Chris, My post was intended to teach WR a burden of proof lesson and I wasn't seriously demanding a response. see my (hehe) I the wrote the post. But even if I was serious your post would be third party but not HARD evidence. That would be more on the order of financial statements ets from the retailers and manufactuors etc... not just another poster that aggrees or disagrees with WR. The reason I made the sarcastic post was he said he "knew for a fact" but didn't provide proof. But when I state things I know for facts that he just doesn't believe he expects me to provide HARD evidence like pentax corporate documents,etc which is absurd of course.. jco
-----Original Message----- From: Chris Brogden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 5:26 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Camera engineering (was Re: Rename request) Well, I still work in retail (assistant manager now... yay!), andBill's not far off. Of course we don't lose money selling just abody, but when you think of all the expenses involved in operating abusiness, we're not going to last long without selling higher-marginaccessories. Lenses and flashes generally have a larger profitpercentage than bodies; memory cards, batteries, cases etc. have evenmore profit. This is why those scuzzy online retailers with theabsurdly low prices won't even mail out your purchase unless you loadup on their absurdly expensive add-on's. There are a lot of camera stores that only exist because of theirphotofinishing revenue. Chris On 9/23/05, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> KNOWN FACT?- wheres the third party> hard evidence - if you don't proide> we will all know you are just a crazy> liar- put up or shut up. (hehe- this> is getting fun. Hope I am rubbing in> a point with you - Get it?).> jco>> -----Original Message-----> From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 4:43 PM> To: [email protected]> Subject: Re: Camera engineering (was Re: Rename request)>>>> ----- Original Message -----> From: "Mark Roberts"> Subject: Re: Camera engineering (was Re: Rename request)>>>> >> >>If they aren't selling lenses, then what chance do they have of> >>staying viable?> >> > Pretty much true of everyone now, with regard to DSLR's (except,> > possibly, the very high end ones). Profit margins are wafer thin.>> Back when I was selling stuff retail, it was a known fact that a body only> sale was a money losing proposition for everyone through the supply chain,> ri! ght from the factory floor to the store counter.> I don't think anything has really changed all that much.>> William Robb>>>
