Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-15-2012, 01:50 PM   #211
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Nevada, USA
Posts: 486
QuoteOriginally posted by jmg257 Quote

True. Though it wouldn't & shouldn't relieve Ned of responsibility for what he says he writes there.
Likewise, even if Ned implemented UPP all on his own it would not and should not relieve Pentax Ricoh of responsibility for the actions of one of its agents.

If Pentax Ricoh knew what PRIAC (USA) was up to, they are responsible for letting it happen. If they didn't (and that's as likely as the moon being made of green cheese in my view), they are still responsible. PRIAC operates only with the authority and direction of Pentax Ricoh in Japan.

This squabble over lied/not lied is masking two important questions that (in contrast to the lied question) would actually be beneficial to answer.

1) Has the UPP changed? As far as I can tell B&H and Amazon are the only ones that dropped prices. If UPP has not changed, it will be interesting to see if B&H and Amazon get more lenses to sell. If UPP has not changed, are the rest of the dealers just asleep at the wheel?

2) Pentax enthusiasts were screwed by how UPP was done. Pentax dealers were screwed. The Pentax brand was screwed. Can Pentax recover from this and step up their business execution sufficently to keep selling product? In contrast to product design and engineering, Pentax business accumen seems remarkably inept.

06-15-2012, 04:55 PM   #212
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,924
QuoteOriginally posted by jmg257 Quote
Though it wouldn't & shouldn't relieve Ned of responsibility for what he says he writes there.
Error: You attribute "Ned's" postings to an independence of Pentax corporate.

I assign no responsibility to "Ned" because he, or the person who wrote it, or the person who made "Ned write" it, are not responsible for this error on a personal level.

It is merely a comment made by a Pentax Executive to put a spin on what occurred.

You don't blame a guy and call him a liar if he had a figurative gun put to his head (Or was that analogy too militaristic? Someone, jump all over me!). But you don't know that, however, given the way corporations spin things as a matter of daily biz, this seems most likely. Head office rarely, if ever, takes the fall.

"Ned", the rogue trader. Has a ring to it.

That's an awesomely ironic ending in Robocop 2.
06-15-2012, 06:40 PM   #213
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
is people are thinking that if "Ned" is proven to have lied, somehow Ricoh/Pentax did not,
who said that, or who do you believe is thinking that? I could be wrong, but I feel like the people here wouldn't believe that at all.
06-15-2012, 11:22 PM   #214
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,473
Of course nobody said that. There were several points being made:
1. Ned is definitely not a liar, he seems to me an honest and open person. For example, he never thought he should hide his liking for a competitor's product.
2. Unless proven otherwise, that statement is not a lie. That statement, being as vague as it is, is afaik the only information we have on the subject.
3. Ned posted that statement on his personal blog, of his free will; I do not believe Ricoh orders him to keep a personal blog - in fact I find such a thought ridiculous.
3.b. Why Ricoh and not Pentax Ricoh Imaging Company?
4. Some people claimed (without any proof/base!) that Ned posted, of his own free will, a lie on his personal blog. We tried to explain said people that's very much equivalent to "Ned lied", but it's pointless - they would rather watch Robocop than listen to any reasonable, logical explanation.

06-17-2012, 05:09 AM   #215
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,247
Just to make it perfectly clear:
I never called Ned Bunnell a liar.
I have never "desperately tried to make Ned Bunell appear to be a liar" (which would first require me to buy Aristophanes' "Evil Ricoh"-fantasy).
I believe Ned Bunnell told the truth when he said that Ricoh had nothing to do with the Pentax USA UPP.

Aristophanes, I would appreciated if you stopped putting words into my mouth, as in the following.
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
The hyperbole now used is so far from the reality of what occurred is nothing more than a desperate attempt to make "Ned" a liar.
You must acknowledge the difference between "calling someone a liar" and "telling someone else, that if they claim 'A', while another person claims 'not A' then they are implying that the other person lies". You may disagree with the logic (at your own peril) but you cannot morph my statements into something they have never been.

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
I am not the one who said "Corporations cannot speak", whereas the US Supreme Court says otherwise. Class A wrong.
My statement was "Corporations cannot speak, without a person speaking". This is different to " "Corporations cannot speak". Hence your conclusion "Class A wrong" is wrong. You killed a strawman (again).

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
And if civil criminality won't do, then let's pull up just short of Godwin's Law and make it wartime criminality to REALLY make the point.
Oh, so it is wrong to create examples which are based on "life vs death" scenarios? Curiously, you write in another post:
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
You don't blame a guy and call him a liar if he had a figurative gun put to his head (Or was that analogy too militaristic? Someone, jump all over me!).
Is it the "Someone, jump all over me!" that makes it not "shameful and reprehensible"? Are you applying the same standards to others and yourself?

Most importantly, however, your example is completely out of line. Ned's life was not at stake. According to your "Evil Ricoh"-fantasy, Ned was just asked to make a statement. At most, he would have lost his job (and probably sued the cr*p out of Ricoh in return). This was no "gun pointed to one's head" situation at all. In the latter situation, he would have no responsibility for anything he says. Even if he spoke the untruth, he'd not be lying. As you know, using an analogy, forced confessions can not be used in court.

However, as president of Pentax USA, you do not have to fear for your life, hence you are responsible for what you are doing.
06-18-2012, 04:56 PM   #216
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Ohio (formerly SF Bay Area)
Posts: 1,491
I'm lying right now in this post.
06-18-2012, 04:57 PM   #217
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,213
QuoteOriginally posted by Quicksand Quote
I'm lying right now in this post.
Are you having a Roman style dinner and wine?
06-18-2012, 05:56 PM   #218
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,924
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
My statement was "Corporations cannot speak, without a person speaking". This is different to " "Corporations cannot speak". Hence your conclusion "Class A wrong" is wrong. You killed a strawman (again).
Not true. Having worked for a $9 billion corporation for 14 years and working in a corporate environment buying and selling debt (bonds), this is not true at all. You have no clue.

I read hundreds of legal and financial documents where the legal "author" is the brand. That's the whole point of boilerplate text, mission statements, press releases, product brochures, prospectus', disclosure statements.

I do this for a living.

You have a major problem not being able to differentiate between the corporation and corporate flunky. You are confusing a blog as coming from someone separate than the corporate word and identity. This is where you are fundamentally wrong. So wrong it's becoming embarrassing (for you).

'Ned" has no personal responsibility for what he says about Pentax unless he violates a law and his fiduciary responsibilities (breaks his contract). This is not one of those cases, not by a long shot, despite you trying to ramp up the near-Godwin;s Law military criminality angle as an act of desperation. Your Bridge on the River Kwai moment.

Pentax has 100% of the liability for what "Ned" says about anything Pentax. No one else.

You're misunderstanding on this is complete.


Last edited by Bramela; 06-18-2012 at 10:56 PM.
06-18-2012, 05:58 PM   #219
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
B&H seem to be back at old inflated prices now for DA* and DA lenses
06-18-2012, 06:10 PM   #220
Pentaxian
seventysixersfan's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 1,711
Yep. Not sure why that happened. Adorama never followed B&H in adopting the lower prices. Maybe B&H got some reprimand from Pentax and had to "get in line" with other retailers.
06-18-2012, 06:13 PM   #221
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 571
QuoteOriginally posted by seventysixersfan Quote
Yep. Not sure why that happened. Adorama never followed B&H in adopting the lower prices. Maybe B&H got some reprimand from Pentax and had to "get in line" with other retailers.

Gosh, I hope not. I was about to buy a 60-250. That is sure not going to happen at the inflated price.
06-18-2012, 06:53 PM   #222
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Utah
Posts: 345
Indeed...B&H is back up. Amazon is still holding steady on the 35mm (for now). Glad I ordered during the dip.
06-18-2012, 06:56 PM   #223
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 5,005
They sold so many they went back to "low stock" mode as someone theorized? Amazon actually tells you how many are in-stock (if it is low).
06-18-2012, 08:16 PM   #224
Junior Member




Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 26
Amazon is at the lower prices still - though most of their stock is showing as low (4-5 left). The other sellers they list seem to be at the higher prices, though there are execeptions (like Emmy photo). Curious to know what is going on.
06-18-2012, 09:52 PM   #225
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
Boy, UPP is awesome. I for one am glad the policy was implemented so well.
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!
40mm, pentax news, pentax rumors, price
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nature Raspberries & Cream & Drops eaglem Post Your Photos! 8 03-05-2012 03:49 PM
Pentax Webstore Drops Price on M42 to K-mount Adapter NiftyFifty Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 23 12-08-2011 01:22 AM
What to Do if K-7 Price Really Drops ;-( wll Pentax DSLR Discussion 30 09-16-2010 02:47 PM
K7 price drops in Oz ozlizard Pentax DSLR Discussion 10 09-02-2009 04:03 AM
WooWhoo -- Pentax Canada Price Drops :D :D and one price increase Jack Simpson Pentax News and Rumors 45 05-06-2009 10:10 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:49 PM. | 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