[monochrome]

There is sense in this because the japanese economy is in recession. So if they don't sell enough k-mount cameras then it may put them off for a while. The main issue I see if that a new FF camera regardless of what people say is lacking in a comparable lens lineup to any other manufacturer. Ricoh can't rely on people having a collection of lenses. So they would need to have a program of new FF lenses IMO. Whether they can manage that is the issue and thus the thoughts that the 2 new telephoto zooms will in someway point towards a FF release.

In point of fact the Japanese economy (which has been in a deflationary recession for 15 years) is no longer in recession.

Which may have something to do with Ricoh's immediate FF camera plans.

---

Last edited by monochrome; 12-07-2014 at 08:16 AM.

[Winder]

In point of fact the Jpanese economy (which has been in a deflationary recession for 15 years) is no longer in recession.

Which may have something to do with Ricoh's immediate FF camera plans.

I don't think that is a point of fact.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/17/business/international/defying-expectation...ther.html?_r=0
"Defying Expectations, Japan’s Economy Falls Into Recession"
Creating a temporary inflationary bubble doesn't fix an economy.

[monochrome]

I don't think that is a point of fact.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/17/business/international/defying-expectation...ther.html?_r=0

Creating a temporary inflationary bubble doesn't fix an economy.

November 16th - New York Times

"Defying Expectations, Japan’s Economy Falls Into Recession"

"Rising sales taxes have been blamed for triggering the downturn by deterring consumer spending, and with Japan having now slipped into a technical recession, the chances that Mr. Abe will seek a new mandate from voters to alter the government’s tax program appear to have increased significantly."

Yen Falls Following Japan's Decision to Delay Sales Tax Rise - WSJ

November 19th - Wall Street Journal

"The yen weakened to a fresh seven-year low against major currencies during Asian trading Wednesday following Tuesday’s decision by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to put off an unpopular increase in the sales tax and call a snap election. The Bank of Japan also decided to maintain its policy Wednesday after it surprised markets last month when it fired a fresh round of stimulus. The BOJ maintained the view that a moderate recovery trend has taken hold, suggesting that the downturn sparked by a tax increase earlier in the year will be short-lived."

2 quarters of negative economic growth is technically the definition of a recession - unless it isn't a recession.

[Winder]

November 16th - New York Times

"Defying Expectations, Japan’s Economy Falls Into Recession"

"Rising sales taxes have been blamed for triggering the downturn by deterring consumer spending, and with Japan having now slipped into a technical recession, the chances that Mr. Abe will seek a new mandate from voters to alter the government’s tax program appear to have increased significantly."

Yen Falls Following Japan?s Decision to Delay Sales Tax Rise - WSJ

November 19th - Wall Street Journal

"The yen weakened to a fresh seven-year low against major currencies during Asian trading Wednesday following Tuesday’s decision by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to put off an unpopular increase in the sales tax and call a snap election. The Bank of Japan also decided to maintain its policy Wednesday after it surprised markets last month when it fired a fresh round of stimulus. The BOJ maintained the view that a moderate recovery trend has taken hold, suggesting that the downturn sparked by a tax increase earlier in the year will be short-lived."

2 quarters of negative economic growth is technically the definition of a recession - unless it isn't a recession.

You are correct - you don't reverse 15 years of deflationary psychology with a short burst of monetary and fiscal stimulus. By the time we see evidence of renewed economic vitality and some inflation expectations in Japan a durable economic recovery will have already been in place for several years. That's the nature of looking at the past and projecting into the future.

Deflationary prices are normal in a health economy. Let's look at goods like computer, plasma TVs, camera..... How much was a 50" plasma TV 10 years ago? What does one cost today? As the economy advances goods become cheaper in a healthy economy. Japans biggest problem has been the 250% debt to GDP ratio and currently it has a graying population.

If we want to look at the past, we don't find any other country that has successfully done what Japan is trying to do. Japan is not the first to try. I know.... "This time it will be different".....

http://www.cobdencentre.org/2013/01/why-japan-should-not-fight-deflation/

[reh321]

How well is Canon succeeding in the MILC arena?
#1 and #2 - and the company that plans to be #3 - seem to be 'failing' in the MILC arena. Must be pretty dumb companies.
Then again, maybe not.

The companies that have a strong crop-sensor DSLR presence have less of an incentive to pursue MILC products that might compete with those DSLR cameras; part of the question is, what is just around the next bend, and are they agile enough to react if the crop-sensor market were suddenly to lurch from DSLR to MILC.

In the current time, Nikon and Pentax have chosen to develop MILC products with smaller sensors. If I understand correctly, the sensors used in Canon's MILC products are essentially the same as in their crop-sensor DSLR (Rebel) cameras; I have believed that lack of EVF is what has crippled the EOS-M, but I'm guessing that they don't care right now, despite the legions of their fans who desperately want one.

[Mistral75]

Indeed:

The big two, Canon and Nikon, have been asleep at the wheel when it comes to the so-called mirrorless revolution. Canon's M series was a token effort, and Nikon's 1 series is half-baked at best. Why? Because neither company wants to eat their golden goose – namely profitable DSLR sales. Instead, they're making a classic business school case-study mistake, and allowing erstwhile competitors like Sony, Panasonic, Fujifilm and Olympus to land a beachhead and gain market share in the mirrorless segment, which is where the industry is inevitably heading whether Nikon and Canon want it to or not.

Source: Samsung NX1 First Impressions

[Nicolas06]

Deflationary prices are normal in a health economy.

The biggest decrease in price overall appeared in western countries just because we can leverage low cost developping country works thank to cheap transports. This is quite new and unlikely to continue for ever as they eventually catch up. Already China and Asia is more and more expensive to produce in.

A few products continue to see their price drop it is electronic devices. That's true.

But most products get a little more expensive each year.

As if it should be part of healthy economy, this is hard to say... Many central bank have an objective arround 2% inflation rate and that not at all implying decreasing prices. More the contrary. Their justification is that deflating price lead to everybody keeping money in the bank instead of spending it as it get more value just by waiting. it doesn't favor creating new enterprise or buyings things. Again just keeping the money make you richer. Enterprise sell less and less and after some time need to fire their employees. At least that's what they say.

[reh321]

Deflationary prices are normal in a health economy. Let's look at goods like computer, plasma TVs, camera..... How much was a 50" plasma TV 10 years ago? What does one cost today? As the economy advances goods become cheaper in a healthy economy.

Your particular examples have nothing to do with economic health; they have to do with "Moore's Law". Gordon Moore, one of the founders of Intel, noticed a year-after-year trend of modern electronics being able to deliver twice the performance ever 18 months or so.

[Nicolas06]

Your particular examples have nothing to do with economic health; they have to do with "Moore's Law". Gordon Moore, one of the founders of Intel, noticed a year-after-year trend of modern electronics being able to deliver twice the performance ever 18 months or so.

Twice the density of transistor on a chip... It has been for quite some time it doesn't relate anymore to twice the performance unfortunately Moreover, for camera, reducing size of transistor doesn't help that much the sensor design that must keep a chip of some size to gather light.

[Winder]

Your particular examples have nothing to do with economic health; they have to do with "Moore's Law". Gordon Moore, one of the founders of Intel, noticed a year-after-year trend of modern electronics being able to deliver twice the performance ever 18 months or so.

It really doesn't matter what goods or services we use as an example. Technology based goods are a good example because of the rapid rate of evolution makes it easy to see. Technology makes all goods cheaper, from the cotton to gin to Rapier and air-jet weaving machines, to 3D printers. Moore's Law is simply a law the describes the speed of advancement. It doesn't change the economics of. It doesn't matter if the technology/performance doubles over 2 years or 200 years. The economics of goods don't change. Only the time frame.

And for the record Moore's Law is not a true law. At some point the rate of advancement will change, and laws by definition are consistent without exception.

[reh321]

It really doesn't matter what goods or services we use as an example. Technology based goods are a good example because of the rapid rate of evolution makes it easy to see. Technology makes all goods cheaper, from the cotton to gin to Rapier and air-jet weaving machines, to 3D printers. Moore's Law is simply a law the describes the speed of advancement. It doesn't change the economics of. It doesn't matter if the technology/performance doubles over 2 years or 200 years. The economics of goods don't change. Only the time frame.

And for the record Moore's Law is not a true law. At some point the rate of advancement will change, and laws by definition are consistent without exception.

I'm not going to argue with you, but the simple fact of life is that expanding economies tend to have a gradual increase in prices of non-electronic items. The historical record shows that. It is a fact. You may have the last word if you continue to disagree.

[Winder]

The biggest decrease in price overall appeared in western countries just because we can leverage low cost developping country works thank to cheap transports. This is quite new and unlikely to continue for ever as they eventually catch up. Already China and Asia is more and more expensive to produce in.

We can discuss the Law of Comparative Advantage. Countries that have a large quantity to cheap labor have an advantage in producing products that only require low skill sets. China is expected to transition 30 million jobs to machines and robots in the next few years. As the price of human labor rises alternative means of manufacturing will be found. 3D printing... Robots.... machines.

But most products get a little more expensive each year.

Show me an industry that is not subsidized or heavily regulated where prices are rising.

As if it should be part of healthy economy, this is hard to say... Many central bank have an objective arround 2% inflation rate and that not at all implying decreasing prices. More the contrary. Their justification is that deflating price lead to everybody keeping money in the bank instead of spending it as it get more value just by waiting. it doesn't favor creating new enterprise or buyings things. Again just keeping the money make you richer. Enterprise sell less and less and after some time need to fire their employees. At least that's what they say.

Give a scenario where rising prices are good for poor people or people on a fixed income? Are rising food prices good or bad for poor people? Are rising energy prices good or bad for poor people? Are rising housing prices good or bad for poor people?

When new money is injected into the economy by the central bank it doesn't get mailed out to the poor or the middle class. It goes to the big banks and corporations who get access to the money before prices rise. Yes... This money "trickles down", but by the time it trickles down to the middle class prices have already risen to offset the added money into their paycheck. For people at the very bottom prices rise long before any money trickles down to them. Inflationary policies are "trickle down" policies. They are policies that benefit the upper 10% at the expense of the rest.

---------- Post added 12-07-14 at 04:03 PM ----------

The historical record shows that. It is a fact.

Then show me an example of this "fact". IF it is a historical record you should have no problem providing a credible source to link to.

There is a lot of historical data the says the opposite. We have periods of price deflation and rising income.
In the US from 1880 to 1896, the wholesale price level fell by about 30 percent, or by 1.75 percent per year, while real income rose by about 85 percent, or around 5 percent per year.

[reh321]

I'm not going to argue economics on a site devoted to photography. Focusing on Pentax related issues is why I am here.

[Nicolas06]

Show me an industry that is not subsidized or heavily regulated where prices are rising.


Give a scenario where rising prices are good for poor people or people on a fixed income? Are rising food prices good or bad for poor people? Are rising energy prices good or bad for poor people? Are rising housing prices good or bad for poor people?

When new money is injected into the economy by the central bank it doesn't get mailed out to the poor or the middle class. It goes to the big banks and corporations who get access to the money before prices rise. Yes... This money "trickles down", but by the time it trickles down to the middle class prices have already risen to offset the added money into their paycheck. For people at the very bottom prices rise long before any money trickles down to them. Inflationary policies are "trickle down" policies. They are policies that benefit the upper 10% at the expense of the rest.

---------- Post added 12-07-14 at 04:03 PM ----------

Then show me an example of this "fact". IF it is a historical record you should have no problem providing a credible source to link to.

There is a lot of historical data the says the opposite. We have periods of price deflation and rising income.
In the US from 1880 to 1896, the wholesale price level fell by about 30 percent, or by 1.75 percent per year, while real income rose by about 85 percent, or around 5 percent per year.

I suppose your country has an official office for computing statistics. Help yourself and check the indices of price rate. If it is not too badly done, you can check this year, and many years in the past. In my country, they even provide you with long terms statistics.

I live in France... but let look for example US. They provide inflation rate month by month from 1914 to 2014:

Where do we have noticable deflation ?

- moderate deflation rates in 1921, 1922... after few year with huge inflation of prices.
- moderate deflation rate in 1927, 1928. 1929 is like a draw. Huge deflation rate following the crisis in 1930, 1931, 1932, 1933
- moderate deflation rate in 1938.
- moderate deflation rate in 1949 and no a full year with deflation since 1949.

There where economic crisis in 1921-1922 and I think I don't need to recall to your attention the 1929 economic crisis.

Then to be sure, let's check the definition of inflation (here from wikipedia)

"In economics, inflation is a sustained increase in the general price level of goods and services in an economy over a period of time.[1]"

For me looking for both the inflation rate history on one side and the definition of inflation on the other side I conclude that there was a continuous sustained increase in the general price level of goods in the US since 1949... And overall even from 1914 if we take the average... Even through some year had deflation.

So...I don't get you point? You want to deny the observed inflation rate? You want to deny many central bank have and objective to maintain a low but positive inflation rate ?

I mean there was some idea that prices decreased over time for most things... Still there proof it was not the case recently in the US... Was not the case in France neither.

Even through I'am engineer and with quite good salary I saw the price of meat incresing and buy less of it than before. I remember that 17 years one precise house was brought for 200 000€... Now it is estimated 600 000€. Still it is 17 years older. When I was youg a small new car was worth something like 1200€... Now it is 8000€. You'd say the new car is better blablabla... Mostly it is still a car, a little safer... but 6 time more expensive. Does it consume far less gazoline? No. Do we drive significantly faster? Well there lowered speed limit now. No real difference in service, 6 time the price. And where I live the toll to use the highway take 10 cent every years, price of restaurant tend to get easily 1 euro per year for a lunch...

Another story... My grand father paid many year for retirement before the second world war. Something like 10 year of paying a lot from hissalary... It was before social security in France. When he finally retired after 40 years, thoses 10 years, not go from social security... There where not worth anything valuable anymore. he could have buy a flat through a mortage he is placed the money that way... But he saved for retirement and got nothing for 10 years worth of savings.

To me doesn't look like on what I obverse prices decreases. The officials conclude the same...

Don't want to argue more on this. If you want to conclude on general decrease of prices and deny the official statistics or the observations you can make (outside or cameras) that your right. If you want to say you don't like this, that's also your rights... Go to an economical forum to argue that deflation is better than inflation... You may have had times. Anyway, no point wasting more anyone time on Pentax forum on this.

[monochrome]

People are expensive. In a classic resources-capital-labor-scrip economy (a market-based capitalist system) deflation is caused when alternative means of production replace people with machines, thus either lowering price or adding utility at a constant price. The analog-to-digital photography conversion is an instructive example.*

Of course, what to do for all the people who have been replaced? Why, allow and support through laws and regulations organized labor. The more difficult it becomes to reduce labor expense as a component of final cost the more likely a nation is to experience a period of price inflation. In 1979 27.9% of the Civilian Labor Force was employed under a collective bargaining agreement. That number has steadily declined to roughly 13% today. The entire 35 year period has been marked by disinflation in prices - and since 1990 stagnation in inflation-adjusted household income. Between 4Q2008 and 3Q2009 USA actually experienced price deflation!

Looking ahead in the USA, as the Labor Force Participation Rate declines (presently 92,400,000 eligible-age persons are not in the Labor Force) the more likely existing labor will have more control over the price of work due to a demand-supply imbalance. There simply won't be enough workers to meet demand.

Labor-driven, cost-push re-flation in the USA is coming.


* I got photography in there