[Leica] Re: Hermes and Leica

[Curt Miller <cmiller@berkshire.net>]

Erwin once again puts a spin of reality and realism to the subject at
hand.  As a CFO of a fairly large non-profit, I frequently find myself in
the position explaining a progressive action by our executives.  There is
always second-guessing of any decision made and, while this is not at all
unhealthy - indeed to be encouraged - it should be understood that while
difficult, the executives usually carefully research the choices made
from all available options, and make the hard decisions for the greatest
benefit of the corporation.  They have done their homework.  They have
studied the alternatives.  They are aware of all the nuances and
permutations implied by their choices.  Yet, they are (mostly) usually
criticized for their decisions.  But make them they must.  I would tend to
applaud Mr. Cohn for his decision rather than criticize him for it.

Curt Miller, MPA

On Tue, 21 Nov 2000, Erwin Puts wrote:

> Let us try to look at the wider picture. First of all: Leica has been
> seeking for a partner since 1998 and has stated so officially several times.
> Why a partner? Leica needs to develop products much faster than they are
> accustomed to. And they need to broaden or change  the range: SLR is not
> doing well, P&S is a difficult market with big swings, projectors are down,
> S1 is extinct, only the binoculars and the M-line and the rebranded digital
> camera is doing well, as is the optical expertise as Leica now exports its
> redoubtable ASPH experience.
> Their current cash flow is insufficient, and while the company is in black
> now, there is no room for really deep investments. A partner with deep
> pockets and in the same market is needed. Not a camera company like Minolta
> or Cosina, as these companies are not interested in the Leica product range,
> just in the brand name and the installed user base. A buy by Minolta would
> be the end of the marque.
> Like it or not: Leica is a luxury product and we, the users have made it
> that way: we buy black paint models and 0-series, in droves, not because it
> gives you better pictures, but because it looks and feels great. We do not
> buy R8 cameras, even if this is the best instrument for photography in
> decades.
> It maks sense to associate yourself with a company that has world fame for
> luxury brands and has a habit of allowing every brand to develop its own
> identity and product range as long as it is a top quality producer with a
> cult following. Now Leica fits in very well.
> Like it or not: most Leica buyers want a high class ambience when they buy
> and be served  on a personal basis. Leica buyers dislike being treated as a
> "here-is-the-box-the -instruction-is-inside" customer. They want personal
> attention, a prolongued exposure to the Leica culture and an even longer
> decision process.
> The industry is changing: the car and watch companies show where the high
> end luxury market is and what  people expect. Photography is being absorbed
> into an imaging, and  multimedia market and thus loses much of its original
> identity. Chemicals are out and the scanner is!
> I do not deplore this change: it just happens and progress cannot be
> stopped. We just have to recognize and accept it.
> Leica has a Jekill and Hide personality: it IS a luxury product: why pay
> thousands of dollars for an old M3
> or hundreds of thousands of dollars for an original 250-Leica and it is a
> formidable picture making instrument.
> But the proportion of people that buy a Leica for picture making is a small
> fraction of the people who buy Leica for the luxury and the image.
> No problem here: a Porsche or a Rolex is also sold on the basis of its
> image. We should accept that the Leca camera is a product that has
> instrumental and emotional character and as of now the emotional character
> is on top. Hermes has recognized it and Mr Cohn is  very smart in saving the
> company.
> 
> Erwin