Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/01/11

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

Subject: [Leica] OT: Value of Rolleiflex
From: Jim at hemenway.com (Jim Hemenway)
Date: Fri Jan 11 17:36:30 2008
References: <DC4B73A4105FCE4FAE0CEF799BF84B36013F1FEA@case-email>, <aed41d690801111507k1a709083k9fd2c69e030b3473@mail.gmail.com>, <47880DB0.5070605@hemenway.com> <4787C2F3.19721.2DED62@leica.rcmckee.com>

Clay:

Didn't you see my wink emoticon?

Jim


R. Clayton McKee wrote:

> Quoth the Jim Hemenway :
> 
> 
>>But doesn't that assume that Hassleblad is better than Rollei? ;-)
> 
> 
> Actually, it assumes that the market value of the Hasselblad name and 
> association is higher than the market value of the Rollei name and 
> association.  It's got nothing to do with the quality of the camera, 
> but with the marketability of the camera name.
> 
> And there, I think, Hassie has a distinct edge.  If not, they've sure 
> wasted many truckloads of money on advertising...  
> 
> --
> 
> 
> R. Clayton McKee                           http://www.rcmckee.com
> Photojournalist                               rcmckee@rcmckee.com
> P O Box 571900                           voice/fax   713/783-3502
> Houston, TX 77257-1900                   cell phone #  on request
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 

In reply to: Message from drodgers at casefarms.com (David Rodgers) ([Leica] OT: Value of Rolleiflex)
Message from jsmith342 at gmail.com (Jeffery Smith) ([Leica] OT: Value of Rolleiflex)
Message from Jim at hemenway.com (Jim Hemenway) ([Leica] OT: Value of Rolleiflex)
Message from leica at rcmckee.com (R. Clayton McKee) ([Leica] OT: Value of Rolleiflex)