Originally posted by junyo Companies like Apple and Leica produce products that sell for far more than their FMV because they're marketed as totems to consumers that want to feel like they're part of some special exclusive club by virtue of a purchase. Yes, some users buy their products specifically for their utility but a decent percentage are trying to buy coolness or 'street cred'. Oftentimes I think people arguing that marketshare shouldn't matter to Pentax believe that Pentax can magically transform itself into a poor man's Leica, and maybe it can, with a much different marketing strategy and a billionaire owner willing to infuse large quantities of cash into the business until the marketing team has built the required brand awareness and cachet. But without that you're just a minor manufacturer of an increasingly commoditized product, which is a tough place to live. The smartest thing Olympus and Sony ever did was figuring out that busting their heads trying to out-Canikon in Canikon's backyard was a sucker's bet.
I agree to disagree with you both and Leica has started with excellent quality product before building the brand giving them the luxury to have huge margins now. And they still do high quality products.
Or for example Olympus Pen or fuji x100 - for quality products you always can have high prices. And you are absolutely right about the special club - the owners of high quality product.
I strongly beleive Pentax can do the same and it is not about markeing - it is about producing excellent quality product even despite the market pressure. This is why the market share initially is not important at all. Apple and Leica has started with new products having zero market share. Pentax has very good legacy and the reasons they are succesful now are quality products like K-5 and old primes like M 50 1.7 and the new DA 35 lenses.