Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-10-2012, 12:07 PM   #676
Junior Member




Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Rhode Island, USA
Posts: 27
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
I'm confused - the MSRP was originally defined by Pentax when the lens was first introduced. I'm not sure if the MSRP has changed ever since then.
My point exactly. Pentax hasn't put the prices up, they've just stopped retailers discounting them! The net result is that the consumer pays more, but it is an important distinction for everyone saying "what do Pentax think they're doing putting the prices up...".

04-10-2012, 12:15 PM   #677
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,354
I don't think this distinction is meaningful at all, at least in terms of how it affects consumers. At the end of the day, I don't even see how it can now be considered a manufacturer's recommended selling price, when it is being required rather than recommended. The bottom line is that Pentax is saying "people now have no choice to but to pay this price."
04-10-2012, 12:20 PM   #678
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,264
QuoteOriginally posted by chiefsilverback Quote
My point exactly. Pentax hasn't put the prices up, they've just stopped retailers discounting them! The net result is that the consumer pays more, but it is an important distinction for everyone saying "what do Pentax think they're doing putting the prices up...".
more to the point Pentax is not making additional moneys from this (at least in the short term), and in fact reduced volume may cost them money in the short term.....but if it brings them a broader dealer network and improves the brand image in the longer term it is a win for them. Funnily enough as new people come to the brand the higher prices on the better lenses may make the brand more appealing because they will equate it more with the "quality" of the big brands who already are largely priced like this. If it also means less problems in other markets where they may well be stronger than the US then it adds a benefit there as well. I do however think that maintaining these prices will mean they need to reevaluate the warranty terms. Lenses should be 5 years. In general most lenses do not fail so the additional cost would be little compared to the image it presents. For that matter bumping bodies to 2 years would be a good thing as well (up here lenses and bodies come with 2 years in any case)
04-10-2012, 12:21 PM   #679
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,264
QuoteOriginally posted by fuent104 Quote
I don't think this distinction is meaningful at all, at least in terms of how it affects consumers. At the end of the day, I don't even see how it can now be considered a manufacturer's recommended selling price, when it is being required rather than recommended. The bottom line is that Pentax is saying "people now have no choice to but to pay this price."
which is pretty much what the story is at Nikon as well. they have a strictly controlled pricing policy

04-10-2012, 12:25 PM   #680
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 73
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
Preferably virgin offerings, if nothing else

Heh heh heh....Hopefully, at least at a sizable discount....
04-10-2012, 12:30 PM   #681
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,859
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
more to the point Pentax is not making additional moneys from this (at least in the short term), and in fact reduced volume may cost them money in the short term.....but if it brings them a broader dealer network and improves the brand image in the longer term it is a win for them. Funnily enough as new people come to the brand the higher prices on the better lenses may make the brand more appealing because they will equate it more with the "quality" of the big brands who already are largely priced like this.
I disagree. The big brands have value lines, pro lines, and in-between. Pentax does not.

Higher prices deters new customers. Period. It will do nothing to stimulate a broader dealer network because that is failing on other criteria. B&M stores dropped Pentax because it was small and they are competing with online. Fewer customers due to high prices means less B&M involvement.

No, this is all about online, cross-border pricing. It's about a few big shops dominating the supply chain and some (not all) engaging in grey market activity.

Quality is determined more by sites like this one and DP Review (which can make or break a product) than some abstraction about price = quality.
04-10-2012, 12:33 PM   #682
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,210
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
I'm confused - the MSRP was originally defined by Pentax when the lens was first introduced. I'm not sure if the MSRP has changed ever since then.

It was the retailers that were selling the lenses are prices way below MSRP that defined the current pricing we are used to. What I am hoping for is Pentax to reduce the MSRP of their lenses to more appropriate levels - this would maintain their requirement of retailers while keeping the interests of consumers in mind.

If they don't, then no one is going to buy another DA*60-250 or DA*50-135.
MSRP have been revised. Look at the FA 50/1.4, FA 43/1.9, FA 77/1.8 for comparison. It has also changed for lenses like the DA* 300/4. Most people don't pay msrp for items. Only collectors with more money than they know what to do with will pay more than the MSRP for items. I agree that setting it too high is counter productive, but the MSRP were quite high to begin with.

QuoteOriginally posted by chiefsilverback Quote
My point exactly. Pentax hasn't put the prices up, they've just stopped retailers discounting them! The net result is that the consumer pays more, but it is an important distinction for everyone saying "what do Pentax think they're doing putting the prices up...".
Selling below the MSRP isn't necessarily discounting them. However, they are forcing retailers to sell close to the msrp.
04-10-2012, 12:38 PM   #683
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Fewer customers due to high prices means less B&M involvement.
I agree with everything except this.

When it comes to a salesman recommending a Pentax vs. a canon... Right now the 7D + 17-55 is ~$2600.

The K5 and the 16-50 is ~2600.

If the comission on the sale is much higher for the Pentax, the Pentax will get mentioned much more frequently than in the past... when it was never mentioned.

04-10-2012, 12:40 PM   #684
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,210
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
more to the point Pentax is not making additional moneys from this (at least in the short term), and in fact reduced volume may cost them money in the short term.....but if it brings them a broader dealer network and improves the brand image in the longer term it is a win for them. Funnily enough as new people come to the brand the higher prices on the better lenses may make the brand more appealing because they will equate it more with the "quality" of the big brands who already are largely priced like this. If it also means less problems in other markets where they may well be stronger than the US then it adds a benefit there as well. I do however think that maintaining these prices will mean they need to reevaluate the warranty terms. Lenses should be 5 years. In general most lenses do not fail so the additional cost would be little compared to the image it presents. For that matter bumping bodies to 2 years would be a good thing as well (up here lenses and bodies come with 2 years in any case)
I don't see how this is going to truly help their retailer network any. The items just became more expensive for consumers and with the premium DA* and LTD series, the warranties are sub-standard in the industry. Who in their right mind will drop $1500 for a DA* 16-50/2.8 with a 1 year warranty, especially given the reputation of the SDM and notorious lack of support in the U.S.A. regarding both warranty work and cash repairs. What small B&M wants to get in the middle of this?
04-10-2012, 12:52 PM   #685
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,264
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
I don't see how this is going to truly help their retailer network any. The items just became more expensive for consumers and with the premium DA* and LTD series, the warranties are sub-standard in the industry. Who in their right mind will drop $1500 for a DA* 16-50/2.8 with a 1 year warranty, especially given the reputation of the SDM and notorious lack of support in the U.S.A. regarding both warranty work and cash repairs. What small B&M wants to get in the middle of this?
I agree and you have to hope that part of the plan is addressing those issues as well (i did say i thought warranties need to change at this price. Nikon is 5 years, Canon OTOH is still a 1 year warranty. Sony is also 1 year even on their very pricey zeiss line. - and Sony warranty service on lenses is apparently less than stellar)
04-10-2012, 12:53 PM   #686
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 10
I just checked my "wish list". Lenses are the most expensive part of photography and my K-5 with three Pentax lenses just went out of my reach.
04-10-2012, 01:00 PM   #687
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 10
Canon 7d
04-10-2012, 01:02 PM   #688
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by Toolmaker Quote
Canon 7d
What about it?
04-10-2012, 01:07 PM   #689
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,264
QuoteOriginally posted by Toolmaker Quote
Canon 7d
with equivalent lenses it costs as much as a K5 (there is no equivalent of course for the LTD series FA or DA they are unique)
04-10-2012, 01:15 PM   #690
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Niagara
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 792
Okay, I am convinced now after seeing ME quoted 3 times that there are at least 3 Pentaxians(assumed) that are negative nellies to say the least. I might also add that bitching and moaning won't get Ricoh to reverse this course of "unilateral pricing". Suck it up boys.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
amazon, mean, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, policy, price
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax Q pricing excanonfd Pentax Q 74 09-26-2011 05:48 PM
Pentax SMC 200mm A* f2.8 Pricing advice LennyBloke Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 09-08-2011 06:56 AM
Pentax K7 Pricing A.M.92 Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 01-22-2011 10:19 AM
Policy on K5 sensors? hut234 Ask B&H Photo! 7 12-18-2010 05:21 AM
USA Pricing vs Canada Pricing Babbs Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 11-18-2010 05:27 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:49 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top