
to their full extent.
The final comment is: there IS such a thing as market
saturation and it does make company excutives and
marketing / sales personnel nervous when a given
market segment shrinks by even a very few percentage
points, as happened to myriad firms last and this year
as a consequence of world-wide financial and monetary
instability; things could even get worse, world-wide,
and it could kill LEICA altogether to not be "conservative"
in such context. Notice the structural and inside managerial
adjustments LEICA is going through, getting itself in
a better posture to survive to the next positive business
cycle: it bespeaks of the top level competence
of LEICA 's executive level management to do so.
Count your blessings, I say.
Andre Jean Quintal
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"I may have been born a reformer,
I'll die a rebel."
DUNE VII