Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/01/11

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] OT: Value of Rolleiflex
From: leica at rcmckee.com (R. Clayton McKee)
Date: Fri Jan 11 17:26:50 2008
References: <DC4B73A4105FCE4FAE0CEF799BF84B36013F1FEA@case-email>, <aed41d690801111507k1a709083k9fd2c69e030b3473@mail.gmail.com>, <47880DB0.5070605@hemenway.com>
 
Quoth the Jim Hemenway :

> But doesn't that assume that Hassleblad is better than Rollei? ;-)

Actually, it assumes that the market value of the Hasselblad name and 
association is higher than the market value of the Rollei name and 
association.  It's got nothing to do with the quality of the camera, 
but with the marketability of the camera name.

And there, I think, Hassie has a distinct edge.  If not, they've sure 
wasted many truckloads of money on advertising...  

--


R. Clayton McKee                           http://www.rcmckee.com
Photojournalist                               rcmckee@rcmckee.com
P O Box 571900                           voice/fax   713/783-3502
Houston, TX 77257-1900                   cell phone #  on request
Replies: Reply from Jim at hemenway.com (Jim Hemenway) ([Leica] OT: Value of Rolleiflex)
 In reply to: Message from drodgers at casefarms.com (David Rodgers) ([Leica] OT: Value of Rolleiflex)
Message from jsmith342 at gmail.com (Jeffery Smith) ([Leica] OT: Value of Rolleiflex)
Message from Jim at hemenway.com (Jim Hemenway) ([Leica] OT: Value of Rolleiflex)