[Franky2step]

Just thinking about the title of this thread, when was pricing ever NOT unilateral? When was the last time your were asked if it was okay for fuel prices, bread, milk, beer, furniture, housing or vehicle prices to rise?

[Alizarine]

For those complaining about high prices...

The DA 35 f2.4 AL, Pentax's current cheapest prime, sells now in the US for $219.95 right?
In my place, it's Php17,990 ($420.33). So cheer up, your price complaints can't be any worse than mine.

[oklahomakid93]

@oklahomakid93

Nice to see that reason has prevailed. A well put and nicely thought out reply. Kudos.

Thanks, man. You know, I actually appreciate these forums, and enjoy all sides of every argument. At times, I can react poorly to something I misunderstood, but all in all, the participants on here are invaluable in helping me learn more about my system and providing me with other sides of the many ongoing debates that can ultimately end up saving me lots of money by not acting out a knee-jerk reaction.

As I type this Willie Nelson's version of "You were always on my mind" is playing in your head, but any sense of negativity I may imply at times is never directed at anyone, nor is it meant to be personal in any way. I'm glad I joined this forum, and I definitely appreciate you taking the time to acknowledge one of my long-winded rants that actually made some sense this time around....Trust me...You'll read some of my posts and wonder why I have not sought some serious help....Well, I have, it's just at times all the therapy in the world can't save me at this point.....

Kid

[ElJamoquio]

Just thinking about the title of this thread, when was pricing ever NOT unilateral? When was the last time your were asked if it was okay for fuel prices, bread, milk, beer, furniture, housing or vehicle prices to rise?

It's 'unilateral' in that Pentax is ordering a minimum price to it's dealers, rather than allowing dealers to compete with each other on efficiency and cost.

[Blue]

Just thinking about the title of this thread, when was pricing ever NOT unilateral? When was the last time your were asked if it was okay for fuel prices, bread, milk, beer, furniture, housing or vehicle prices to rise?

I guess you haven't heard, but housing prices crashed. Plus, there is a big concern over fuel costs.

[beholder3]

[deleted]

[Alizarine]

Whoa. Why not buy somewhere abroad via the net then? The lens goes for 170 EUR here and that includes 19% tax.

That's how Pentaxians here in the Philippines mostly do it; or buy second-hand (and thanks for the suggestion! ).
I was appealing to those crying over the (now) high local (US) prices. Pentax prices here can never be better than in the US, that I'm sure of.

[eddie1960]

Whoa. Why not buy somewhere abroad via the net then?
The lens goes for 170 EUR here and that includes 19% tax.

my guess is he will still be screwed with import duties. this kind of pricing usually reflects some kind of government taxation

[northcoastgreg]

Have to try to not burn my fingers, but seems quite logical for me to make prices in balance with other continents...I live in Finland, so you might know those "new" prices are something we have at here for now.

It may seem logical or even "fair" if you look at it from a distance, without taking in account some of the relevant facts. The increase in American prices merely increases the share for the retailers, the middleman. The trend in American retail is toward a lower share for retailers (and lower prices for consumers), brought about by new technology (i.e., the internet) and competitive pressure. This revolution in retail that has brought lower prices to American consumers has not operated to the same extent in Europe and elsewhere in the world, for possibly a whole variety of reasons (probably having to do, at least in Europe, with how the retail sector is taxed and regulated). So in essence, Americans are now be asked to pay a lot more for Pentax glass because the rest of the world doesn't want to fully join the American revolution in retail. How "logical" is that?

Yes, I know, the American model of retail involves the obsolescence of B&M. So what? Is B&M really worth paying $800 more of a lens? Do you really want to pay that much more merely so you can paw your stuff before you buy it? I'd rather keep the $800 and have the item show up at my door.

[Kunzite]

I'd rather have B&M stores, and for that I don't have to pay $800.
I'd rather buy after seeing the product, instead of buying online only to find out e.g. I don't like the grip and I'd rather buy something else.
I'd rather buy new products, not ones that were returned, maybe several times, by others - for reasons unknown.
I'd rather not have your American model of retail.

Thank you very much for listening

[ElJamoquio]

For most things I'd prefer it show up at my door, even if it's the same price. I don't want to waste the time going shopping.

I understand with some things, actually feeling and using them is valuable - the 'grip', etc.

I'm not sure how you know that your B+M 'new' lens is really 'new', and how you know your internet 'new' lens isn't 'new'. For example Amazon has their warehouse deals that are the non-new-stuff. I believe Adorama and BH have the same. I've never seen a 'local' B+M store with a similar policy.

[eddie1960]

It may seem logical or even "fair" if you look at it from a distance, without taking in account some of the relevant facts. The increase in American prices merely increases the share for the retailers, the middleman. The trend in American retail is toward a lower share for retailers (and lower prices for consumers), brought about by new technology (i.e., the internet) and competitive pressure. This revolution in retail that has brought lower prices to American consumers has not operated to the same extent in Europe and elsewhere in the world, for possibly a whole variety of reasons (probably having to do, at least in Europe, with how the retail sector is taxed and regulated). So in essence, Americans are now be asked to pay a lot more for Pentax glass because the rest of the world doesn't want to fully join the American revolution in retail. How "logical" is that?

Yes, I know, the American model of retail involves the obsolescence of B&M. So what? Is B&M really worth paying $800 more of a lens? Do you really want to pay that much more merely so you can paw your stuff before you buy it? I'd rather keep the $800 and have the item show up at my door.

I think you simplify a bit. part of the issue in the US is how you tax sales. In fact you lag behind the rest of the world on this. I know of no country where you can avoid the tax by shopping across a state/province border other than the US. While I would love to avoid taxes as much as the next guy I also know that when I pay them they come back as services i demand from my government.
I think a lot of Americans also would like to be able to shop B&M for their gear (and in fact I'm certain the fact that they can shop canikon locally is one of the reasons they dominate the market). Unfortunately when you combine the tax rules and the ability to operate on a ridiculously low margin it means B&M can't compete and stay healthy so they go under left and right. While I think the price floor move may have been too extreme it already exists to some degree with the other brands. having a healthy B&M channel alongside the Web channel is important. Not everyone will buy via the web. Not everyone will buy without trying/seeing the product. Canon and Nikon and Sony all realise this and if you look the web prices are already controlled to support the dealers. Pentax is just getting in line with the industry. (I's starting to happen with all electronics from what I see). While I will buy via the web as long as I can buy locally for close to the price I would prefer to have a local guy I can shop from who can assist with issues when they arise, and who is there when i need him. Pentax US prices pretty much lacked any control prior to this and it was a race to the bottom on price. no-one wins in that scenario in the longer term
Personally I think this will take a good 24 months to finish playing out. prices will adjust, new items will come on stream. new users will enter the fold and life will go on. If you were making a purchase in the next few months though it hurts

[eddie1960]

For most things I'd prefer it show up at my door, even if it's the same price. I don't want to waste the time going shopping.

I understand with some things, actually feeling and using them is valuable - the 'grip', etc.

I'm not sure how you know that your B+M 'new' lens is really 'new', and how you know your internet 'new' lens isn't 'new'. For example Amazon has their warehouse deals that are the non-new-stuff. I believe Adorama and BH have the same. I've never seen a 'local' B+M store with a similar policy.

When I was in retail we had Open Box tags for anything open and we took 10% off the top, if it sat longer than 30 days we took another 5% and so on until it was gone. Whenever someone wanted to deal on price the first step was to present open box items.
Mind you some smaller independents aren't always that transparent, but the good ones always are.

[Kunzite]

I'm not sure how you know that your B+M 'new' lens is really 'new', and how you know your internet 'new' lens isn't 'new'. For example Amazon has their warehouse deals that are the non-new-stuff. I believe Adorama and BH have the same. I've never seen a 'local' B+M store with a similar policy.

Easy: I know and trust those people (one can't say the same when talking about a site ). Even more, we don't generally abuse the "try and return" policy.

[JPT]

I don't want to be insensitive here because I can see that some people are very upset about this. I'm pretty budget-conscious myself, so I know I would be upset. But I think it makes a lot of sense from a business point of view. Look at where their pricing has got them.

- They presumably make less on US sales compared to elsewhere. I wonder whether they make any money there at all, or just want to maintain a presence.
- Pentax seems to have got the image of being the "budget brand". There is nothing "budget" about the way the cameras are designed and put together.
- Their products are not available in stores and most customers have to buy online. You can't expect B&M stores, with their higher overheads, to stock products if you let online retailers undercut them heavily on price.
- It looks like they price their products high to start with to compensate for the inevitable drop in price that will follow. This means that most reviews say they are good products but offer questionable value. Despite this, they end up selling for less anyway, but those reviews are rarely updated to reflect the actual selling prices.
- The knowledge that a product will be continually discounted throughout its life can act as a discouragement to purchase. Even now, I'm seeing comments from forum members who are looking for one more price drop on the K-5. That's a 18 month old camera! The old policy encouraged customers to delay.
- Pentax's market share in the US is still dreadful compared to other countries. For me, this is the killer.

So it looks to me like Pentax USA has presided over a shocking destruction of brand value over the years and Ricoh was right to put a stop to it. Let's hope the new policy gets them into more stores, allows them to realign their list prices (downwards) and leads to a better and wider range of products for all of us.