on 3/02/03 11:00 AM, P�l Jensen at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > This is not what it is all about. It isn't about making something weirdo > appealing to a few. It is about being distinctive or downright appealing. ... > The idea that if you make something along the line of the competition the > buyers won't buy the competitors product isn't correct. You may end up that > your own customers buy the competitors product instead as that product seem > original and after all, the competition may have been onto something as it is > worth copying. >
P�l, I think a major difference in the way you and I approach the likely future success of Pentax products lies with our underlying assumptions. We are both right, to a limited extent, when we (seem to) assume that: P�l: Major assumption - consumers make choices based on an evaluation of alternative products. Corollary - to be successful a new product needs to be included in the multi-product comparison, needs to be distinguishable from other products, and needs to have some feature(s) better than the competition. Stan: Major assumption - consumers do not make choices, they make purchases. Some consumers under some circumstances will do comparisons, but mostly they will look at one item and, if it "feels right" they will purchase that item. Corollary - to be successful, a new product needs to be noticed and assessed. For most people, that means assessing the product for what it is, not for how well it compares to something else. This is why I think the looks of the *ist-D don't matter as a comparison with other brands. What does matter is to get the camera in the hands of people who are thinking about DSLR's. Moving people from Espios or Optios is likely the easy*ist. Moving total novices might also work if an emphasis is placed on simplicity of operation with a growth path for those who would grow. Moving people from other brands is futile in the short term. It will happen here and there, with people like those you assume, and in cases where a good salesperson argues that they should consider the Pentax. To get the camera I the hands of "my" consumers, it needs to look like a camera, it needs to meet their expectations for what this undifferentiated product called SLR or DSLR "should" look like. Few want to face the ridicule of being simultaneously an ignorant beginner AND looking like an ignorant beginner. Of the total population of consumers, there is a subset that matches my assumptions, and one that matches yours. There is at least one other subset, probably very large, who will do even less analytic thinking than yo and I assume, and they will follow the rule that, all other things more or less equal, it is best to do what everyone else is doing. Stan
