[rollei_list] Re: Rolleimot...first Rollei SLR
- From: "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 10:16:15 -0700
No one really cares.
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 9:35 AM, CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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
>
>
--
Peter K
Ó¿Õ¬
Other related posts:
