> You're being way too alarmist -- even if Pentax went blooie tomorrow, > there'll be enough used equipment to keep you going for years. I've got > more reason for concern because I haven't actually bought anything yet, > but AFAICT EVERY SINGLE camera company (including Canon and Nikon) is > currently a bad long-term bet; the only question is whether I'd get > enough use over 5-10 years to warrant a heavy investment in a DSLR-like > system. > > The fact that Ricoh just came out with the K-50 and K-500 is IMO proof > that Pentax will be around for at least another year, you don't try to > stoke entry-level demand for something you're getting ready to kill. >
Pardon my bluntness. Are you stupid or just pretending to be? Who wants to invest in loads of yesterday's gear when tomorrow's is better? Who (personally) would seriously invest in a brand that was 'blooie' (for years), especially if their primary goal was creating great images? Yes, companies deceive and manipulate all the time. I've seen it time and again. I'm NOT saying this is the case here, I have no way of knowing, and have no grounds to suspect. However, the last thing I would expect to see is a company announce that they're 'blooie' BEFORE they had a chance to unload their inventory at the highest possible price. Yes they WOULD stoke demand on something they plan on killing. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
