Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/10/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]yes it's a commercial stance, but not in your misunderstood way. Not being a Leica dealer, I won't be making money selling a successful Leica R line. Surging sales would be totally unknown territory for the R line, yep, that is about as commercial as you can get. just brilliant Mark, a successful R strategy with increasing instead of decreasing market share definitely is an anti-Leica R sales philosophy. On the rangefinder front, if a new upstart Rangefinder company like Cosina can introduce more Leica mount rangefinder bodies, lenses and accessories in a shorter time than any similar period in Leica company history, if Zeiss is going after a piece of the Leica mount rangefinder sales for the first time in their intense 70 year competition, if a conglomerate like Seiko Epson enters into the Leica M marketplace, these are not signs of successful Leica marketing strategy. How many Hermes can be sold? real world, I expect Leica to continue its present R plan, with the same long term downward sales trend. The R digital back will be a short up trend, but only temporary unless they can keep it updated at least every two years. Do you know that Leica USA binocular division sales now exceed Leica USA camera sales? pretty sad. yep, thinking Leica should be make commercially viable products to stay in business for its employees and customers really is an anti-Leica way of thinking. my Gawd, that just is not the Leica Way! Stephen Gandy Mark Rabiner wrote: > On 10/16/04 6:52 PM, "Stephen Gandy" <leicanikon@earthlink.net> typed: > > > a lot of Nikon shooters use M too. it's not an either or world. > > > > if Leica can't justify keeping trained staff and has to lay them off in > > these slack times, I have a difficult time believing Leica can find the > > funds to develop a new modern AF SLR. even if they did, every new Leica > > SLR design since day one in 1964 has only been 10 to 20 years behind the > > best current designs from Nikon or Canon. Leica needs to admit its own > > failures and move on to survive. > > > > I believe from a profit standpoint, it is smarter and far more cost > > effective for Leica to just license the R mount for already in production > > digital cameras, and possibly a new generation of AF Leica glass in a new > > mount with those partners. So a Sigma or Fujica or Kodak does not have > > the build quality of a R9. so what? in three years a digital SLR is a > > doorstop anyway. > > > > Leica has to keep making cameras and lenses at a profit, not investing > > precious capital into dead ends which won't generate a profitable return. > > So 100 shooters pop for the $6,000 digital R9 back. big deal. with the > > ever changing world of digital imaging, just by the time it catches on, > > it > > will be outdated, and a lost investment. > > > > granted, these are all guesses. but the fact is, that what Leica has > > been > > doing with its SLR lineup and precious investment capital just has not > > worked out financially over its entire 40 year R history. it's time to > > wake up and think differently, or there will not be a Leica as we know > > it. > > > > Stephen Gandy > > > > Not everyone is as convinced of the non viability of Leica R bodies as the > guy who is doing a booming business pushing Leica R to Canon adaptors. > NOT selling Leica bodies. > NOT selling Leica glass either. > > NON Leica bodies for Leica glass. > NON Leica glass for Leica bodies. > > It's the beast 666 antiLeica! > > I believe such commercial stance should be at least alluded to in a post > like this. > > Mark Rabiner > Photography > Portland Oregon > http://rabinergroup.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information