HOYA to sell Pentax - Page 6

kevinschoenmakers · 11-05-2009, 11:04 AM

Originally Posted by knoxploration

That's your reading of it. I tend to disagree - I'd see a two sentence press release as being extraordinarily blunt. I also see a JVC deal as making very little sense at all - particularly when one considers that JVC already tried and failed in the digital camera business once before, and that was in the simpler point-and-shoot segment before things got as competitive as they are these days.

As someone pointed out, they might feel forced to enter the still camera market once more, because video and stills are more and more being taken with the same camera. Also, going at it alone is something different then buying a well established name.

*LeDave* · 11-05-2009, 11:27 AM

I don't care who it is that buys Pentax, just two things that matters most to why Pentax is what it is today.

1) Don't slap their name over Pentax like Sony over Minolta. (Literally killed the Minolta brand, it probably won't be remembered in fifteen years from now because of that.)
2) Don't downgrade Pentax. (History for making well built bodies, weather-sealed & top lcd even on entry-level line-ups, solid sturdy feel on the bodies, etc.)

thibs · 11-05-2009, 11:35 AM

Originally Posted by LeDave

I don't care who it is that buys Pentax, just two things that matters most to why Pentax is what it is today.

1) Don't slap their name over Pentax like Sony over Minolta. (Literally killed the Minolta brand, it probably won't be remembered in fifteen years from now because of that.)

Sony had no choice: Minolta still exists as company, they couldn't do in any other way. I don't think endoscopes under Hoya name will do any bad to endoscope sales. Hoya doesn't care and they are right. Pentax is a different thing.

Mister Guy · 11-05-2009, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by cateto

If you read carefully, they only say that the media reports on the sale of Pentax are "not a fact". This is far from denying bluntly: it simply says it is not something factual, but it does not discard the possibility of negotiations or explorations in that direction.

They could have used a much stronger wording in order to actually deny this rumour.

Time will tell.

I still don't get why Japanese companies don't get much more fluent English speakers to translate their releases. I really hope American companies don't do such a bad job in Japanese. Ordinarily, I'd say such a short blunt response is a casual dismissal and about as strong a refutation as you can get. However, the poor English used makes it very nebulous what they are trying to convey. Saying "An article reported this but this is not a fact" could carry a very loud but silent "yet". All they really ended up denying was that conclusive deal has already been reached.

*benjikan* · 11-08-2009, 02:17 AM

Originally Posted by pxpaulx

How about Pantex? Pintax? Maybe not!

How about a Pentax-Tampax merger. Tampax has a very profound market share and is a known entity world wide.

It also has a similar sounding name. Thus the new "Pantax" could penetrate new markets that they could not have considered in the past.

These are some of the probing issues that Pentax Exec's will have to DEEPLY consider, if they wish to survive this highly and profoundly competitive market place. My only concern is will the new "Pantax" be a disposable camera?

Zav · 11-08-2009, 02:26 AM

Originally Posted by benjikan

How about a Pentax-Tampax merger. Tampax has a very profound market share and is a known entity world wide.

It also has a similar sounding name. Thus the new "Pantax" could penetrate new markets that they could not have considered in the past.

These are some of the probing issues that Pentax Exec's will have to deeply consider, if they wish to survive the highly competitive market. My only concern is will the new "Pantax" be a disposable camera.

What else to say?

lithos · 11-08-2009, 03:47 AM

Originally Posted by benjikan

How about a Pentax-Tampax merger. Tampax has a very profound market share and is a known entity world wide.

It also has a similar sounding name. Thus the new "Pantax" could penetrate new markets that they could not have considered in the past.

These are some of the probing issues that Pentax Exec's will have to DEEPLY consider, if they wish to survive this highly and profoundly competitive market place. My only concern is will the new "Pantax" be a disposable camera?

I'm sure someone could pull a few strings.

lithos · 11-08-2009, 03:52 AM

Benji should put a plug in for 'em on his blog.

*benjikan* · 11-08-2009, 04:54 AM

Originally Posted by lithos

Benji should put a plug in for 'em on his blog.

LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL,LO L,LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL!!!!

Lazaruscomeout · 11-08-2009, 05:58 AM

Originally Posted by benjikan

How about a Pentax-Tampax merger. Tampax has a very profound market share and is a known entity world wide.

It also has a similar sounding name. Thus the new "Pantax" could penetrate new markets that they could not have considered in the past.

These are some of the probing issues that Pentax Exec's will have to DEEPLY consider, if they wish to survive this highly and profoundly competitive market place. My only concern is will the new "Pantax" be a disposable camera?

They would be able to absorb pentax easily enough. We might even start to see an improved product cycle. It would be a good fit, period. They could give a kit lens away with each body for a while, but the lens wouldn't stayfree forever.

Sorry

lithos · 11-08-2009, 07:11 AM

Originally Posted by Lazaruscomeout

We might even start to see an improved product cycle.

A new bit of kit released every month would be bloody fantastic.

JHfwp · 11-08-2009, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by LeDave

I don't care who it is that buys Pentax, just two things that matters most to why Pentax is what it is today.

1) Don't slap their name over Pentax like Sony over Minolta. (Literally killed the Minolta brand, it probably won't be remembered in fifteen years from now because of that.)
2) Don't downgrade Pentax. (History for making well built bodies, weather-sealed & top lcd even on entry-level line-ups, solid sturdy feel on the bodies, etc.)

I'll second that. Especially number 2. If JVC ever sheds the Pentax name they better be prepared to make a splash.

*isteve · 11-08-2009, 09:07 AM

Tampax already got together with Nikon....and invented the Tampon....

Originally Posted by benjikan

How about a Pentax-Tampax merger. Tampax has a very profound market share and is a known entity world wide.

It also has a similar sounding name. Thus the new "Pantax" could penetrate new markets that they could not have considered in the past.

These are some of the probing issues that Pentax Exec's will have to DEEPLY consider, if they wish to survive this highly and profoundly competitive market place. My only concern is will the new "Pantax" be a disposable camera?

lurchlarson · 11-08-2009, 10:17 AM

A Pentax-Samsung or Pentax-Fuji merger would make more sense than JVC.

I think Hoya probably will ditch Pentax eventually I just don't know that Pentax is quite ripe enough for Hoya to let it go just yet. Maybe after this product cycle ends and the next cycle starts. Pentax still needs to get a little more notoriety in the mass market. It would make them more valuable once Hoya puts them on the market.

*benjikan* · 11-08-2009, 11:06 AM

Originally Posted by *isteve

Tampax already got together with Nikon....and invented the Tampon....

Ah...Only Stevie could have come up with that one...Steve, give me a call. I am shooting for ELLE International at the end of November. Want to come to Paris and assist me on that one. It is for 15-18 Elle Magazines around the globe. If your up to it...