[LRflex] Re: Response to Flavio, etc.
- From: "FLAVIO GORI" <flaviogori@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 11:03:11 +0200
Good morning Keith and all,
I still think MB and Leica are on different floor.
About what you are reporting you're right and even in previous time quality
standard in MB engine and even in other fields (I clearly remember rain
getting inside cabin, in the end of 80s) do not seems to be always their
real point. Maybe most of people said this way, but reality it was another
thing. I think it might be closer to a "status symbol" concept.
On the other hand, you can even say that Leica is not so high quality,
confronting other brands, to be paid so much, but at least Leica (most)
gives you a real quality camera and lens. At this point you can ask
yourself, as I do with myself, if it worth paid so much to use a Leica
outfit. I say to myself it is worth, but all of us have to choose for
themselves.
The only thing that I see very close for MB and Leica (and all other brands)
is "electronic". This one can add trouble in every mechanical field. Even
the best one. And just because of this you have to be very careful about the
people who made your camera or car or any other object and their quality
control. Yes, just the one failed in some ways for the first released M8.
That's because I consider still useful a made in Germany or at least a made
in Leica from Germany.
:-)
Flavio
On 07/05/07, KEITH LONGMORE <keith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Flavio
> The problem for MB is very similar to that for Leica. MB was in trouble
> financially and with quality problems before the acquisition of
> Chrysler; they had hoped that buying Chrysler would help them, whereas
> in practice, it did the opposite. There is now great unease in Motown
> that MB plan to sell Chrysler off, probably to an "equity company" (i.e.
> an asset-stripper).
>
> MB's reputation was based on solid quality; going on for ever -
> especially their diesel engines. But they found their development costs
> rising to the point where profits were shrinking rapidly in the early
> 90s. So what did they do? Cut testing, cut component prices,
> outsourced to South Africa and Mexico (and since then, China); the
> result was a lot of dissatisfied customers, first for the C-class, then
> for the E. The latter is their biggest seller, and they have over the
> last two years or so paid an arm and both legs to try to sort out the
> quality issues, especially electric/electronic ones.
>
> This is where the horns of the dilemma lie for Leica: like MB they need
> to generate high margin if they are to stay in the game and compete with
> more modern designs. Developing cameras with today's complexity costs a
> lot of money, if they are to be reliable (software and hardware!) and
> when you can buy relatively cheap Far Eastern products that ARE
> reliable, and DO perform well, you have to do better if you are going to
> charge a premium.You have to give the customer a good reason to spend
> his/er money, and you need that customer to keep coming back for more.
> I don't think Leica will achieve that through sticking to the 'Made in
> Germany' tag; it's a much more complex issue than that.
>
> I attended the SAE World Congress in Detroit 3 weeks ago, and was quite
> shocked at the large proportion of Chinese, Korean, and Indian stands,
> all offering surprisingly sophisticated products at knock-down prices
> compared to the US or Europe. I'm sure the same can be said of camera
> expos.
>
> Finally - Flavio, etc: in the US, Federal law requires that a car engine
> lasts for a minimum of 100,000 miles without major failure, and with
> compliant emissions. MB are still changing 350 turbodiesels 12 years
> after the end of production, because they cannot meet the requirements
> of this law. (So the automotive press tell us.) Its predecessors, the
> 300 turbodiesel, and the 300 naturally-aspirated diesel both met the
> requirements of Federal law.
>
> On another tack, I agree with those who would like the R10 to be less of
> a brick. Heavy cameras are fine, but as one approaches decrepitude,
> much reduced weight becomes a very necessary characteristic of a camera!
>
> Regards
> Keith Longmore
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>
--
FLAVIO GORI
http://www.LoScrittoio.it
Edizioni in Rete
http://flaviogori.googlepages.com/home
------
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:
