Hoya founder's grandson calls Pentax acquisition a failure

**cheekygeek** · 05-28-2010, 09:16 AM

Also in the article are the words "after Pentax became profitable" meaning the division is no longer a liability. There remain two big questions:

1) Are both the medical division and camera divisions profitable?
2) Was Pentax simply an investment they planned to flip? (That's what the grandson's words sound like to me: "If we'd paid less we could have sold it by now.")

Finally, now that they own Pentax they could not only sell it (as a whole) - they could SPLIT it and sell part of it. If the camera division is losing money with no end in sight, any amount of money would be a good offer. Then the question becomes:

Is the buyer planning on simply killing the brand to eliminate a competitor? Or if buying the company as a whole, are they simply after the medical division and will kill the camera division as a business decision?

I think Hoya's axing the warranty operations in Europe point toward an End of Life for the Pentax camera brand, unless a buyer comes along that wants to keep/rescue the brand.

I also think 645D production is also window dressing to make Pentax (and the camera division) more attractive to a potential buyer of the company or division. It is something the other major maker's don't have in their lineup.

Pentaxtic · 05-28-2010, 03:33 PM

Grandson owns a Canon/Nikon so of course he will say Hoya over paid for Pentax.

Class A · 05-28-2010, 04:52 PM

From the article:

Quote:

The company’s initial offer for Pentax in 2006 was about 10 percent higher than its market value at the time.

So obviously, even now that Pentax has become profitable, it will take a long time to recuperate from that. In particular, if you only have 1% of shares like the grandson, you'd want the company to be even more profitable.

Sad to see someone talking purely from a money generating perspective, apparantly ignoring the fact that a great brand has been saved from becoming extinct and continues to offer great products in a very competitive field.

**Aristophanes** · 05-28-2010, 06:14 PM

Originally posted by MrPetkus

No, I don't think so. It's about a man's quest, acting alone or collaboratively, to change the complexion of Hoya. I agree that Bloomberg's title is stupid because it doesn't reflect the story's content. However, it's not my job to paraphrase or censor the story's title in order to mollify delicate Pentaxians.

The real story here is that 3 institutional investors own more than 50% of Hoya. That's never good. They can behave like vulture funds if need be and break up a company real fast, brands and customers be darned.

MrPetkus · 05-29-2010, 07:43 AM

Originally posted by Aristophanes

The real story here is that 3 institutional investors own more than 50% of Hoya. That's never good. They can behave like vulture funds if need be and break up a company real fast, brands and customers be darned.

There are lots of stories here. All in all a rather interesting piece for analysis and dissection.

tokyoso · 05-31-2010, 02:01 PM

sounds like a estranged grandson trying to buy the company back from evil multi-national financial empire.

Ira · 05-31-2010, 02:59 PM

Originally posted by cheekygeek

Is the buyer planning on simply killing the brand to eliminate a competitor?

That's a very rare occurrence.

Even if Nikon or Canon bought it, there's no reason for either to simply kill it.

Kunzite · 05-31-2010, 03:33 PM

What else would they do? Divert resources from their own (very successful) systems, in order to promote the Pentax K-mount? I don't think so. Canon, Nikon or Sony - they would buy Pentax only to kill it.
However, I hope no one seriously think that Pentax will be sold to Canon/Nikon/Sony... it's very doubtful it will be sold at all.

omega leader · 05-31-2010, 04:13 PM

Originally posted by Ira

That's a very rare occurrence.

Even if Nikon or Canon bought it, there's no reason for either to simply kill it.

The financial costs associated with acquiring a non-failing brand to simply kill it far outweighs the potential benefits. This just isn't done.

Netsoft · 05-31-2010, 11:45 PM

Even if Canon buy the brand just to kill it, it doesn't seems to bring any benefit to them. Acquisition of an asset is seen as an investment and buying something and throwing it away isn't a justifiable investment decision. They'll be damned if I'm the major investor.

Kunzite · 06-01-2010, 01:35 AM

That's exactly my point. Buying Pentax and supporting the K-mount system doesn't make sense, buying Pentax and killing the K-mount system doesn't make sense either.
I can't understand why some people desperately hope Pentax will be sold (to whom doesn't seem so important), and launch such rumors. Is it hope they'll have the resources to go after Canon and Nikon? Is it just that "the sky is falling"?

Blue · 06-01-2010, 07:13 AM

You guys fail to realize that its possible to buy up a company and sell it off piecemeal either partially or entirely and make money off of the deal. Those chemical company example I posted earlier or one example. However, I also said that Canon missed its chance to do this ~ 3 or 4 years ago.

Edit: Kunzite, I don't know why you think some of us want Pentax to be sold.

Kunzite · 06-01-2010, 07:45 AM

It's just that we keep hearing such rumors, and tons of "hey, who will buy Pentax next" discussions. Rumors like the newest one on Photorumors (Canon and Sony fighting over Pentax) were started by someone, right?
Glancing on the internet it looks like Hoya is set to sell Pentax asap. But is this actually true? I think Hoya is serious about Pentax, they're trying to build a future for them, instead of just increasing their market value (in order to sell them for a higher price).

Why would one want Pentax to be sold, I've explained in my previous post: it could be hope that a big company with huge resources would take better care of them, than Hoya is currently doing. Of course, is one thing to wish for something and quite another to spread rumors about it.

Please keep in mind (I should had been more clear about this, my apologies) that I wasn't referring to Pentaxforums. Unless some of us are making up such rumors, which I seriously doubt.

Eigengrau · 06-03-2010, 10:33 AM - **1 Like**

Sorry, but I wasn't aware that Hoya was doing a poor job with Pentax. It's hard to imagine a company doing better with a brand - Hoya is turning Pentax into a brand that innovates and differentiates. It also seems to be giving Pentax plenty of resources to develop new and awesome products.

I think some people always want to predict doom and gloom, even when there is no good evidence for it. This guy is a relative, not someone who is actually involved in any significant way with Pentax. Why should we even listen to him? Pentax has put out 3 excellent, potentially industry-changing cameras since the Hoya acquisition, and they are generating more buzz than ever before. Profits are there and mindshare is way up - unless we've got something other than the opinion of some whiny Japanese guy to go off of, I'm not going to be losing any sleep.

Kunzite · 06-03-2010, 11:09 AM

Originally posted by Eigengrau

Sorry, but I wasn't aware that Hoya was doing a poor job with Pentax.

IMO, they aren't - not at all. But some may think they're not moving fast enough.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Your latest acquisition	Perrumpo	General Talk	27219	1 Day Ago 09:12 AM
HOYA CEO admits not keeping Pentax camera division in the HOYA group?	yakiniku	Pentax News and Rumors	61	10-18-2009 02:15 PM
DA 55-300mm F4-F5.8 - New acquisition!	legacyb4	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	35	09-27-2009 03:13 PM
"Pentax plan calls for higher-grade SLR"	rparmar	Pentax News and Rumors	41	02-25-2008 06:58 AM
Lens Acquisition	KFrog	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	01-23-2007 08:18 PM

05-28-2010, 09:16 AM	#31
cheekygeek Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Kearney, Nebraska USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,261	Also in the article are the words "after Pentax became profitable" meaning the division is no longer a liability. There remain two big questions: 1) Are both the medical division and camera divisions profitable? 2) Was Pentax simply an investment they planned to flip? (That's what the grandson's words sound like to me: "If we'd paid less we could have sold it by now.") Finally, now that they own Pentax they could not only sell it (as a whole) - they could SPLIT it and sell part of it. If the camera division is losing money with no end in sight, any amount of money would be a good offer. Then the question becomes: Is the buyer planning on simply killing the brand to eliminate a competitor? Or if buying the company as a whole, are they simply after the medical division and will kill the camera division as a business decision? I think Hoya's axing the warranty operations in Europe point toward an End of Life for the Pentax camera brand, unless a buyer comes along that wants to keep/rescue the brand. I also think 645D production is also window dressing to make Pentax (and the camera division) more attractive to a potential buyer of the company or division. It is something the other major maker's don't have in their lineup.

05-28-2010, 03:33 PM	#32
Pentaxtic Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Vancouver Photos: Gallery Posts: 417	Grandson owns a Canon/Nikon so of course he will say Hoya over paid for Pentax.

05-28-2010, 04:52 PM	#33
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	From the article: Quote: The company’s initial offer for Pentax in 2006 was about 10 percent higher than its market value at the time. So obviously, even now that Pentax has become profitable, it will take a long time to recuperate from that. In particular, if you only have 1% of shares like the grandson, you'd want the company to be even more profitable. Sad to see someone talking purely from a money generating perspective, apparantly ignoring the fact that a great brand has been saved from becoming extinct and continues to offer great products in a very competitive field.

05-28-2010, 06:14 PM	#34
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by MrPetkus No, I don't think so. It's about a man's quest, acting alone or collaboratively, to change the complexion of Hoya. I agree that Bloomberg's title is stupid because it doesn't reflect the story's content. However, it's not my job to paraphrase or censor the story's title in order to mollify delicate Pentaxians. The real story here is that 3 institutional investors own more than 50% of Hoya. That's never good. They can behave like vulture funds if need be and break up a company real fast, brands and customers be darned.

05-29-2010, 07:43 AM	#35
MrPetkus Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 387 Original Poster	Originally posted by Aristophanes The real story here is that 3 institutional investors own more than 50% of Hoya. That's never good. They can behave like vulture funds if need be and break up a company real fast, brands and customers be darned. There are lots of stories here. All in all a rather interesting piece for analysis and dissection.

05-31-2010, 02:01 PM	#36
tokyoso Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Tokyo Photos: Albums Posts: 723	sounds like a estranged grandson trying to buy the company back from evil multi-national financial empire.

05-31-2010, 02:59 PM	#37
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	Originally posted by cheekygeek Is the buyer planning on simply killing the brand to eliminate a competitor? That's a very rare occurrence. Even if Nikon or Canon bought it, there's no reason for either to simply kill it.

05-31-2010, 03:33 PM	#38
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	What else would they do? Divert resources from their own (very successful) systems, in order to promote the Pentax K-mount? I don't think so. Canon, Nikon or Sony - they would buy Pentax only to kill it. However, I hope no one seriously think that Pentax will be sold to Canon/Nikon/Sony... it's very doubtful it will be sold at all.

05-31-2010, 04:13 PM	#39
omega leader Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Niagara Region, Ontario Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 417	Originally posted by Ira That's a very rare occurrence. Even if Nikon or Canon bought it, there's no reason for either to simply kill it. The financial costs associated with acquiring a non-failing brand to simply kill it far outweighs the potential benefits. This just isn't done.

05-31-2010, 11:45 PM	#40
Netsoft Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Malaysia Posts: 58	Even if Canon buy the brand just to kill it, it doesn't seems to bring any benefit to them. Acquisition of an asset is seen as an investment and buying something and throwing it away isn't a justifiable investment decision. They'll be damned if I'm the major investor.

06-01-2010, 01:35 AM	#41
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	That's exactly my point. Buying Pentax and supporting the K-mount system doesn't make sense, buying Pentax and killing the K-mount system doesn't make sense either. I can't understand why some people desperately hope Pentax will be sold (to whom doesn't seem so important), and launch such rumors. Is it hope they'll have the resources to go after Canon and Nikon? Is it just that "the sky is falling"?

06-01-2010, 07:13 AM	#42
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	You guys fail to realize that its possible to buy up a company and sell it off piecemeal either partially or entirely and make money off of the deal. Those chemical company example I posted earlier or one example. However, I also said that Canon missed its chance to do this ~ 3 or 4 years ago. Edit: Kunzite, I don't know why you think some of us want Pentax to be sold.

06-01-2010, 07:45 AM	#43
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	It's just that we keep hearing such rumors, and tons of "hey, who will buy Pentax next" discussions. Rumors like the newest one on Photorumors (Canon and Sony fighting over Pentax) were started by someone, right? Glancing on the internet it looks like Hoya is set to sell Pentax asap. But is this actually true? I think Hoya is serious about Pentax, they're trying to build a future for them, instead of just increasing their market value (in order to sell them for a higher price). Why would one want Pentax to be sold, I've explained in my previous post: it could be hope that a big company with huge resources would take better care of them, than Hoya is currently doing. Of course, is one thing to wish for something and quite another to spread rumors about it. Please keep in mind (I should had been more clear about this, my apologies) that I wasn't referring to Pentaxforums. Unless some of us are making up such rumors, which I seriously doubt.

06-03-2010, 10:33 AM - 1 Like	#44
Eigengrau Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Colorado Photos: Albums Posts: 250	Sorry, but I wasn't aware that Hoya was doing a poor job with Pentax. It's hard to imagine a company doing better with a brand - Hoya is turning Pentax into a brand that innovates and differentiates. It also seems to be giving Pentax plenty of resources to develop new and awesome products. I think some people always want to predict doom and gloom, even when there is no good evidence for it. This guy is a relative, not someone who is actually involved in any significant way with Pentax. Why should we even listen to him? Pentax has put out 3 excellent, potentially industry-changing cameras since the Hoya acquisition, and they are generating more buzz than ever before. Profits are there and mindshare is way up - unless we've got something other than the opinion of some whiny Japanese guy to go off of, I'm not going to be losing any sleep.

06-03-2010, 11:09 AM	#45
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by Eigengrau Sorry, but I wasn't aware that Hoya was doing a poor job with Pentax. IMO, they aren't - not at all. But some may think they're not moving fast enough.