Originally posted by juu Please clarify what you mean by "cannibalizing" here, it's generally not used that way.
"
cannibalization refers to a reduction in sales volume, sales revenue, or market share of one product as a result of the introduction of a new product by the same producer."
If Pentax were to release a m43 body, some consumers would choose those bodies over their DSLRs. And the real issue is that Pentax would realize lower profit from lenses because the lens sales that traditionally follow a body purchase, which are now shared with the 3rd party lens makers and the used market, would now be shared with the 3rd parties, used, and at least two active competitors.
Originally posted by juu That implies Pentax has no move and is left to APSC DSLR attrition.
I think there is a lot to gain by joining someone else's system - they can start selling products immediately and be competitive immediately without having to invest massively in R&D to start with a somewhat complete lens line-up. They also may somewhat benefit from marketing and "mount brand awareness" already done to date by the other companies sharing the standard. And they gain from economies of scale in sensor manufacture.
By chooosing to wait until now, it's my belief they've left themselves with a finite list of options.
Pentax saves minimal R&D costs/time by joining someone else's standard; they still have to figure out how to implement it, and in such a way that their first gen product would present a feature/value proposition against their competitors 2nd and 3rd gen offerings, a home run on their first at bat. And not having to "invest massively in R&D to start with a somewhat complete lens line-up" is a humungously positive spin on "abandoning all aftermarket lens sales". It took Pentax how long to repackage a plastic version of the cheap 35mm prime? if they can't hustle out a revamp of one of their own lens, theirs no chance that they bring a decent lineup of m43 lense to the table for a couple of years. In the meantime, those sales go to Oly, Panasonic and Sigma.
And the situation just gets worse as time progresses because, at the end of the day, despite the screaming of camera nerds, cameras are increasingly commoditized products. There are a finite number of opportunities for differentiation, and your competitors aren't stupid. Wait long enough and all the niches are filled. AND, the competitors can always choose to "tweak" the standard every now and again, adding ongoing costs to you, or making your products work slightly worse.
Originally posted by juu Doing their own system makes the stakes higher - both in case of a win and in case of a loss.
This is me, beating my dead horse. Except that overlooks the fact that Pentax already has a very mature system, that they know inside and out, and
can implement immediately. It's called K mount. Yeah, yeah, register distance. Doesn't matter, they have to leverage K mount, otherwise there's not reason to buy from Pentax. Go completely the opposite direction, release a full frame EVIL, shoved into the K-x/K-r platform. Shave it down to it's bones. Figure out how to stick a decent EVF in the rangefinder position, and remove the prism hump. Make a cheap 35mm lens, as thin as possible. Congratulations, you're in the EVIL business. No, it's not the smallest/lightest/sexiest. But it is a highly unique product, that cost you virtually nothing to develop, and leverages your existing mount, and can be sold at a decent profit because it's not competing with a bunch of other similar cameras. Advertising line: "The only compact system that's 100% lens compatible with your DSLR system, from day one, without adapters." promise a "micro k" in a year that will be smaller/lighter/sexy, but still 100% K compatible, via adapter. And then...
Originally posted by juu Pentax's core competency is in lenses. If, what you say about most profits being in lens sales is true, a viable strategy could be the exact opposite of starting their own system - it would be to produce lenses for the most popular mirrorless systems.
Setup a separate brand, make m43 and E mount lens, ruthlessly steal the best bits for micro K.
Originally posted by juu Also, whenever you say "Pentax will have to compete with Olympus/Panasonic/... if you join m43 or with Sony if you join NEX", think about this - they will still have to do the same even if they start their own mirrorless system, albeit in a slightly different way. The customer will still evaluate Pentax's mirrorless against those established systems.
But with proprietary mounts, it's not a simple case of evaluating products; it's evaluating products plus the cost acquisition. And the mount acts as a switching barrier, which means that to a consumer whom Pentax convinces to buy their product, the cost of switching to the hot new Panasonic that came out just as they're looking for a new body is substantially higher, and thus weights that evaluation heavily in favor of Pentax's new model. Yes, they have to work harder to sell bodies, but once you've sold a body, the customer is likely locked in for a bit, and thus peripheral sales are easier. The alternative is a war of constant technical oneupsmanship, which doesn't favor a small competitor.
Sorry for the long post. It's probably all wrong, and full of grammatical errors. No warranties expressed or implied.