[rollei_list] Re: Rolleimot...first Rollei SLR
- From: CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 13:35:09 -0300
I have said what I wanted to say on this topic, facts are Heidecke did
not cause Rollei Werke F&H bankruptcy, he could made some errors but
these errors were not so serious to close the factory he and Franke
founded; TLR sales started to decline in the '60s but they were still
enough to support the Rollei 35 and the SL 66 development and the
tooling investment to produce them. Rollei sales rose enough to think
about a direct competion with the Japanese industry in Singapore, this
was the true error that caused Rollei bankruptcy, Rollei Fototechnik
demonstrated along 25 years that Rollei Werke F&H could survive if
Singapore never existed.
Carlos
PS: It's a great irony, to use a soft word, you attack my use of
Prochnow (at least I quote my sources), while you used his work all
the time for the only valid and real info you referred in this topic.
ç2010/4/12 Peter K. <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Carlos,
>
> You are like a pit bull who will not let go. Look, I have made my points.
> Much of the romance around Rollei is BS. You really love to argue. If I said
> the sky was blue you would tell me I am really talking about the clouds and
> how Prochnow designed the first prototype cloud in 1954.
>
> 1. Rollei TLR sales were on a decline in the late 50s, this I believe due to
> the SLRs and companies like Mamiya and Yashica and other eating away at
> their market.
>
> 2. The threat of Hasselblad making an SLR was nonsense and something
> fabricated to make Rollei look better. Even after Rollei came out an SLR,
> Hasselblad never lived up their alleged threat and produced a TLR. So my
> opinion is that this is a legend and a lot of nonsense.
>
> 3. In 1963, the family council, concerned with dropping sales and production
> appointed a new Managing Director, Dr. Peesel. This did not happen
> overnight. It was the result of stupid decision making not not building a
> Rollei SLR or interchangeable lens TLR but instead building idiot products
> like the Rolleimot.
>
> 4. You pointed out that Heidecke died in 1960 and there was no successor
> because he could not find one. I gather you read this as you were only 4
> years old when this happened so this is 3rd hand information from a book. In
> my opinion this statement is more BS. Many executives do not know how to
> groom a successor and fewer want to. They are egotistical. I have seen this
> several times first hand and not from a book.
>
> It is my opinion, and I am not quoting anyone, that Rollei management was
> indeed aware their company was having issues with drops in sales but chose
> to ignore it. Eventually though it became too big to ignore. Its the same
> thing that happened at General Motors. Sales dropped year after year, they
> were building cars people were not buying and eventually it caught up with
> them and they went bankrupt. It did not happen overnight. Same for Rollei,
> it did not happen overnight. It is stupid decisions or lack of decisions
> that lead to lower sales, lower revenue, and eventually bankruptcy. And its
> not just companies, stupidity is elsewhere. Remember Argentina went through
> its IMF approved sovereign bankruptcy a few years back. Greece is narrowly
> avoiding bankruptcy now. Why? Stupid decisions and in some cases lack of
> decisions.
>
> I do not worship Rollei and do not want to be the reincarnation of Prochnow,
> something you obviously want and need to be. You see I have a life, so I am
> putting paid to this discussion.
>
> Peter K
>
> On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 8:29 PM, CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> 1) I did not write Heidecke lost interest in the 6x6 SLR camera,
>> Prochnow wrote those exact words, I quoted the page in the Report 2
>> and to avoid confusions in my translations from German into English, I
>> also have the SL 66 English booklet by Prochnow "Rolleiflex SL 66
>> successful story" , my translation is right. Prochnow was member of
>> the Richard Weiss team and he knew what he was writing about.
>>
>> 2)In the same book Report 2 and booklet, Prochnow writes: "...there
>> was a _good turnover_ from the Rolleiflex...", turnover is a financial
>> term, it means "The number of times that an asset is replaced during a
>> given period. For example, an inventory turnover of five indicates
>> that the firm's inventory has been turned into sales and has been
>> replaced five times". This was in 1957, two years after the meeting
>> with Hasselblad, Heidecke has the numbers to take decisions beyond
>> that meeting results: "Again and again the development of SLR cameras
>> was interrupted as soon as the sales figures of TLRs went up. This is
>> why SLRs were designed and produced only after Dr. Heidecke death".
>> (Report 1, page1-35).
>>
>> 3) In 1958 and 1959, numbers were not so good like in 1957 _in
>> comparison_but this is normal for most companies, we know the causes
>> now, but they were not so evident at the time and in February 1960
>> Heidecke died (he tried but he couldn't find a capable successor),
>> there were almost three years of indecision.
>>
>> 4)After the management replacement, things started to improve for
>> Rollei, from 1966 with the Rollei 35 and SL 66 specially. In my book
>> Prochnow says that "from 1966 to 1967 turnover rose from 30 to DM 45
>> million. Rising sales and new products gave Rollei a new, different
>> image."
>>
>> 5)Peesel, who had taken good decisions for Rollei, found a majority
>> partner in the Nordeutsche Landesbank and he decided "to give his
>> competitors (talking about the Japanese industry) some of their own
>> medicine. In 1970 Rollei went to Singapore".
>>
>> 6) It was the bank mentioned above that allowed Rollei Werke F&H
>> bankruptcy in 1981, they had invested money for Singapore in 1970,
>> Heidecke and the TLR had nothing to do with this bankruptcy, Heidecke
>> was dead and the TLR almost dead, it still survives.
>> Carlos
>>
>>
>>
>> 2010/4/11 Peter K. <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> > Carlos,
>> >
>> > Prochnow was the ONLY one who really wrote a book. Whether accurate or
>> > not
>> > it was the only source. Still I take things with a grain of salt. I TLRs
>> > were selling less in the late 50s and 60s and SLRs were winning. They
>> > started the SL66 and it accounted for 50% of their revenue. This was
>> > after
>> > the company reported declining sales. Now, declining sales tells me that
>> > revenue is reduced.
>> >
>> > So tell me, when you said. "Heidecke lost interest in the SLR production
>> > for
>> > two reasons:
>> >
>> > 1) The TLR sales were very good
>> >
>> > THIS WOULD Seem inaccurate as TLRs sales were on the decline as noted by
>> > Prochnow.
>> >
>> > 2)Viktor Hasselblad and Heidecke talked on the issue during their 1955
>> > meeting in Göteborg: " After its completion in 1957, Reinhold Heidecke
>> > lost
>> > interest in the 6x6 SLR. There was a good
>> > turnover from the Rolleiflex and his colleagues persuaded him that they
>> > could develop other cameras..
>> >
>> > Hearsay. I think Victor was smart. Reality is IMO that Reinhold make a
>> > mistake.
>> >
>> > Your turn.
>> > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 5:58 PM, CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> It seems that Prochnow is a lot more significant to you than you want
>> >> to accept, it happened with your article too, you have the Prochnow
>> >> summary that came with some Rollei models..
>> >> Anyway you did not answer my question, companies have good and bad
>> >> moments, we were talking about Heidecke in 1955, 1957 and 1958, and
>> >> you are diminishing the impact that the Singapore investment had for
>> >> the Rollei economy, at least you are accepting the SL 66 and Rollei 35
>> >> success, thanks to Prochnow of course.-
>> >> Carlos
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2010/4/11 Peter K. <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> > I see, so you are trying to change subjects. OK. What happened was
>> >> > the
>> >> > Franke & Heidecke company was renamed Rollei Werke Franke & Heidecke
>> >> > in
>> >> > 1962. The following year in 1963, the family council, concerned with
>> >> > dropping sales and production, appointed a new Managing Director, Dr.
>> >> > Peesel, to reorganize the management team at Rollei. So perhaps not
>> >> > going
>> >> > bankrupt but losing to Hasselblad. They were going downhill with
>> >> > their
>> >> > TLR
>> >> > as the only production camera. Can I say that?
>> >> >
>> >> > Eventually they did go bankrupt.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 5:15 PM, CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Peter, again the issue is simple, When did happen the Rollei
>> >> >> bankruptcy, in 1960 or in 1981? Please answer this question.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Carlos
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 2010/4/11 Peter K. <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> >> > I agree in part about Singapore. I disagree on the others. All you
>> >> >> > have
>> >> >> > said
>> >> >> > here you heard from Prochnow. He probably glamorized it. I still
>> >> >> > think
>> >> >> > Heidecke screwed up and Victor simply outsmarted him.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Hasselblad had ZERO interest in a TLR. That is a dream created by
>> >> >> > Rollei
>> >> >> > somewhere. Prochnow was daydreaming about that one. Victor used
>> >> >> > that
>> >> >> > threat
>> >> >> > as a means to convince Heidecke not to build an SLR. Heidecke took
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> > bait
>> >> >> > and Rollei eventually failed. Hasselblad never considered a TLR
>> >> >> > even
>> >> >> > AFTER
>> >> >> > Rollei came out with an SLR. So I stand by my comments.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Numbers are numbers. You can produce 1000 cameras but if you only
>> >> >> > sell
>> >> >> > 500
>> >> >> > then you are at a 50% loss.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Your turn. I know you will not let me have the last word.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Peter K
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 4:24 PM, CarlosMFreaza
>> >> >> > <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> This issue is very simple Peter, Heidecke never ordered to put in
>> >> >> >> production the finished SLR prototype, he was keen about it
>> >> >> >> initially,
>> >> >> >> he knew about Hasselblad cameras and he knew about the lenses and
>> >> >> >> magazines, Richard Weiss was his second Technical Manager and
>> >> >> >> Heidecke
>> >> >> >> ordered him to dedicate his time for the SLR prototype developing
>> >> >> >> leaving any other task.
>> >> >> >> Heidecke mind was not a suicidal one, his numbers were right and
>> >> >> >> he
>> >> >> >> lost interest on the SLR, he did not want to cause a Hasselblad
>> >> >> >> TLR
>> >> >> >> as
>> >> >> >> a reaction to a Rollei SLR beyond any "gentlemen agreement". The
>> >> >> >> technical term for F&H situation was "TLR cameras produced a good
>> >> >> >> turnover", it means a good relationship between production and
>> >> >> >> sales.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> BTW Peter, I really don't think Heidecke errors in the fifties(we
>> >> >> >> saw
>> >> >> >> them as errors today) were decisives for the future of Rollei,
>> >> >> >> Rollei
>> >> >> >> survided two decades after Heidecke death and the bankruptcy had
>> >> >> >> nothing to do with the TLR, it happened because they wanted to
>> >> >> >> compete
>> >> >> >> with the Japanese industry at the same production level taking
>> >> >> >> money
>> >> >> >> from the banks to install and to produce in the Singapore plants,
>> >> >> >> but
>> >> >> >> they had a lot of commercial success with the SL 66, the Rollei
>> >> >> >> 35
>> >> >> >> and
>> >> >> >> slide projectors sales, with a different industrial and
>> >> >> >> commercial
>> >> >> >> strategy F&H Rollei Werke could avoid the bankruptcy as others
>> >> >> >> companies like Leica avoided it. Post Heidecke management took
>> >> >> >> good
>> >> >> >> decisions as the SLR and 35mm cameras production, but Singapore
>> >> >> >> was
>> >> >> >> a
>> >> >> >> plan ambitious too much.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Carlos
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> 2010/4/11 Peter K. <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> >> >> > I think the nice term is gentlemens' agreement. Sorry I
>> >> >> >> > disagree.
>> >> >> >> > He
>> >> >> >> > was
>> >> >> >> > fat
>> >> >> >> > and happy and making money so this is the alleged reason, I
>> >> >> >> > think
>> >> >> >> > it
>> >> >> >> > is
>> >> >> >> > a
>> >> >> >> > legend not really fact.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > My post is not THAT different. He was "talked out of it" by
>> >> >> >> > Rollei.
>> >> >> >> > They
>> >> >> >> > allege a genetlemens' agreement. Just because it is written
>> >> >> >> > that
>> >> >> >> > way
>> >> >> >> > does
>> >> >> >> > not make it true.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > I think production #s are meaningless. Sales are what is
>> >> >> >> > important.
>> >> >> >> > Two
>> >> >> >> > very
>> >> >> >> > different things. GM produced many cars, but sold fewer. Hence
>> >> >> >> > they
>> >> >> >> > went
>> >> >> >> > bankrupt. Same for F&H.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Your turn Carlos. I mean, I am not trying to step on your ego
>> >> >> >> > here. I
>> >> >> >> > know
>> >> >> >> > you are a big fish in our little pond. :-)
>> >> >> >> > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 3:33 PM, CarlosMFreaza
>> >> >> >> > <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Peter, this is the time machine, we already discussed this
>> >> >> >> >> topic,
>> >> >> >> >> we
>> >> >> >> >> agreed on the TLR with interchangeable lenses, but now you
>> >> >> >> >> added
>> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> SLR prototype within the same causes for the SLR no production
>> >> >> >> >> in
>> >> >> >> >> 1957, you wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> ".. From what I have read, Heidecke did not lose interest. He
>> >> >> >> >> was
>> >> >> >> >> talked out of the idea of producing an SLR by the management
>> >> >> >> >> of
>> >> >> >> >> Rollei. These were the same geniuses who talked him out of
>> >> >> >> >> putting
>> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> interchangeable lens TLR
>> >> >> >> >> that he developed into production. They were comfortable and
>> >> >> >> >> making
>> >> >> >> >> money so they did not want to change..."
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Your post below is saying now a different thing regarding the
>> >> >> >> >> SLR
>> >> >> >> >> prototype, you now writes that "he", Heidecke ABANDONED the
>> >> >> >> >> SLR
>> >> >> >> >> project in 1957 quoting the meeting with Hasselblad, now you
>> >> >> >> >> are
>> >> >> >> >> separating the facts regarding the TLR and the SLR, "to
>> >> >> >> >> ABANDON"
>> >> >> >> >> and
>> >> >> >> >> "to LOSE" interest are different ways to say similar things To
>> >> >> >> >> abandon
>> >> >> >> >> the SLR production with the protype ready to do it was a
>> >> >> >> >> Heidecke
>> >> >> >> >> personal decision.
>> >> >> >> >> If you compare the production for Hasselblad and for F&H from
>> >> >> >> >> 1948
>> >> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> >> 1958, the fact a few pros started to use Hasselblad to replace
>> >> >> >> >> Rolleiflexes did not affect Rollei sales very much, this fact
>> >> >> >> >> was
>> >> >> >> >> one
>> >> >> >> >> of the causes for Heidecke error about the SLR no production,
>> >> >> >> >> if
>> >> >> >> >> Rollei was losing a lot of market there was not a meeting
>> >> >> >> >> Heidecke/
>> >> >> >> >> Hasselblad, but businesses were good for the TLR, Heidecke
>> >> >> >> >> only
>> >> >> >> >> wanted
>> >> >> >> >> to avoid Hasselblad could make a TLR, it was right for the
>> >> >> >> >> Rollei
>> >> >> >> >> numbers in the fifties.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Carlos
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> 2010/4/11 Peter K. <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> >> >> >> > Carlos,
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > No I am not mixing facts. I guess the easiest way to rebut
>> >> >> >> >> > what
>> >> >> >> >> > I
>> >> >> >> >> > say
>> >> >> >> >> > is
>> >> >> >> >> > try
>> >> >> >> >> > to discredit the source as many lawyers do. But I will not
>> >> >> >> >> > go
>> >> >> >> >> > away
>> >> >> >> >> > that
>> >> >> >> >> > easily.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > My source is the same as yours, Prochnow. The only
>> >> >> >> >> > difference
>> >> >> >> >> > is I
>> >> >> >> >> > do
>> >> >> >> >> > not
>> >> >> >> >> > believe everything he writes verbatim. I wrote an article
>> >> >> >> >> > for
>> >> >> >> >> > Shutterbug
>> >> >> >> >> > maybe 12 years back and corresponded with Prochnow and also
>> >> >> >> >> > Rollei
>> >> >> >> >> > Fototechnic. The latter provided some copies of old
>> >> >> >> >> > documentation
>> >> >> >> >> > and
>> >> >> >> >> > loaned
>> >> >> >> >> > me several books dealing with Rollei. Prochnow was kind
>> >> >> >> >> > enough
>> >> >> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >> >> > clear
>> >> >> >> >> > up
>> >> >> >> >> > some questions I had and allowed me to use some photos.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > This is from the article:
>> >> >> >> >> > "With Mamiya’s introduction of a TLR with interchangeable
>> >> >> >> >> > lenses
>> >> >> >> >> > in
>> >> >> >> >> > 1957, F
>> >> >> >> >> > & H experimented with the idea of converting a Rolleiflex
>> >> >> >> >> > 2.8
>> >> >> >> >> > E.
>> >> >> >> >> > Reinhold
>> >> >> >> >> > Heidecke approved the plan for a prototype , PR178 in 1958
>> >> >> >> >> > which
>> >> >> >> >> > was
>> >> >> >> >> > created
>> >> >> >> >> > with 3 interchangeable twin lenses (see Photo). They were
>> >> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> > standard
>> >> >> >> >> > 80mm
>> >> >> >> >> > F2.8 Planar, a telephoto 135mm F4 Sonnar lens, and a wide
>> >> >> >> >> > angle
>> >> >> >> >> > 60mm
>> >> >> >> >> > F5.6
>> >> >> >> >> > Distagon lens. Technical management convinced Reinhold
>> >> >> >> >> > Heidecke
>> >> >> >> >> > that
>> >> >> >> >> > there
>> >> >> >> >> > would be too many drawbacks with interchangeable lenses and
>> >> >> >> >> > F &
>> >> >> >> >> > H
>> >> >> >> >> > abandoned
>> >> >> >> >> > the project. Even so, this was the basis for the
>> >> >> >> >> > development
>> >> >> >> >> > of
>> >> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> > Tele-Rollei of 1959 with a 135 F4 Zeiss Sonnar lens, and the
>> >> >> >> >> > Wide-angle
>> >> >> >> >> > Rollei of 1961 with its 55mm F4 Zeiss Distagon lens."
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > Reading between the lines, basically Heidecke was older and
>> >> >> >> >> > wealthy
>> >> >> >> >> > and
>> >> >> >> >> > did
>> >> >> >> >> > not need or want to fight this. his health was also not very
>> >> >> >> >> > good.
>> >> >> >> >> > Remember
>> >> >> >> >> > he passed away less that two years later in 1960. Ten years
>> >> >> >> >> > after
>> >> >> >> >> > Franke
>> >> >> >> >> > who
>> >> >> >> >> > died in 1950.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > As to the SLR, it was SLR development originated in 1955
>> >> >> >> >> > (this
>> >> >> >> >> > was
>> >> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> > original SLR Prototype) and abandoned in 1957. The reason he
>> >> >> >> >> > ABANDONED
>> >> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> > SLR was he and Hasselblad allegedly had some sort of
>> >> >> >> >> > gentlemens
>> >> >> >> >> > agreement.
>> >> >> >> >> > Rollei would not make an SLR and Hasselbald would not make a
>> >> >> >> >> > TLR.
>> >> >> >> >> > I
>> >> >> >> >> > think
>> >> >> >> >> > Victor was a much smarter business man. Hasselblad had no
>> >> >> >> >> > need
>> >> >> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >> >> > make a
>> >> >> >> >> > TLR
>> >> >> >> >> > as his SLRs was selling exceptionally well and replaced many
>> >> >> >> >> > Rolleis
>> >> >> >> >> > pros
>> >> >> >> >> > were using at that time. Two years after Heidecke's death
>> >> >> >> >> > Rollei
>> >> >> >> >> > began
>> >> >> >> >> > development on the SLR again. This was 1962 and the start of
>> >> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> > SL66.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > Peter K
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 11:16 AM, CarlosMFreaza
>> >> >> >> >> > <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> >> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Peter , I noticed now that you are mixing the facts
>> >> >> >> >> >> completely,
>> >> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> first SRL prototype and the interchangeable lenses
>> >> >> >> >> >> prototypes
>> >> >> >> >> >> were
>> >> >> >> >> >> two
>> >> >> >> >> >> different cameras, they were not produced for different
>> >> >> >> >> >> reasons
>> >> >> >> >> >> and
>> >> >> >> >> >> I
>> >> >> >> >> >> don think to repeat those different causes.
>> >> >> >> >> >> It's very difficult to discuss with someone mixing facts,
>> >> >> >> >> >> it
>> >> >> >> >> >> does
>> >> >> >> >> >> not
>> >> >> >> >> >> make sense to continous this topici if you don't
>> >> >> >> >> >> distinguish
>> >> >> >> >> >> between
>> >> >> >> >> >> 1955, 1957, 1958 and 1962/63.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Carlos
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> 2010/4/11 CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> >> >> >> >> > What is your source Peter? Where did you obtain that
>> >> >> >> >> >> > info?
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Who
>> >> >> >> >> >> > was
>> >> >> >> >> >> > better informed than Prochnow that integrated the team
>> >> >> >> >> >> > that
>> >> >> >> >> >> > developed
>> >> >> >> >> >> > the prototype?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Carlos
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > 2010/4/11 Peter K. <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Carlos,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> All this is interesting but have to say that a lot of
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> this
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> is
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> what
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> one
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> would
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> call romanticizing the past. I read that management
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> convinced
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Heidecke
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> abandon the interchangeable lens TLR.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Now I am sure you have been in executive meetings. The
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> term
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> "he
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> lost
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> interest" reminds me of one where after an hour of
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> discussion,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> President
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> of the company I worked for listened to what myself and
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> a
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> colleague
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> had
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> say, then turned to us and told us "This is not open for
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> discussion,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> you
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> will ...." And believe me I am using very nice language
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> describe
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> discussion much like Prochnow does in his book. Of
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> course
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> press
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> release
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> read that we had reached an accord in doing...." This is
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> what
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> I
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> call
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> romanticizing.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Bear in mind, Heidecke was older, tired and his health
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> was
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> declining
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> at
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> that
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> time. It was only a few years before he passed on and
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> not
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> long
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> after
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> later
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Rollei was in financial troubles. So I for one do not
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> buy
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> claim
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> that
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Rollei TLR sales were good. At that time you had immense
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> competition
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> from
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Mamiya, Minolta, Yashica, and others. Granted the Rollei
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> was
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> pro's
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> choice, but Mamiyas sold well and were eating away at
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Rollei's
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> market.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> They
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> had a very good quality camera at a lower price point
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> with
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> excellent
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> and
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> interchangeable lenses. So you could buy the TLR and 2
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> lenses
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> for
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> what
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> a
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Tele Rollei would cost.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Peter K.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 9:23 AM, CarlosMFreaza
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> He lost interest Peter. A team of three engineers
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> developed
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> 1955
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> SLR prototype, two of them were Richard Weiss and Claus
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Prochnow,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> they
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> finished the camera for 1957 and according Prochnow,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Heidecke
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> lost
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> interest in the SLR production for two reasons: 1) The
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> TLR
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> sales
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> were
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> very good; 2)Viktor Hasselblad and Heidecke talked on
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> issue
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> during
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> their 1955 meeting in Göteborg: " After its completion
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> in
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> 1957,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> _Reinhold Heidecke lost interest in the 6x6 SLR_. There
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> was a
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> good
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> turnover from the Rolleiflex and his colleagues
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> persuaded
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> him
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> that
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> they could develop other cameras... The decision was
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> also
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> a
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> result
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> of
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> a meeting between Reinhold Heidecke and Victor
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Hasselblad
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> in
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Gothenburg..." (Report 2, page 26-538 and SL 66
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> brochure).
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> BTW the SLR production in 1957 would mean a continous
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> improvement
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> for
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> the model 10 years before the SL 66 regular production
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> and
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> an
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> earlier
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> competition regarding Hasselblad when the market was
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> still
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> different,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> but as a results of that decision, Rollei R&D became
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> only
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> dedicated
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> to
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> design improvements and accesories for the TLR
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> including
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Rolleimot, it only changes in 1962, after Heidecke
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> death
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> in
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> 1960,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> when
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Rollei new management decided to develop the SL 66 and
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> to
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> manufacture
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> a 35mm camera, but it's necessary to say things were
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> good
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> for
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Rollei TLR up to about 1960
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> We commented several times on the interchangeable
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> lenses
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> TLR
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> camera,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> the prototypes were ready for production in 1958, this
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> time
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Rollei management had a stronger influence on Heidecke
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> to
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> decide
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> camera no production, deviating from the original
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> design
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> towards
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Tele and Wide Rolleiflexes. Anyway, "it was clear that
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> this
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> was
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> not
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> a
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> substitute for a single-lens reflex camera" writes
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Prochnow
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> on
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> TLR
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> with interchangeable lenses in the previous page, but
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> it
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> was
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> a
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> direct
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> competition against the Mamiya TLR with interchangeable
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> lenses,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> they
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> started to lose their own market.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> 2010/4/10 Peter K. <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > From what I have read, Heidecke did not lose
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > interest.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > He
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > was
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > talked
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > out
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > of
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > the idea of producing an SLR by the management of
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > Rollei.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > These
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > were
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > same geniuses who talked him out of putting the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > interchangeable
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > lens
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > TLR
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > that he developed into production. They were
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > comfortable
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > and
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > making
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > money so
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > they did not want to change.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > If you think about it, these idiot managers thought
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > Rolliemot
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > was OK
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > to
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > develop but not an SLR? Talk about stupidity. The
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > Rolliemot
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > is
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > odd
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > or
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > maybe
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > useless but it was what I would call the Edsel of
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > accessories.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > I
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > am
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > sure
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > there are odd accessories things developed by other
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > cameras
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > makers
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > throughout the years. Even Leica (are they still in
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > business
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > these
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > days?)
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > --Peter K
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> ---
>> >> >> >> >> >> Rollei List
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> >> >> >> >> >> 'subscribe'
>> >> >> >> >> >> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> >> >> >> >> >> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into
>> >> >> >> >> >> www.freelists.org
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>> >> >> >> >> >> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > --
>> >> >> >> >> > Peter K
>> >> >> >> >> > Ó¿Õ¬
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> ---
>> >> >> >> >> Rollei List
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> >> >> >> >> 'subscribe'
>> >> >> >> >> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> >> >> >> >> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into
>> >> >> >> >> www.freelists.org
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>> >> >> >> >> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > --
>> >> >> >> > Peter K
>> >> >> >> > Ó¿Õ¬
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> ---
>> >> >> >> Rollei List
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>> >> >> >> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> >> >> >> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into
>> >> >> >> www.freelists.org
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>> >> >> >> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --
>> >> >> > Peter K
>> >> >> > Ó¿Õ¬
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> ---
>> >> >> Rollei List
>> >> >>
>> >> >> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >>
>> >> >> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>> >> >> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>> >> >>
>> >> >> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> >> >> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into
>> >> >> www.freelists.org
>> >> >>
>> >> >> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>> >> >> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Peter K
>> >> > Ó¿Õ¬
>> >> >
>> >> ---
>> >> Rollei List
>> >>
>> >> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >>
>> >> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>> >> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>> >>
>> >> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> >> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>> >>
>> >> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>> >> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Peter K
>> > Ó¿Õ¬
>> >
>> ---
>> Rollei List
>>
>> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>>
>> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>>
>> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Peter K
> Ó¿Õ¬
>
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
