Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Clive-- I don't think that what you are saying is exactly what I am saying. (Unless I am totally wrong, which is always possible ... who ain't sometimes!). What I said was that the primary business model and manufacturing activity determines how much it costs to run the business in toto (not in Kansas). Pricing of products is related to the costs of running the business. One can't separate in some clean way the "exact" cost of creating a single camera model, as though it were created solely in a vacuum, uninfluenced by other business costs not necessarily "directly" related to the product being built. There is overall marketing, salaries for all employees, and all the other schtuff. I am not saying that because most of Leica products are expensive that the new digital should also be as expensive, relatively speaking, as the models made in the workbench manufactory. The fact that there are few models made in the outsourcing process, relative to a mass-market production of other products made in the same factory, will determine the cost, though. If the putative manufacturer (whoever it is!) makes 100,000 of one kind of product, and makes another kind of product that shares some of the same features or perhaps even the chassis (compare the Volkswagen Touareg with the Porsche Cayenne) or other "guts," even though they may be similar, in a quantity of 10,000, it costs more to make the Porsch--the smaller run--given the lower volume and higher quality materials, etc., Porsche engine, etc. So the same with the new digital. It isn't just the "other" guy's camera with a red dot on it! Kit - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Clive Moss Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 5:49 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] The LEICA DIGILUX 2 is announced Kit McChesney said the following on 12/3/2003 9:39 AM: > Well, maybe not the digital, but the overall manufacturing process is > primarily as I described, even if a small portion of their business is > outsourced. That type of manufacturing/business strategy determines the > overall pricing and profitability of the business. At least I think it does! > What your business does as a majority of its activity, where most of your > sales are, would seem to have the most influence over how much it costs to > run the biz. No? > ... No, not really. The Panaleicas share the marketing costs but not the manufacturing costs of the M-series. Cross subsidizing the manufacturing costs of old product lines with excess margins on marginally competitive new product lines is really bad business. In partial justification of the cost, the direct mechanical control of zoom, focus, and aperture is probably way more costly to manufacture than electronic controls such as are found on a P&S -- and likely more satisfying to use. The EVF will be no better than other EVFs -- same technology. Not even close to the M-series. The small sensor size will be the killer flaw in this camera. In no way will its quality be able to match any of the DSLRs (not even the cheapest) with their larger sensors. Yes -- I will be flamed because the tests are not yet in. However -- small sensors are noisier than large sensors at a given ISO equivalent rating -- given current technology. Yes, I know this was the argument against 35mm from the beginning -- but the Digilux 2 does not offer the same advantage that the original Leicas offered over the alternatives. - -- Clive http://clive.moss.net - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html