[Pål Jensen]

Seems to be a lack of understanding how companies work. Hoya didn't run Pentax; they owned it.

[sjwaldron]

Seems to be a lack of understanding how companies work. Hoya didn't run Pentax; they owned it.

The owner didn't have any part in what products they developed and released?

[johnmflores]

Wasn't it said that Hoya was the one who pushed to get the 645D to market? It's true they trimmed a lot out of Pentax, but I think they would have kept R&D working full force to keep their unintentional investment worth something so they could sell it for a profit. Now that Ricoh is on the scene, we see that Hoya seems to have given them an amazing deal and kept their foot in the door to mutually make the Pentax brand stronger. Also, the Pentax Q survived (or started?) with Hoya as it must have been in the most important stages of development when Hoya was in charge.

I guess we will find out in October how well Hoya treated Pentax with SLR development.

When all is said and done, Hoya saved Pentax and oversaw the release of 3 landmark cameras for the brand - K-x, K-5, and 645D. Thank you Hoya for your fine stewardship of a brand we all care about!

[Pål Jensen]

The owner didn't have any part in what products they developed and released?

None whatsoever.
As all owners they are conerned about the bottom line. Pentax need to make the necessary steps to keep the owner happy.

[cbaytan]

What does everyone think?

They are very very good,congrats, to make sure what is exactly the lens and the body?

[glanglois]

None whatsoever.
As all owners they are conerned about the bottom line. Pentax need to make the necessary steps to keep the owner happy.

The owners are not doing development in their garage nor do they sign off on each spec sheet. They do have to sign off on strategic direction and authorize development funds for large projects. While the definitions of "strategic direction" and "large projects" will vary from business to business, the senior leadership/ownership of the company do participate in some way in new product direction and development.

The day that they are concerned about nothing but the bottom line is the day that they fail to live up to their responsibilities. We have seen what happens when management takes that path; it's not pretty.

[Winder]

Bunnell has said in interviews that Hoya was a big part in bringing the 645D to market. Hoya may not have been making the day to day decisions, but the definitely set the framework, the goals, and the budgets.

If I tell an assistant where to be and when for a shoot I am running my company. I may not tell him what speed to drive or what roads to take. I don't tell him what time to leave or or how many cups of coffee to drink. I just tell him where to be and what time to be there.

Hoya does not need to be (and should not be) part of the day to day decisions to be running the company.

[Blue]

Bunnell has said in interviews that Hoya was a big part in bringing the 645D to market. Hoya may not have been making the day to day decisions, but the definitely set the framework, the goals, and the budgets.

If I tell an assistant where to be and when for a shoot I am running my company. I may not tell him what speed to drive or what roads to take. I don't tell him what time to leave or or how many cups of coffee to drink. I just tell him where to be and what time to be there.

Hoya does not need to be (and should not be) part of the day to day decisions to be running the company.

so what if Hoya told Pentax to market the 645D. It wasn't like it was a new project under the Hoya boys that came to fruition. Besides, Ned is one of those assistants you mentioned. I wonder if he upgraded from the D-Lux-4 to the D-Lux-5.

[Winder]

so what if Hoya told Pentax to market the 645D. It wasn't like it was a new project under the Hoya boys that came to fruition. Besides, Ned is one of those assistants you mentioned. I wonder if he upgraded from the D-Lux-4 to the D-Lux-5.

It means that if it was not for Hoya there never would have been a 645D. I'm not sure why people don't like Hoya. If Hoya had not bought Pentax there might not be and Pentax today. It is like Minolta people complaining about what Sony has done. If people don't like what a company is producing then buy from a different company.

The 645D, K-7/K-5, & K-x/K-r all came to market under Hoya, and those are the best cameras Pentax has produced. I don't really care who owns Pentax. I would like to see some serious glass come to market and the trend in quality bodies continue and improve.

[Blue]

It means that if it was not for Hoya there never would have been a 645D. I'm not sure why people don't like Hoya. If Hoya had not bought Pentax there might not be and Pentax today. It is like Minolta people complaining about what Sony has done. If people don't like what a company is producing then buy from a different company.

The 645D, K-7/K-5, & K-x/K-r all came to market under Hoya, and those are the best cameras Pentax has produced. I don't really care who owns Pentax. I would like to see some serious glass come to market and the trend in quality bodies continue and improve.

You failed to grasp that I wasn't complaining about what Pentax was producing, but rather you giving those corporate raiders at Hoya credit for developing something when they did very little. Actually, what it means is that Pentax produced those products in spite of Hoya. Hoya obviously didn't give a hairy rats arse about the camera division and the top guy made it known. Pentax existed when Hoya forced short of a hostile take over. It is clear that they did so strictly for the medical aspect of the company. The kept the photography and optics side of things going to sell it off. The Minolta example is a straw man. Konica-Minolta laid off everyone in the camera & lens unit and shut it down. Sony then bought it without the name and hired back some of those people. You make way too many ass-umptions about what other gear folks have that debate these things. My gear isn't restricted to Pentax. Frankly, Sony and Fujifilms were $400m in the red for 2010 so I am glad they didn't end up with Pentax. If canon had paid the price Ricoh paid for Pentax, they would have likely shut them down and bought them strictly for the Patents. The way I see it, the only other options wold have been Samsung, Panasonic or Oly or some one completely new.

[Schraubstock]

As all owners they are conerned about the bottom line

Hi
Without a good product to sell there won't be any bottom line!
All "owners" should know that and if they don't they go the way of all failed companies. In the end the buying customers provide the bottom line.

Greetings

[johnmflores]

You failed to grasp that I wasn't complaining about what Pentax was producing, but rather you giving those corporate raiders at Hoya credit for developing something when they did very little. Actually, what it means is that Pentax produced those products in spite of Hoya. Hoya obviously didn't give a hairy rats arse about the camera division and the top guy made it known. Pentax existed when Hoya forced short of a hostile take over. It is clear that they did so strictly for the medical aspect of the company. The kept the photography and optics side of things going to sell it off. The Minolta example is a straw man. Konica-Minolta laid off everyone in the camera & lens unit and shut it down. Sony then bought it without the name and hired back some of those people. You make way too many ass-umptions about what other gear folks have that debate these things. My gear isn't restricted to Pentax. Frankly, Sony and Fujifilms were $400m in the red for 2010 so I am glad they didn't end up with Pentax. If canon had paid the price Ricoh paid for Pentax, they would have likely shut them down and bought them strictly for the Patents. The way I see it, the only other options wold have been Samsung, Panasonic or Oly or some one completely new.

"IR:
Since the merger with Hoya, Pentax’s development cycle seems to have accelerated and products have become better focused. What changes in culture or management have you seen since the Hoya merger?

Bunnell:
I think the biggest change for anybody working at Pentax has been that Hoya has brought a sense of accountability to anybody that works at Pentax. And, also an understanding that you need to make a commitment to product plans, you need to make a commitment to the channel, and above all else you need to make a commitment for doing the right thing, which also results and leads to making sure you can be profitable. So, they have really forced us to be much more aggressive in our thinking and be very, very careful that if you're going to make a decision, you're going to stick with it. So, I would say what Hoya has brought to us is accountability, demand for more efficiency, and demand for doing things more quickly
than probably historically Pentax has been used to.

IR:
Pentax has always been kind of an engineering oriented company, and now Hoya is maybe a little more business focused?

Bunnell:
I think it would be fair to say that people have always thought of Pentax being primarily an engineering-driven company. And, although this goes well past my time at Pentax, we typically were the sort of company that would bring out one camera this year, and then three years later bring out another camera, and there wasn't any real relationship to the cameras and the notion that you had a product line. Hoya is helping us develop a product line strategy, which makes a lot of sense for us from a business standpoint. It also makes more sense for our retailers. They know who we are now, they know what products we have, they know they can expect we'll be replacing these models in a certain time period. So, a lot more disciplined business approach.

IR:
The K-7 was a major leap forward in terms of features and capability for Pentax. Was that a direct result of the Hoya merger, or was it under development well before that?

Bunnell:
I would say the development of K7 had started obviously before the Hoya merger. But the focus that Hoya had placed on us to make absolutely certain we had all of the right features was probably the most telling sign there was the beginning of an influence by Hoya on our design strategy.

IR:
There have been some rumors of Hoya potentially spinning off Pentax as an independent company. What do you see for the future?

Bunnell:
There have been a lot of rumors, and I guess best way to answer that is our COO Hiroshi Hamada I think aptly pointed out, this is probably three months ago, that Pentax was a really small company, and that we probably could not exist on our own due to the tremendous pace and investment in technology. So his strategy is that we will have to partner with more people, to be successful. I think a lot of people misconstrued that to say that they're going to sell us off. I think he was pointing out that we're not a giant company, where we have all the components under our roof, and we will have to partner with key people to help us stay competitive."

Imaging Resource Interview: Ned Bunnell, President, Pentax Imaging

[Blue]

"IR:
Since the merger with Hoya, Pentax’s development cycle seems to have accelerated and products have become better focused. What changes in culture or management have you seen since the Hoya merger?

Bunnell:
I think the biggest change for anybody working at Pentax has been that Hoya has brought a sense of accountability to anybody that works at Pentax. And, also an understanding that you need to make a commitment to product plans, you need to make a commitment to the channel, and above all else you need to make a commitment for doing the right thing, which also results and leads to making sure you can be profitable. So, they have really forced us to be much more aggressive in our thinking and be very, very careful that if you're going to make a decision, you're going to stick with it. So, I would say what Hoya has brought to us is accountability, demand for more efficiency, and demand for doing things more quickly
than probably historically Pentax has been used to.

IR:
Pentax has always been kind of an engineering oriented company, and now Hoya is maybe a little more business focused?

Bunnell:
I think it would be fair to say that people have always thought of Pentax being primarily an engineering-driven company. And, although this goes well past my time at Pentax, we typically were the sort of company that would bring out one camera this year, and then three years later bring out another camera, and there wasn't any real relationship to the cameras and the notion that you had a product line. Hoya is helping us develop a product line strategy, which makes a lot of sense for us from a business standpoint. It also makes more sense for our retailers. They know who we are now, they know what products we have, they know they can expect we'll be replacing these models in a certain time period. So, a lot more disciplined business approach.

IR:
The K-7 was a major leap forward in terms of features and capability for Pentax. Was that a direct result of the Hoya merger, or was it under development well before that?

Bunnell:
I would say the development of K7 had started obviously before the Hoya merger. But the focus that Hoya had placed on us to make absolutely certain we had all of the right features was probably the most telling sign there was the beginning of an influence by Hoya on our design strategy.

IR:
There have been some rumors of Hoya potentially spinning off Pentax as an independent company. What do you see for the future?

Bunnell:
There have been a lot of rumors, and I guess best way to answer that is our COO Hiroshi Hamada I think aptly pointed out, this is probably three months ago, that Pentax was a really small company, and that we probably could not exist on our own due to the tremendous pace and investment in technology. So his strategy is that we will have to partner with more people, to be successful. I think a lot of people misconstrued that to say that they're going to sell us off. I think he was pointing out that we're not a giant company, where we have all the components under our roof, and we will have to partner with key people to help us stay competitive."

Imaging Resource Interview: Ned Bunnell, President, Pentax Imaging

I remember that interview and I bought into this part highlighted in blue because it came from Ned. Well, Ned was wrong and Ricoh is buying the camera and optical unit from Hoya once they strip it out into the temporary company. The rest of it corroborates what I have been saying, Hoya pushed products already under development prior to the merger.

[uccemebug]

I think the biggest change for anybody working at Pentax has been that Hoya has brought a sense of accountability to anybody that works at Pentax. And, also an understanding that you need to make a commitment to product plans, you need to make a commitment to the channel, and above all else you need to make a commitment for doing the right thing, which also results and leads to making sure you can be profitable. So, they have really forced us to be much more aggressive in our thinking and be very, very careful that if you're going to make a decision, you're going to stick with it. So, I would say what Hoya has brought to us is accountability, demand for more efficiency, and demand for doing things more quickly
than probably historically Pentax has been used to.

This, to me, is the most important part of the quoted conversation. Implementing discipline and accountability .. from everything I've learned, these are the elements that improve products, customer support (and satisfaction), profitability, and employee satisfaction. It's very telling that Hoya was able to introduce this where the independent Pentax wasn't used to it as an organization.

[jackseh]

Did Hoya make any moola out of selling Pentax?