On Jan 10, 2004, at 1:46 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote:
I am trying to fathom the economics of producing a DSLR to sell at U.S. $900 (the *ist Djr?). Start with the *ist D, retaining its sensor (as Canon did), then:
Make the body plastic. Saves at most $10 per unit?
Put in a slower processor and smaller buffer. Saves a few tens of dollars per unit?
Take off the TV and AV dials. Again, save a few tens of dollars per unit?
Fewer electronic options (like custom functions). Well, the R&D for the *ist D has been done, so the only cost saving is a smaller programmable ROM. Save $10 per unit?
Try as I might, I cannot see how to get the unit production cost of the *ist D down enough to justify a drop of $900 in the official retail price.
But, then, I'm a fuzzy social scientist. Someone who knows more about the real world, help me out, please?
OTOH, let's put a couple of bits of information together:
1. The selling price of the *ist D has come down from U.S. $1700 to $1350. It is presumably not selling at a loss.
2. Keeping the same sensor, there doesn't seem to be much opportunity (given the above discussion) to reduce production costs. (Unless Pentax finds someplace with even lower labor costs than the Philippines.)
Ergo, I suspect that the production cost of the *ist D is at the point where it could already be sold for about what the Economalist D will cost.
Anyway, when *ist Djr. comes out, Pentax better have a DAJ lens to sell it with, and had better do something to counter Canon's massive ad campaign.
Saturday morning musings.
Joe
