Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Dear Amanda, > I have to apologize for making this thread dragged on, > a thread which should have ended a long time ago. If you just let it die, it will. Since you feel I owe you a few explanations I will do my best to answer your questions. > J Yao seems to have many supporters from Hong Kong at > least. Some people have friends. And good friends these two gentlemen are. I have learned a great deal from them. > This would be my final words on this thread. But I'm > afraid J Yao owes us a clarification of the > "inaccuracies" he mentioned. Those who know me well would appreciate that my family has been in the wholesale/distribution business for home electrical appliances for over thirty years and we mostly sell to the Peoples' Republic of China. The photo business is only icing on the cake, relatively speaking. There are 1.3 billion people across the border from where I am, and compared to our sales volume, 1,000 camera lenses are really really insignificant. For an individual consumer like yourself, this may represent a large quantity and most individuals do not get through 1,000 lenses in their life time. But for our business and our market, one thousand lenses are really nothing. There is no grandiosity involved here. A large country with a lot of people simply consumes a lot of goods thus generates a large market. When we place our orders, the unit we employ is not 'how many pieces', but 'how many containers'. The containers in question are the standard 20' and 40' commercial freight containers. The magic figure, US$1.5 million, you mentioned was one inaccuracy. I never quoted this figure. If Leica AG was losing money (said to be approx. US$500) at US$1,500 a lens, they would of course not offer the same lens at the same price again. I never went as far as calculating how much I would offer them for 1,000 Vario Elmarits, but on the back of my mind a sum close to US$3m would be more reasonable, wouldn't you think? And US$3m is a small small sum compared to our annual turnover. We are not talking about personal wealth here, which has nothing to do with this thread. I am sure there are thousands and thousands of companies in the world that have turnovers in the region of hundreds of millions and even billions of dollars, so what is the big deal? Regarding GREED: I sincerely do not think it is illegal or immoral, or even greedy to own more than one lens or one camera. The whole issue is not about need. I can have as many cameras or lenses as I please, so long as I don't end up starving my family. This is my attitude. I like to have some cameras and lenses placed at various places I frequent, and that include my places of work, my study, my bedroom, and even homes abroad. And if you ask me, this is really none of your business. And do not forget, Leica AG benefits from our 'habits', and other Leica users benefit indirectly also. And lastly, your comment on gray equipment. This is again inaccurate. Since we order from the official local Leica agent, the goods are not 'gray'. They are 'gray' to you since you are not in our territory. Again, this is relative. In fact, many issues you brought up are about relativity. May I offer you a Chinese proverb: "A frog who sits at the bottom of a well only sees a small sky" > This would be my final words on this thread. I sincerely hope you will keep your promise. Sincerely, Joseph