[rollei_list] Re: Nikon and Mitsubishi
- From: "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 16:46:46 -0800
So you are saying if Nikon goes belly up, Mitsubishi would let them. Hence,
it would allow Nikon to be acquired?
On 1/2/06, Marc James Small <msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> At 04:05 PM 1/2/06 -0800, Peter K. wrote:
> >Yes, I understand what you are saying. But that brings up a question
> then.
> >If what you say is true, and let's say Nikon goes bankrupt, do the other
> >companies bail them out?
>
> In 1991, Daimler-Benz advised Mercedes they were on their own: that is,
> they either had to break even or shut down, a similar position to that
> handed down to Zeiss Ikon in early 1972 by the Zeiss Foundation.
> Similarly, at around that same time, Mitsubishi told Nikon the same thing.
> Nikon pulled out, barely, though it is still not a great market-leader for
> the Mitsubishi Vertical Monopoly.
>
> Had Nikon not been able to break even or better, Mitsubishi would have let
> them go under. In other words, Mitsubishi was no longer going to pay
> their
> tab.
>
> The situation is similar but not identical with Canon, which is more
> tightly integrated, with the Canon Camera dudes being an integral part of
> the Canon concern -- Canon, having broken off from Mitsubishi in the later
> 1940's is exempt from a lot of the antitrust matters which afflict
> Mitsubishi. Canon makes its raw money out of sales for digital and
> optical
> systems for office and industrial machines, and this is a real cash cow.
> Canon hasn't made a loss in a lot of years but it could afford to do so
> for
> quite a while before the overall Canon concern would become worried.
> Mitsubishi is far larger than is Canon, but their profit margin is much
> smaller, so they have to pay close attention to their P&L statement.
>
> Zeiss made its money from the later 1800's into the 1990's from
> scientific,
> medical, industrial, and military optics. Sports optics and cameras were
> a
> side-show maintained for the glamor effect. By the late 1950's, the only
> thing bringing money into Zeiss Ikon were the point-'n'-shoot Contessas
> and
> the Contaflex SLR's, and the burden of the Contarex simply swamped their
> balance sheet. The Zeiss Foundation pulled the plug twelve years or so
> after the introduction of the Contarex and the timing was controlled by
> the
> retirement of the head of Zeiss, Heinz Küppenbender, who had started out
> as
> the Head of Contax back after the Nazis ran off the fellow who conceived
> of
> the camera system. The Zeiss Sports Optics wasn't at risk as they always
> break even or better, as is also the case with Leica Sports Optics: there
> is ALWAYS a market for quality spotting scopes and binoculars, and, yes, I
> am awash in Zeiss glasses and own a Leitz APO-Televid with a full set of
> oculars, and a grand scope it is. (Nikon and Pentax have found the same
> to
> be true: Nikon specializes in mid-quality sport optics, while Pentax
> makes
> some gear directly competitive with the products of Leica and Zeiss and,
> of
> course, at the same price-point.)
>
> In the 1990's, that "peace dividend" brought about by the end of the Cold
> War damned Zeiss, as military contracts dried up, especially for such
> really fancy items as integrated radar/optical gunsights and submarine
> periscopes. And Zeiss' hap-handedness at getting into night vision only
> made the red ink bleed all over the place. This was when Zeiss got its
> lensworks into hawking lenses for digital p&s cameras, with salvation for
> the concern -- Zeiss sold as many lenses to Sony between 1996 and 2004 for
> use on its digital cameras as all versions of Zeiss had produced between
> 1846 and 1996.
>
> Now, Zeiss is back in the military end of things and seems to have gotten
> night vision under control; some friends of mine at the ITT Night Vision
> labs across town grumble about Zeiss, but, finally, Zeiss managed to beat
> ITT out of some hefty contracts in recent years, so they seem to be doing
> something right.
>
> Marc
>
> msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cha robh bàs fir gun ghràs fir!
>
> NEW FAX NUMBER: +540-343-8505
>
>
>
> ---
> 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:
