[LRflex] Re: For high end Leica, Nikon's and Canon's small digicam growth

  • From: "Neil Gould" <neil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:25:21 -0600

Hi all,

Recently, you wrote:

> From: LEICAFLEX <leicaflex@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Hi all,
>
> IMHO, Leica has to continually evolve their business model and strike
> strategic development + manufacturing partnerships, otherwise I just
> don't see how they can compete with the likes of mass consumerism:
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070220/tc_nm/nikon_digicams_dc_2
>
Does Leica even try to compete in that arena? Does it fit their
capabilities?

> If they can carefully deliver the low end product line at a slightly
> exclusive price point that is competitive in product feature set,
> w/out making the mistakes like Rollei (not Franke & Heidecke), and get
> a foot hold with products that appeal to the discriminating comsumer,
> then maybe consumer-level cameras with mass sales can fuel R&D for the
> R10 and so forth.
>
Leica has good partnerships for consumer level digicams; Panasonic and
Olympus are strong in that market, and Leica's "added value" provides the
kind of "low end product line" that you propose.

>  Leica also depends a lot on the scopes and
> binoculars to supplement the bottomline, just like Olympus with their
> endoscopic division.  Thank goodness they have a strong arm in that
> sector of their business.
>
In the case of Olympus, the scenario is reversed. Their credibility was
established with their line of microscopes and technical equipment.
Olympus has been an innovative manufacturer that brought many creative
camera designs to photography. The success of the OM-1 fueled their entry
into the "pro-sumer" photographic market, and the success of their 35mm
pocket cameras established them as a supplier of good quality consumer
products. These factors translate into decent sales of digicams in both of
those markets.

I consider Leica's business model to be more similar to that of Porsche;
neither company tries to deliver a product for average consumers. The
products from both companies retain value as they age, and owners are as
often as not users.

> The recent demise of the DMR with no new replacement in sight is a
> clear reminder that when high dollar, high end gear is discontinued,
> the people that tend to lose the most are those that have invested
> into that system
>
That would be true if those buying high-end gear didn't use it, or if the
cameras couldn't be maintained. I suspect that those of us that have
invested in Leica equipment have done so because it is some of the best
equipment available, and that makes it easier for us to execute our
photographic vision. For professional users, there are many ways to
justify the cost of the equipment, and the ROI is realized quickly enough
that a capital loss is unlikely.

As I see it, Leica is still finding their way in the professional dSLR
market. The benefits of an SLR are somehwat mitigated by such things as
instant review and live view. Improve those two features, and I can
imagine that there would be some head-scratching in the board room over
the importance of a dSLR. Perhaps the ability to use R lenses with the
Digilux 3, L1 and Olympus eVolt cameras is a hint of things to come?

Regards,

Neil

------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
    http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
    //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/

Other related posts: