[Leica] Another R option (now M9)

[jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj)]

I do not understand the 'cannibalization' theory. Nikon seemed to sell
enough of both the D700 and D3, even though they had the same sensor, and
pretty much the same functionality at wildly different price points. Those
who needed a tough, rugged camera body bought a D3, and the rest a D700.
Cannot Leica do something similar? I am sure Leica management knows what
they are doing, but looking at it from the outside, it seems to me that the
idea  should be to grow and diversify one's market through product
differentiation till the company gets insulated from the risk of a single
new product that gets launched and fails. As of now, it seems to me, that
Leica is overly dependent on the M9 to drive profitability. I do not think
that either the S2 or Panaleicas bring in much profit to the company as a
whole, because of low volumes, even though they may be very profitable per
unit sold. If they cannot bring in another lower priced model now for fear
of losing sales of the M9, surely they should simultaneously release two
models with the launch of a M10 at two different price points, offering
different features and functionality to broaden out their market base.
Cheers
Jayanand

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Philip Forrest <photo.forrest at 
earthlink.net
> wrote:

> Yup.
> The profit margin of a camera shop on a body is very slim. It's
> the lenses and especially other soft goods that really make the body
> sales worthwhile. A multi-card reader used to make my shop more profit
> than the sale of a D700 plus a 24-70 f/2.8 lens.
> Leica doesn't have that right now. No one wants to use a Visoflex or
> other close-up accessories. Their accessory VFs are more than most SLR
> lenses and they still aren't as good as the Zeiss finders.
> If they get a good quality, good performing body out there with M mount
> and a few more modern features as have been discussed, the buyers
> should come. Then they buy the lenses.
> I know 30 classmates who would buy a Leica in a heartbeat if it wasn't
> so expensive. I have a bunch of them seriously considering an M8 after
> using mine for a few days. They love the way of using a rangefinder
> camera. They just can't afford the initial investment. Those are the
> future of Leica if Leica will allow it.
> It doesn't have to be about a marque of luxury. Leica
> gave that up a while back when they stuck the name on the Panasonic
> (sure the same can be argued years prior when they stuck the name on a
> Minolta.)
> It doesn't have to be about exclusivity, Cosina has shown
> that in the last 10 years. They sell many times more lenses to the same
> users for >90% of the image quality and those users are happy with those
> lenses. Some are outstanding as we all know.
> Will Leica be able to replace their long time user base with the next
> generation of photographers? If they don't change up things, I doubt it.
>
> Phil Forrest
>
>
>
>