J.C.,
The stuff below is already simple and straightforward. I figured with your
many years of engineering experience you would have been able to "decipher"
if fairly easily. If it's that hard for you to understand, it's probably not
worth any additional effort on your part.
I'm gonna have to call it quits on this thread. My apologies to the folks
who lost interest a long time ago.
--Mark
"beware the carpenter who claims twenty years experience and has one year of
experience twenty times"
"J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
could you please simplify what you have posted?
I don't understand the numbers or the premise.
What exactly are you estimating and if pentax does
what? Ill look at them for you but I cant decipher at this
point...
jco
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Erickson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 1:16 AM
To: 'pentax-discuss'
Subject: RE: Camera engineering (was Re: Rename request)
J.C. Wrote:
I am waiting too, where are your estimates showing their decisions were
justified?
If you don't provide HARD EVIDENCE
and or estimates, why are you insisting
that I have to? My lack of "HARD" evidence isnt any worse than yours
is...
GET IT?
jco
I don't like to quote my own messages, but here are some estimates that I
sent back on Sept 20 in response to a message by Herb Chong:
I wrote:
"Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
given that Pentax hopes to sell 120K DSLRs this fiscal year, all of
which are low profit margin, what do you think?
Herb...
The question is not how many people are unhappy with the limited
K/M compatibility, but how many people (who would otherwise buy
a Pentax DSLR) are so unhappy that they are withholding their $$$?
Let's say it's 1200. That's 1% of the 120K number you quote
above. Let's say that Pentax gets $500 US per DSLR. That's
$600K in lost revenue this fiscal year. Let's say that Pentax
takes a $50 profit per camera. That's $60K in lost earnings
this fiscal year. Not a very big number, is it?
