Well that niche sounds too narrow to be sustainable, but I guess
that's your point.
FWIW, I think it's nice that such a small player as Pentax has come
away with so little loss in the war for market shares. For being a
David against two, or maybe three, Goliaths, it seems that they're
pretty good at staying in there. It's spooky with the demise of the
Contax brand and the financial troubles of Minolta, Kodak, Hasselblad
and Leica, but it seems like Pentax goes a different route than them.
It's not nice when the brand we have invested in is getting
marginalised one step at a time, but I fail to see the seriousness of
this particular matter.
Even with the special significance of the actual percentage. :-)
Jostein
----- Original Message -----
From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <pentax-discuss@pdml.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 1:11 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
more than a few business people have suggested that Pentax's only
way to make the imaging products division profitable is to abandon
the consumer camera market entirely or to market only to a niche
with much less competition, i.e. medium format. in either case, if
these people's suggestions get acted on, there won't be any P&S and
35mm-type bodies anymore, film or digital.
Herb....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jostein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <pentax-discuss@pdml.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 8:25 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
If high model turnover is a problem, then making a MedF digital may
make the
best signal effect of dedication to serious digital with the least
R&D effort.
I bet Pentax will be careful not to repeat the mistakes that Mamiya
has made
with their introduction. They've been through that already with the
MZ-D.
