Ah yes anecdotal information used to fight supposed anecdotal information. Not much of an argument for the statistician in me. The economist in me wants to say "lets assume someone's correct", but you haven't disposed of the opposing argument by a long shot.
At 01:45 PM 10/7/03 -0400, you wrote:
> > Hi, > > John F wrote: > > > I've spent far more than that, over the same period, in picking > > up used equipment. Nice for me, but it doesn't support Pentax. > > > I disagree. Although indirect, it does support Pentax. Buyers of new > equipment would do so at a much(?) lower rate if there was no secondhand > market to soak up their cast-offs. There aren't many people like > pentax-fan from Japan, with rooms piled to the ceiling.
I wondered if somebody would raise this justification.
Unfortunately it is based on an unwarranted assumption; that the seller of the used Pentax equipment was using the money to buy more (new) Pentax gear.
In many of the cases where I know the reason for sale, that hasn't been the case. In fact two of my most expensive used purchases were one from a photographer who was dumping Pentax and switching to Nikon, and one from an estate sale where the money wasn't being for photographic gear at all. And we've seen several postings, even on this group of Pentax die-hards, of equipment being (reluctantly) offered for sale simply to raise money.
I drink to make other people interesting.
-- George Jean Nathan
