Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/10/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Anthony Atkielski wrote: > > What Leitz really needs, one one hand a beginners model, with > > a good lens for a reasonable price, and a lower cost body, but > > reliable. > > I disagree. There are already dozens of cameras like that--Leica will > just be > washed away if it tries to compete in that market. I'm with Anthony on this, and the argument that the cheaper cameras are useful to make up for the losses of the quality gear is something I don't find convincing. I don't believe that Leica can market cheap cameras for a *long* time. Of course, for a *while* there will be plenty of people who will gladly buy a $300 non-Leica manufactured "Leica". They want to own something with that name and then try to convince their neighbor that the $300 "Leica" plastic is superior to the Nikon plastic. But the name alone won't keep selling those point and shoots (or beginners models) forever. It's a cheap, temporary solution. The brand name will erode and the sales of the high-end gear will suffer more and more from the non-cultish plastics with the red dot. So high-end sales suffer, and the low-end will suffer as soon as Nikon et al prove that they're no worse, which is easy enough for them, because it's true and the big boys have more cash to get that message across. Down go the beginners models along with the high-end. Good-bye Leica-cult means good-bye company. Cheap, quick fixes may save some temporary CEO's reputation, but not the company. There are thousands of successful small companies in the world, making high-end gear of all kinds, of which only professionals have knowledge. Those companies survive if they render outstanding quality, or a cult-object, or both, as in Leica's case. But not if they try to make a buck or two by betting on every horse in the stable. Bernard