Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>> The system is very efficient when aimed towards a target. For instance >> : destroy in the past the german photographic industry or the US car >> industry. > >I don't think you can blame the alledged destruction of the German >photographic industry on any "unfair" Japanese "system" of competition, >unless developing high quality, professional, innovative cameras and >lens at reasonable prices is considered "unfair". As far as the US car >industry, have you ever driven a circa 1970's or early 1980's American >automobile? I'd rather think competition from the Japanese automobile >industry saved the US automobile industry in the long run by way of a >good kick in the ass. I quite agree with you for the "good kick in the ass". My Renault car has been made in a french factory with the Toyota system of production.It is = a very good car which is the n=B01 foreign car sold(before japanese cars!) = on the very competitive german market.=20 But if the consumer is winning in quality, the french worker has lost his job(what about the power of purchasing of the US worker in Detroit ?) .I think the same result would have been reached if a more efficient market had existed between the european (or US) car companies.But it is politically easier facing the unions to apply a reform when it comes from abroad. The case of Harley-Davidson shows a very clever politics : protectionnism during 5 (?) years in order to contain the japanese thread and in counterpart a vigorous productivity effort. The same politics applied to european (german )photographic industry woul= d have been superior to the "laissez-faire" which is the politics of the fr= ee fox in the free poultry-house.=20 Dominique Pellissier >