[redrockcoulee]

Does it prove that Pentax is a third-rate brand with third-rate products no one normal out there (but only a few fanatics here) care about anyway?
If that is not the case, I'm not quite sure what you wanted to say with the statement above?

I doubt if I know the corporate name of most of the products in my home. In fact at work we are in the midst of changing the "corporate" name and a total restructing. How is it being done I do not know or care, it does not affect me, I go to work I do my job and every two weeks some money is in my credit union account. Regardless of our name we protect the country and maybe three people in Canada know and less than that care. If the army is sent in does it matter if it is Canadian Forces or Canadian Armed Forces. In the end it is the product that counts and when it was CF the soldiers still carried arms

If I go to the store to buy a Pentax lens do I care if the corporate name is Ashiah, Pentax, Hoya or Ricoh? No as it does not matter. I drove a beater Datsun when they became Nissan and the truck got neither better or worse nor did the world end for those who drove Datsuns. During the period my Saabs were made or when I owned them the corporation name changed as did the ownership (at different times I might add). I still like and drive Saabs.

I also doubt that the people involved in corporate name changes or restructing have any direct involvement in marketing, research and development or production of new Pentax products. I also doubt that he payroll , grounds, compensation, or maintanance departments do either and yet they exist. A company does more than just produce the product you want. They may even have an annual company picnic one day.

I cannot see many people getting upset if the parent company does a name change. So many large corporations have done so in the past. Xerox for example. How many name changes has Chyrsler had in the last decade or have they even? I do not know nor do I care, a truck is a truck no matter what label they stick on it and if they decide to drop the name Dodge and slap the old Fargo name on it will it make it any less tough of a truck? The last two cameras have Pentax on them and there is no evidience that the replacement for K5II will not have it as well. Such a small thing to worry about IMHO.

[Kunzite]

If I remember correctly, in the latest interview head of Ricoh Imaging said the name change is just a minor thing, and is meant for internal porposes only.

So, if in the span of several months they have nothing to show but just a minor, internal thing, they could have posponed that minor, internal thing for later, and focus to tell us more major things. Or even better — together with the announcement of all the good things, they could have said that the company name would change too. When looking at a pile of goodies and hi-end stuff with both Pentax and Ricoh's name on them on one side, and the less important news about a minor internal thing on the other side, people would not feel annoyed as they do now.

I believe you are mistaken; the forums would be full of "OMG the sky is falling! No more Pentax, that was their last camera ever, the K-mount is doomed, I'm jumping ship and you'd better follow!"
No, I don't think that associating the announcement of a new high end product with a name change would be a good idea. But, such an announcement following the name change (September 5 or whatever) should reassure people - those who want to be reassured.

Considering that Pentax is a specific and iconic product brand and a mindset, yet, with a very controversial history of mismanagement during the digital era. They should calm the controversies first.

By hiding their name changing plans? What would be that, if not a controversial management decision?

[mecrox]

Perhaps folks are getting a little paranoid? The assumption is that Pentax gets the bird and Ricoh gets the goodies. There's not really any basis for that. Yes, that may happen but then so may just about anything else. For example, Ricoh say they have plans for professional items. We don't know what that means but it could mean that in a couple of years, Pentax has a stronger line-up and presence that it does now and is clearly aiming for some professional business which they aren't really at the moment. OK, that might not include an FF DSLR but it seems pointless to become so fixated on that one item. I think one has to be a bit realistic here. First, trying to take on Canonikon with their huge networks, lens catalogues and many years of experience in the FF DSLR arena is likely a great way to throw away many tens of millions. Second, a guess, Ricoh want Ricoh to become a serious name in the camera biz. The Pentax brand is one of but not the only means they have to achieve that. It was on its last legs and went for a song after years of mismanagement. We should be grateful it is still going at all.

[monochrome]

Perhaps folks are getting a little paranoid? The assumption is that Pentax gets the bird and Ricoh gets the goodies. There's not really any basis for that. Yes, that may happen but then so may just about anything else. For example, Ricoh say they have plans for professional items. We don't know what that means but it could mean that in a couple of years, Pentax has a stronger line-up and presence that it does now and is clearly aiming for some professional business which they aren't really at the moment. OK, that might not include an FF DSLR but it seems pointless to become so fixated on that one item. I think one has to be a bit realistic here. First, trying to take on Canonikon with their huge networks, lens catalogues and many years of experience in the FF DSLR arena is likely a great way to throw away many tens of millions. Second, a guess, Ricoh want Ricoh to become a serious name in the camera biz. The Pentax brand is one of but not the only means they have to achieve that. It was on its last legs and went for a song after years of mismanagement. We should be grateful it is still going at all.

This Reply tells just about the entire story. Behind the scenes Ricoh may well be laying the foundation to address each issue. Remember, "be patient" and "intermediate term."

[GibbyTheMole]

I have been using Pentax for 20 years, and will also retire from shooting if the name is removed.

Makes sense to me. I've been a guitar player for 30 years, and I know if Fender slapped a different name decal on the headstock, I'd quit playing guitar. Just like if Chevy changed their name, I'd stop driving cars. I just pray Sears doesn't change the Kenmore appliance name to something else, because both my stove and fridge are Kenmore, and I will have to stop eating and will die from lack of food.

[Uluru]

Breaking news:
"Ricoh Imaging promises new hi-end rumours, possible new company name change".

[jatrax]

I just pray Sears doesn't change the Kenmore appliance name to something else,

Kenmore gets made by a lot of different companies depending on who gets the contract that year. So they already just slapped a name onto your fridge even though the guts may be different from year to year. Which I guess is sorta the opposite of what Ricoh is doing. They are going to keep the guts the same but slap a different name on it. Or something like that. This post made sense when I started it, now I'm just confused. Nevermind........

[jsherman999]

This Reply tells just about the entire story. Behind the scenes Ricoh may well be laying the foundation to address each issue. Remember, "be patient" and "intermediate term."

Since the Ricoh acquisition I've been pretty bullish about K-mount's place in the overall strategy and have had major doubts that they would buy the main asset (K-mount) only to have it devalued by lack of investment and support...

And I'm still optimistic, but I think it's worth pointing out that there's another possibility here, if remote - a complete re-branding could be a first step in the dissolving of both Pentax and K-mount.

Here's the logic - An open/sudden shutdown of "Pentax" now or in the near future shows that Ricoh made a misstep in it's purchase - a misstep that's easy to see, visible, noisy. Folding "Pentax" into "Ricoh" name as much as possible would mask the eventual shut-off of K-mount. Then, at some point, if Ricoh wants to exit cameras altogether, they can shut down the whole camera division. Analysts might see that as a wise move at that point, since cameras are a relatively small part of their business and the move could be seen as a smart redistribution of effort and capital in a sluggish world economy. The general public still says 'huh?' when they hear about Ricoh cameras, and they may not see the end of Ricoh as a camera brand as any great shakes.

Here's why this could be making a small amount of sense now: Everyone has been surprised by the degree of downturn the camera industry has taken - including Canon and Nikon. If Canon and Nikon didn't know it would drop so far so fast, neither did Ricoh when they made the purchase. This opens up the possibility that they might never had made the purchase in the first pace, knowing then what they know now, and may want to call it a loss and divest in the cleanest, quietest way possible. Dissolving the Pentax name first and then dissolving the mount once the name is gone is one way to do that. It just kinda... slips away. The drama is starved from the situation by the two step process, with the first step seemingly innocuous.

Do I think that's what's happening? No. No, I don't think I do. But a year and a half ago I wouldn't have even thought it was in the realm of possibility - the surprising degree of Camera Industry deflation has moved it into the 'possible' category.

.

[monochrome]

Everyone has been surprised by the degree of downturn the camera industry has taken - including Canon and Nikon.

I haven't seen CIPA numbers on Pentax's sales decline, but I do know that last April Jim Malcolm told us Pentax knew this was coming. He said that Canon and Nikon were experiencing an involuntary inventory build, i.e. they were manufacturing more cameras than they were selling, but that Pentax was not in the same position. Pentax has correctly anticipated the slowdown. At that time he said Pentax is committed to K-mount, (and Q and 645), that colored camera bodies are a way to get a larger installed base of K-mounts into the marketplace, that Q is a growth driver, that exciting things are coming and that we should be patient.

We have been frustrated for months by the news vacuum - perhaps we are now learning the reason Pentax has held back on the high-end camera.

[Uluru]

Everyone has been surprised by the degree of downturn the camera industry has taken - including Canon and Nikon.

I wasn't. I was expecting this to happen sooner or later, and trend has started some 4 years ago, when Canon and Nikon have started overproduction of their entry level DSLRs, to fire fight incoming mirrorless invasion. They have practically clogged the market with endless models issued almost daily, added lots of hi-tech stuff from upper tier DSLRs into entry level, added more megapixels too, just to deter people from buying into mirrorless. And have shot themselves in the foot.

[Uluru]

We have been frustrated for months by the news vacuum - perhaps we are now learning the reason Pentax has held back on the high-end camera.

Maybe this was exactly what Pentax was waiting for, to deliver something quite different and refreshing. And in times of crises, what rules apply to big players, does not necessarily apply to very small players, who can run in between bomb shells exploding.

[bossa]

I haven't seen CIPA numbers on Pentax's sales decline, but I do know that last April Jim Malcolm told us Pentax knew this was coming. He said that Canon and Nikon were experiencing an involuntary inventory build, i.e. they were manufacturing more cameras than they were selling, but that Pentax was not in the same position. Pentax has correctly anticipated the slowdown. At that time he said Pentax is committed to K-mount, (and Q and 645), that colored camera bodies are a way to get a larger installed base of K-mounts into the marketplace, that Q is a growth driver, that exciting things are coming and that we should be patient.

We have been frustrated for months by the news vacuum - perhaps we are now learning the reason Pentax has held back on the high-end camera.

Merging both camera divisions would be a first step to selling the camera division. I cannot see why they would just shut it down for free.

[Uluru]

Merging both camera divisions would be a first step to selling the camera division....

Or the first step in making the future operations and teamwork more efficient.

[bossa]

Or the first step in making the future operations and teamwork more efficient.

Of course

[snake]

Merging both camera divisions would be a first step to selling the camera division. I cannot see why they would just shut it down for free.

Strange strategy.