Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]"Lee, Jonathan" wrote: > The problem with the Leica 0 and other collectibles is not that Leica won't > make money in the short term. Rather, it causes a long-term diltuion of the > brand-name cachet that is necessary to move expensive goods like Leica > stuff. For example, in Toronto's only authorized Leica store, the Leica on > prominent display is one of those Ein Struck (sp. ???) M6s in a fabulous > wooden box with red velvet in it. This only serves to remind those waltzing > up to buy a Nikon F5 that Leica isn't a real camera company, its a > commemerative company: its produts being too valauble, too pretty to be > used. If you make a camera that is never intended to be used, like the > Lecia 0, don't be surprised if people who use expensive cameras don't buy > your camera. What about the ugly Nikon F5 50th anniversary ? <http://www.cameraquest.com/nf5aniv.htm> > > > The fact that a company, any company, must look 70 years backward in time to > produce a profitable product is dissapointing. You don't catch Hassleblad > selling 1000Fs or Nikon making F-2s again. What about the Nikon S3 2000 Millenium <http://www.nikon.co.jp/press/2000/image/s3_s.jpg> Jonathan, Will you say after that : Nikon isn't a real camera company ? ;-) Lucien