Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/09/27

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica's future
From: Jim Brick <>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 22:57:53 -0700

All one has to do is look at the size of Leica as a company. The technology
that it is producing, the fields that it is in (35, projection, digital,
P&S, etc...) and the size of it's Photokina presence. Photokina space goes
for mucho denero per sq meter. This was a BIG show. Profit enough to
sustain what Leica does, does not all come from the quintessential
enthusiast. But your point is well taken.


At 11:51 PM 9/27/98 +0000, you wrote:
>On Sun, 27 Sep 1998 15:33:19 -0700, Jim Brick wrote:
>   [Lots of good stuff snipped to save bandwidth.]
>>The "real" customer base that floats Leica is not the
>>"groupies" like us.
>   I don't want to start a flame war with this question, but I 
>can't help wondering who Leica perceives their customer base to 
>be? Ted reported that Leica usage at the Commonwealth Games was 
>next to non-existent. I gather here and elsewhere that this is 
>largely true among professional photographers--at least among 
>those that don't subscribe to this list. Leicas of all 
>descriptions are too expensive for the dilettants, who, for that 
>kind of money, will not want a camera that requires them to think
>anyway. In sum, Leica usage seems to be a specialized, niche 
>market. So who does float Leica? To me it seems like the 
>quintessential enthusiast product, though 50 years ago I'm sure 
>that wasn't true.
>**                         Howard Sanner
>**                Kirsten Flagstad Discographer
>**                  Ampex Mailing List Founder