Ricoh to buy Pentax camera business from Hoya

MSM · 07-01-2011, 08:00 PM

The real question is: "Does Ricoh control jsherman's mind? "

Blue · 07-01-2011, 08:02 PM

Originally posted by johnmflores

To the doomsayers ... If Ricoh's intent is not to use the Pentax name and not to continue developing K-mount dSLRs, then what exactly did they pay $120 million for? The right to make Ricoh Optios?

Its not so much people being doom sayers. If Ricoh new what the hell they were doing, they wouldn't have lost their slr line to begin with. Plus, exactly what have they done lately that anyone can name without googling for an hour.

Originally posted by sjwaldron

It specifically says in the Ricoh release "Furthermore, with the Acquisition, both companies will cooperate with each other to increase the value of the PENTAX brand."

The Pentax brand is the name itself. "NewCo" is most likely legal speak they use in press releases.

It didn't say jack about the use of the name after Oct 1. I hope they use the Pentax name. It would have been nice if Sony would have been able to get use of the Minolta name as well but at least the Sony name was already renowned.

**Fontan** · 07-01-2011, 08:05 PM

K mount will live on, but not Pentax. I see it as Ricoh paying 120 mil for the ownership of 3 mounts.

adr1an · 07-01-2011, 08:07 PM

Originally posted by Fontan

K mount will live on, but not Pentax. I see it as Ricoh paying 120 mil for the ownership of 3 mounts.

Hmm - thats not what the statements from Hoya says at all... Maybe have a read up on them and you might 'see' different...

Quote:

No operational changes of PENTAX Imaging System Business are anticipated for the time being by making this agreement. All employees will be transferred to the new company accordingly. Also, all current products will continue to be sold with the PENTAX brand name under current operations.

PENTAX, under the guidance of RICOH, will continue with our best effort to grow and evolve our business and partnerships and deliver quality products and services designed for a high level of customer satisfaction.

Again, we appreciate your continued support of PENTAX.

Blue · 07-01-2011, 08:09 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by ogl

Only in your mind. Pentax is below Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus and Panasonic.

Maybe you should look at this before spouting off. Pentax had closed the gap from 2008.

Canon falls off a cliff as Nikon grabs the #1 market share in DSLRs/iLCs in Japan in H1:2010 [revisited] - 1001 Noisy Cameras

Blue · 07-01-2011, 08:12 PM

Originally posted by adr1an

Hmm - thats not what the statements from Hoya says at all... Maybe have a read up on them and you might 'see' different...

That is what I have pointed out in this thread and a couple of others. It is unclear as to what the name is going to be. The split off company that will be transferred to Ricoh is clearly not being called "Pentax" and the name "NewCo" is being used. It clearly sounds like a temporary name but I would think that Pentax would be in it some how if Ricoh was going to be using it past Oct 1.

adr1an · 07-01-2011, 08:18 PM

Originally posted by Blue

That is what I have pointed out in this thread and a couple of others. It is unclear as to what the name is going to be. The split off company that will be transferred to Ricoh is clearly not being called "Pentax" and the name "NewCo" is being used. It clearly sounds like a temporary name but I would think that Pentax would be in it some how if Ricoh was going to be using it past Oct 1.

Agreed... The NewCo stuff is pretty 'standard' in an "Asset Transfer".

Pentax Imaging was sort of buried in the Pentax Corp... in order for Hoya to spin out the Pentax Imaging assets and IP, they had to establish a new company, and transfer the assets to that entity, and sell THAT to Ricoh. The "NewCo" stuff is just a by-product of transfering assets out of one corporation, into a temporary entity for sale, to then absorb it into the new owners.

Hoya did this because they wanted to keep 'everything else' that Pentax had, EXCEPT their Imaging Business (which they have said from the outset they weren't particularly interested in, the purchase seems to have been all about getting access to the Medical/Surgical Optics arm....)

Also - People seem to have confused the Corporation Name "Pentax" with the Brand Name "Pentax". The statement from Hoya regarding NewCo is entirely to do with the Corporation Name and not the Brand Name .

There is NO reason that "Ricoh Corporation" can't make "Pentax Cameras" and sell "Pentax".... they just wont be sold by "Pentax Corporation" anymore...

So I personally don't put much 'concern' behind the whole "NewCo" affair...

johnmflores · 07-01-2011, 08:28 PM

Originally posted by Blue

Its not so much people being doom sayers. If Ricoh new what the hell they were doing, they wouldn't have lost their slr line to begin with. Plus, exactly what have they done lately that anyone can name without googling for an hour.

If Ricoh knew what the hell they were doing with SLRs then they wouldn't have needed to buy Pentax. Ricoh bought Pentax precisely because they didn't know what they were doing. That, and Nikon wasn't for sale.

So if Ricoh buys Pentax for their DSLR knowhow and then ignores it, it's $120 mil wasted. But if they invest in the brand and put some marketing dollars behind it, it could be good. Very good.

Seriously, could there be a better fate for Pentax than to be bought by a company with a stated desire to get more involved with ILCs but precious little institutional knowledge themselves? The only overlap is the GXR and Q.

Just imagine if they had been bought by Nikon or Canon...

johnmflores · 07-01-2011, 08:30 PM

Originally posted by Blue

That is what I have pointed out in this thread and a couple of others. It is unclear as to what the name is going to be. The split off company that will be transferred to Ricoh is clearly not being called "Pentax" and the name "NewCo" is being used. It clearly sounds like a temporary name but I would think that Pentax would be in it some how if Ricoh was going to be using it past Oct 1.

Developing and launching a new brand will cost Ricoh tens of millions on top of the $120 they just spent. Makes no sense.

Blue · 07-01-2011, 08:32 PM

Originally posted by adr1an

Agreed... The NewCo stuff is pretty 'standard' in an "Asset Transfer".

Pentax Imaging was sort of buried in the Pentax Corp... in order for Hoya to spin out the Pentax Imaging assets and IP, they had to establish a new company, and transfer the assets to that entity, and sell THAT to Ricoh. The "NewCo" stuff is just a by-product of transfering assets out of one corporation, into a temporary entity for sale, to then absorb it into the new owners.

Hoya did this because they wanted to keep 'everything else' that Pentax had, EXCEPT their Imaging Business (which they have said from the outset they weren't particularly interested in, the purchase seems to have been all about getting access to the Medical/Surgical Optics arm....)

Also - People seem to have confused the Corporation Name "Pentax" with the Brand Name "Pentax". The statement from Hoya regarding NewCo is entirely to do with the Corporation Name and not the Brand Name .

There is NO reason that "Ricoh Corporation" can't make "Pentax Cameras" and sell "Pentax".... they just wont be sold by "Pentax Corporation" anymore...

So I personally don't put much 'concern' behind the whole "NewCo" affair...

I wasn't putting much into an obvious temporary name. There is nothing clear cut in future branding by Ricoh is my point. Once it is sold, Hoya won't have much say in K-mount survival unless they become a 3rd party lens maker.

"If" Pentax is kept as a brand by both companies that will be rather unique. And if Ricoh bastardizes the 35mm line and kills the K-mount, what will be the point? If Ricoh does that, they can kiss-my-a$$. That's all I'm saying. I'll just be moving on.

Edit: Hoya is going through a sort of de-merger. So what does that mean when Ricoh absorbs that "NewCo"? We really don't know, yet. I am surprised Ricoh has enough money to buy a cup of coffee.

Blue · 07-01-2011, 08:32 PM

Originally posted by johnmflores

Developing and launching a new brand will cost Ricoh tens of millions on top of the $120 they just spent. Makes no sense.

You fail to comprehend that Ricoh spent the past 2 decades killing the shit of the Ricoh name as an slr. Ricoh is going to have to demonstrate they can do something which the haven't really done since the '80s. Pentax screwed the pooch when the let themselves get taken over by the Hoya boys which was obviously the old grab and part out strategy typical of corporate raiders.

joe.penn · 07-01-2011, 08:39 PM

Originally posted by johnmflores

Developing and launching a new brand will cost Ricoh tens of millions on top of the $120 they just spent. Makes no sense.

The cost of doing business - just hope they put the tens-of-millions (if not more) into developing and launching, if not, that would actually make no sense...

---

**Fontan** · 07-01-2011, 08:54 PM

Guys, the death march has started. Ricoh will mess it all up, as they have done to themselves.

johnmflores · 07-01-2011, 09:01 PM

Originally posted by Blue

You fail to comprehend that Ricoh spent the past 2 decades killing the shit of the Ricoh name as an slr. Ricoh is going to have to demonstrate they can do something which the haven't really done since the '80s.

So they stopped making SLRs 20 years ago because they weren't making money and you make it sound like an act of willful malice.

And as I've said, that's precisely why they bought Pentax - to give them the capabilities to do something they haven't really done since the 80s.

Sure this deal can go horribly wrong if Ricoh mismanages it. But they've managed to carve out a nice niche for themselves in the document imaging business, acquiring other companies along the way - Lanier, Gestetner, IKON, etc... - and letting them maintain their corporate identities post acquisition.

The biggest risk that I see is their marketing and distribution. Setting up and maintaining a business-to-business sales and marketing organization is fundamentally different than setting up and maintaining a business-to-consumer organization. That is still a gap in Ricoh's DNA, and one that needs to be filled in order for their push into consumer markets to work.

Still, there's a lot of upside potential here.

johnmflores · 07-01-2011, 09:03 PM

Originally posted by joe.penn

The cost of doing business - just hope they put the tens-of-millions (if not more) into developing and launching, if not, that would actually make no sense...

Yes, branding is a cost of doing business. My point is, why try to build a new one when you're buying a perfectly good one? Spend that money on product development and marketing instead. It's not a bottomless well.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax Lens Compatibility with Ricoh camera?	Chairman_Xi	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	03-08-2011 07:56 PM
Hoya Sells Pentax-Brand Survey Instrument Business	Biro	Pentax News and Rumors	18	12-12-2009 02:30 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
If Hoya still buys Pentax and quits camera business..	RiceHigh	Pentax News and Rumors	51	05-17-2007 07:43 AM

07-01-2011, 08:00 PM	#331
MSM Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Alabama Photos: Gallery Posts: 994	The real question is: "Does Ricoh control jsherman's mind? "

07-01-2011, 08:02 PM	#332
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by johnmflores To the doomsayers ... If Ricoh's intent is not to use the Pentax name and not to continue developing K-mount dSLRs, then what exactly did they pay $120 million for? The right to make Ricoh Optios? Its not so much people being doom sayers. If Ricoh new what the hell they were doing, they wouldn't have lost their slr line to begin with. Plus, exactly what have they done lately that anyone can name without googling for an hour. Originally posted by sjwaldron It specifically says in the Ricoh release "Furthermore, with the Acquisition, both companies will cooperate with each other to increase the value of the PENTAX brand." The Pentax brand is the name itself. "NewCo" is most likely legal speak they use in press releases. It didn't say jack about the use of the name after Oct 1. I hope they use the Pentax name. It would have been nice if Sony would have been able to get use of the Minolta name as well but at least the Sony name was already renowned.

07-01-2011, 08:05 PM	#333
Fontan Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: 5th floor Posts: 1,610	K mount will live on, but not Pentax. I see it as Ricoh paying 120 mil for the ownership of 3 mounts.

07-01-2011, 08:07 PM	#334
adr1an Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Canberra Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 739	Originally posted by Fontan K mount will live on, but not Pentax. I see it as Ricoh paying 120 mil for the ownership of 3 mounts. Hmm - thats not what the statements from Hoya says at all... Maybe have a read up on them and you might 'see' different... Quote: No operational changes of PENTAX Imaging System Business are anticipated for the time being by making this agreement. All employees will be transferred to the new company accordingly. Also, all current products will continue to be sold with the PENTAX brand name under current operations. PENTAX, under the guidance of RICOH, will continue with our best effort to grow and evolve our business and partnerships and deliver quality products and services designed for a high level of customer satisfaction. Again, we appreciate your continued support of PENTAX.

07-01-2011, 08:09 PM - 1 Like	#335
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by ogl Only in your mind. Pentax is below Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus and Panasonic. Maybe you should look at this before spouting off. Pentax had closed the gap from 2008. Canon falls off a cliff as Nikon grabs the #1 market share in DSLRs/iLCs in Japan in H1:2010 [revisited] - 1001 Noisy Cameras

07-01-2011, 08:12 PM	#336
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by adr1an Hmm - thats not what the statements from Hoya says at all... Maybe have a read up on them and you might 'see' different... That is what I have pointed out in this thread and a couple of others. It is unclear as to what the name is going to be. The split off company that will be transferred to Ricoh is clearly not being called "Pentax" and the name "NewCo" is being used. It clearly sounds like a temporary name but I would think that Pentax would be in it some how if Ricoh was going to be using it past Oct 1.

07-01-2011, 08:18 PM	#337
adr1an Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Canberra Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 739	Originally posted by Blue That is what I have pointed out in this thread and a couple of others. It is unclear as to what the name is going to be. The split off company that will be transferred to Ricoh is clearly not being called "Pentax" and the name "NewCo" is being used. It clearly sounds like a temporary name but I would think that Pentax would be in it some how if Ricoh was going to be using it past Oct 1. Agreed... The NewCo stuff is pretty 'standard' in an "Asset Transfer". Pentax Imaging was sort of buried in the Pentax Corp... in order for Hoya to spin out the Pentax Imaging assets and IP, they had to establish a new company, and transfer the assets to that entity, and sell THAT to Ricoh. The "NewCo" stuff is just a by-product of transfering assets out of one corporation, into a temporary entity for sale, to then absorb it into the new owners. Hoya did this because they wanted to keep 'everything else' that Pentax had, EXCEPT their Imaging Business (which they have said from the outset they weren't particularly interested in, the purchase seems to have been all about getting access to the Medical/Surgical Optics arm....) Also - People seem to have confused the Corporation Name "Pentax" with the Brand Name "Pentax". The statement from Hoya regarding NewCo is entirely to do with the Corporation Name and not the Brand Name . There is NO reason that "Ricoh Corporation" can't make "Pentax Cameras" and sell "Pentax".... they just wont be sold by "Pentax Corporation" anymore... So I personally don't put much 'concern' behind the whole "NewCo" affair...

07-01-2011, 08:28 PM	#338
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by Blue Its not so much people being doom sayers. If Ricoh new what the hell they were doing, they wouldn't have lost their slr line to begin with. Plus, exactly what have they done lately that anyone can name without googling for an hour. If Ricoh knew what the hell they were doing with SLRs then they wouldn't have needed to buy Pentax. Ricoh bought Pentax precisely because they didn't know what they were doing. That, and Nikon wasn't for sale. So if Ricoh buys Pentax for their DSLR knowhow and then ignores it, it's $120 mil wasted. But if they invest in the brand and put some marketing dollars behind it, it could be good. Very good. Seriously, could there be a better fate for Pentax than to be bought by a company with a stated desire to get more involved with ILCs but precious little institutional knowledge themselves? The only overlap is the GXR and Q. Just imagine if they had been bought by Nikon or Canon...

07-01-2011, 08:30 PM	#339
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by Blue That is what I have pointed out in this thread and a couple of others. It is unclear as to what the name is going to be. The split off company that will be transferred to Ricoh is clearly not being called "Pentax" and the name "NewCo" is being used. It clearly sounds like a temporary name but I would think that Pentax would be in it some how if Ricoh was going to be using it past Oct 1. Developing and launching a new brand will cost Ricoh tens of millions on top of the $120 they just spent. Makes no sense.

07-01-2011, 08:32 PM	#340
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by adr1an Agreed... The NewCo stuff is pretty 'standard' in an "Asset Transfer". Pentax Imaging was sort of buried in the Pentax Corp... in order for Hoya to spin out the Pentax Imaging assets and IP, they had to establish a new company, and transfer the assets to that entity, and sell THAT to Ricoh. The "NewCo" stuff is just a by-product of transfering assets out of one corporation, into a temporary entity for sale, to then absorb it into the new owners. Hoya did this because they wanted to keep 'everything else' that Pentax had, EXCEPT their Imaging Business (which they have said from the outset they weren't particularly interested in, the purchase seems to have been all about getting access to the Medical/Surgical Optics arm....) Also - People seem to have confused the Corporation Name "Pentax" with the Brand Name "Pentax". The statement from Hoya regarding NewCo is entirely to do with the Corporation Name and not the Brand Name . There is NO reason that "Ricoh Corporation" can't make "Pentax Cameras" and sell "Pentax".... they just wont be sold by "Pentax Corporation" anymore... So I personally don't put much 'concern' behind the whole "NewCo" affair... I wasn't putting much into an obvious temporary name. There is nothing clear cut in future branding by Ricoh is my point. Once it is sold, Hoya won't have much say in K-mount survival unless they become a 3rd party lens maker. "If" Pentax is kept as a brand by both companies that will be rather unique. And if Ricoh bastardizes the 35mm line and kills the K-mount, what will be the point? If Ricoh does that, they can kiss-my-a$$. That's all I'm saying. I'll just be moving on. Edit: Hoya is going through a sort of de-merger. So what does that mean when Ricoh absorbs that "NewCo"? We really don't know, yet. I am surprised Ricoh has enough money to buy a cup of coffee.

07-01-2011, 08:32 PM	#341
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by johnmflores Developing and launching a new brand will cost Ricoh tens of millions on top of the $120 they just spent. Makes no sense. You fail to comprehend that Ricoh spent the past 2 decades killing the shit of the Ricoh name as an slr. Ricoh is going to have to demonstrate they can do something which the haven't really done since the '80s. Pentax screwed the pooch when the let themselves get taken over by the Hoya boys which was obviously the old grab and part out strategy typical of corporate raiders.

07-01-2011, 08:39 PM	#342
joe.penn Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,902	Originally posted by johnmflores Developing and launching a new brand will cost Ricoh tens of millions on top of the $120 they just spent. Makes no sense. The cost of doing business - just hope they put the tens-of-millions (if not more) into developing and launching, if not, that would actually make no sense... ---

07-01-2011, 08:54 PM	#343
Fontan Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: 5th floor Posts: 1,610	Guys, the death march has started. Ricoh will mess it all up, as they have done to themselves.

07-01-2011, 09:01 PM	#344
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by Blue You fail to comprehend that Ricoh spent the past 2 decades killing the shit of the Ricoh name as an slr. Ricoh is going to have to demonstrate they can do something which the haven't really done since the '80s. So they stopped making SLRs 20 years ago because they weren't making money and you make it sound like an act of willful malice. And as I've said, that's precisely why they bought Pentax - to give them the capabilities to do something they haven't really done since the 80s. Sure this deal can go horribly wrong if Ricoh mismanages it. But they've managed to carve out a nice niche for themselves in the document imaging business, acquiring other companies along the way - Lanier, Gestetner, IKON, etc... - and letting them maintain their corporate identities post acquisition. The biggest risk that I see is their marketing and distribution. Setting up and maintaining a business-to-business sales and marketing organization is fundamentally different than setting up and maintaining a business-to-consumer organization. That is still a gap in Ricoh's DNA, and one that needs to be filled in order for their push into consumer markets to work. Still, there's a lot of upside potential here.

07-01-2011, 09:03 PM	#345
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by joe.penn The cost of doing business - just hope they put the tens-of-millions (if not more) into developing and launching, if not, that would actually make no sense... Yes, branding is a cost of doing business. My point is, why try to build a new one when you're buying a perfectly good one? Spend that money on product development and marketing instead. It's not a bottomless well.