[RobA_Oz]

Olympus Documentary: A Great Moment (English) - YouTube

Nice they included you in their cover shot, surfar.

Seriously, all camera makers need to connect with younger generations, if they’re going to continue in the market. I’ve just put some more of my money into a new Pentax lens, but I’m not going to be a customer for as long as they might be. Nostalgia can be one motivating factor for some, and probably was in my case when I bought the new D FA*50 because that FL was where I started in SLR photography, but nostalgia requires personal history to have any depth.

[surfar]

"the Olympus group does need to be profitable,

Yes,and it is.

What many commentators are seeing/saying is "tunnel vision".Put the ultra wide in your mind!

THE big picture is what buisness is about,Oly gets it.

The foundation of their house is 100 years old and its not going anywhere.

The R&D that flows onto their profitable arms comes from the "imaging division".

[BigMackCam]

Yes,and it is.

What many commentators are seeing/saying is "tunnel vision".Put the ultra wide in your mind!

THE big picture is what buisness is about,Oly gets it.

The foundation of their house is 100 years old and its not going anywhere.

The R&D that flows onto their profitable arms comes from the "imaging division".

With respect, any large organisation gets that the "big picture" is what business is about. That's why they're big organisations But that doesn't mean a big organisation will continue to prop up a financially failing division. It's great that the imaging division's R&D flows into their other profitable arms... but it doesn't have to produce consumer cameras and lenses to carry out R&D. If the imaging division's operating costs significantly exceed revenues, one option is to exit the photographic market and simply have a much leaner R&D team (minus all the manufacturing, sales and distribution elements) working directly for the profitable divisions. This is all part of big picture thinking, too. I sincerely hope it doesn't come to that, and I don't necessarily think it will. But I clearly don't know as much as you do about what goes on behind closed doors at Olympus, so I'm not quite so optimistic... "on the fence" is how I'd describe myself, here

[Rondec]

Olympus Documentary: A Great Moment (English) - YouTube

I think the issue is who owns the company and what they want to do going forward. Certainly it seems as though the money making arm of the company is the medical department. The point has just been made a couple of times that there are other shareholders who have come in and have a say about what Olympus does going forward. If their three thousand dollar camera doesn't sell, it will be a drain on resources, even if the R and D for it is somehow useful for endoscopes.

I think we need to be clear that none of us want to see Olympus stop making cameras. This sort of market is tough for everyone and the gloom and doom affects Pentax too. At a minimum, I think most companies are going to slow down their release of new camera bodies till the market picks up again (which I'm not sure will happen).

[Mistral75]

(...)

The R&D that flows onto their profitable arms comes from the "imaging division".

That's what they said multiple times but it looks like an alternative truth when one looks at the figures.

Olympus publish R&D expenses split by business segment, see https://www.olympus-global.com/ir/data/brief/pdf/Olympus_FY2019_Supplemental_E.pdf

Olympus Imaging R&D represents only 4.4% of Olympus total R&D: ¥4.166bn out of ¥93.968bn. That's much less than the FY2020 forecast loss of the Imaging segment (¥7bn).

The portion of the Imaging R&D that is of interest to the other segments (some R&D goes into developing specific cameras and lenses and can't flow into other Olympus segments) could easily be absorbed by the other segments if Olympus Imaging ceased to exist in their current form and the financial impact would be positive.

[Wheatfield]

Ridiculous. They are announcing new lenses, new cameras, putting out new firmware & enhancements periodically. Five years from now could be a much different camera-scape, given the half-life of technology. Film should be back in the saddle by then! ...or maybe not. Lol!

I'm reminded of the flurry of activity at Pentax just before they went out of business. The camera market is shrinking. It wouldn't be surprising if some companies decided to get while the getting is good.

[Kunzite]

I'm reminded of the flurry of activity at Pentax just before they went out of business.

Before they WHAT?

[Wheatfield]

Before they WHAT?

Pentax as a company ceased to exist On October 29, 2007.

[Kunzite]

Yes, but that was the result of a hostile takeover - and they were incorporated into Hoya. In that form, they continued to be in business.
In one form or another, they're still here.

Perhaps a better analogy would be Samsung, who truly gave up on the camera market - not long after their greatest camera.

[clackers]

I'm reminded of the flurry of activity at Pentax just before they went out of business.

?

Being purchased is not going out the business. It's a change of ownership.

[Wheatfield]

?

Being purchased is not going out the business. It's a change of ownership.

Nice spin.

Pentax as a company became a wholly absorbed part of Hoya Corp.
Out if curiosity, where is Pentax Corporate head office? Who is the President?
Can you tell me where to get a list of the Board of Directors?
To me, it's quacking and waddling, and that makes it a duck.
Pentax is a brand name, not a company.

[monochrome]

Nice spin.

Pentax as a company became a wholly absorbed part of Hoya Corp.
Out if curiosity, where is Pentax Corporate head office? Who is the President?
Can you tell me where to get a list of the Board of Directors?
To me, it's quacking and waddling, and that makes it a duck.
Pentax is a brand name, not a company.

That’s correct. Ricoh Imaging Corp., Ltd. and Hoya Corporation both manufacture products and each markets them under the jointly used brand Pentax (until November).

[MarkJerling]

Nice spin.

Pentax as a company became a wholly absorbed part of Hoya Corp.
Out if curiosity, where is Pentax Corporate head office? Who is the President?
Can you tell me where to get a list of the Board of Directors?
To me, it's quacking and waddling, and that makes it a duck.
Pentax is a brand name, not a company.

The company founded in 1919, Asahi Kogaku Goshi Kaisha was renamed Asahi Optical Co. Ltd in 1938. The name "Pentax" was a brand name for much of the company's history. Only in 2002 the company was renamed Pentax Corporation. In August 2007 the company became a subsidiary of Hoya. Pentax merged with Hoya on 31 March 2008. In 2011, Hoya transferred its Pentax Imaging Systems business to a newly established subsidiary called Pentax Imaging Corporation. On 1 October, 2011, Ricoh purchased Pentax Imaging Corp. and renamed the new subsidiary Pentax Ricoh Imaging Company, Ltd. On 1 August 2013 the company name was changed to Ricoh Imaging Company Ltd.

You are correct in that Pentax is a brand, not a company. But, that was actually the case for much of it's existence. Any company with the name 'Pentax' is actually a fairly recent thing.

Pentax has never gone out of business. The company has changed ownership and has been absorbed and split off over the years and renamed several times. For much of Pentax's existence, it was a brand name, from first use in 1957 of the pre-existing Pentax brand name which was originally registered as a trademark by VEB Pentacon, the East German branch of Zeiss Ikon. So, from 1957 to 2002 it was a brand name. From 2002, it was both a brand name and a company name until 2013, when it again became a brand name only.

[lytrytyr]

You are correct in that Pentax is a brand, not a company.

Bloomberg begs to differ:

https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=21752074

[Mistral75]

Bloomberg begs to differ:

https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=21752074

That's Pentax Medical, subsidiary of Hoya.