[Mistral75]

(...)
There are exactly 3 points to note, on this subject:
- two companies attempting to use the Pentax brand for cameras, Asahi Optical was first (Mistral might confirm or correct me, if I'm not mistaken it was him posting a detailed account on this story)
- Hoya's hostile takeover on Pentax Corporation
- Hoya selling Pentax Imaging Systems to Ricoh.
(...)

indeed, VEB Zeiss Ikon Dresden (German Democratic Republic) were the first to use the Pentax name in 1954 for a prototype camera but Asahi Optical had applied for the trademark in September 1952 and were ultimately granted the rights to the Pentax trademark.

Hoya obtained these rights following their hostile-turned-friendly takeover and licenced part of them (Nice class 9) to Ricoh as part of the sale of the Pentax camera business to the latter.

[Mistral75]

Agree. In this case Pentax decided to not attend this specific show and instead make an alternative appearance. That's all I see here.

The reason behind that? I don't know. From my own experience I would assume it comes down to limited resources (mainly manpower) to do both at the same time at the same place. (Even a small booth is a LOT of work.)

(...)

It comes down to too high costs and insufficient return, not manpower. For more than a decade Pentax under their various owners have relied on Pentax enthusiasts paid in kind (equipment sold at discounted price) to run the Pentax booth at Salon de la Photo.

[Rondec]

I guess I think there are a few different things that I glean from this.

First of all, Sigma's decision has entirely to do with Sigma. They weren't selling many K mount lenses. For all of the discussions about how much Pentaxians need Sigma lenses, we didn't buy them in sufficient numbers for them to keep churning them out. The last release of a Sigma lens in the K mount was many years ago. Sigma is about making money, not about supporting other camera makers and so if Pentaxians choose to buy Pentax lenses or used lenses or Samyang lenses they will reward them buy not making future lenses in the K mount.

Second, trade shows, even when well attended, are not necessarily a good place to sell gear. While you do get some exposure to photographers who might not be familiar with your products, I don't think there is much bang for the buck there.

Finally, I do think that Pentax should invest in some advertising. I mentioned that I get Outdoor Photographer and that the GR III had a full page ad in the last issue. That seems a bit old school and without much reach, but certainly such a magazine would be read by the sort of people who would be interested in well made, sealed cameras that can go most places. But to me, Pentax should make better web content. Have a You Tube Channel where their ambassadors introduce Pentax cameras and explain how they use their features. Start curating PPG again and use it for the display of higher end photos.


It is clear that Pentax isn't doomed. As Mistral75 has posted elsewhere, they are one of the few brands that has grown in a time of general shrinkage in the camera market as a whole. They are ready to launch some very nice new gear this coming year, but they still can do more to get their name out there.

Edit: Mistral75 pointed out below me that Smart Vision has grown (this includes GR III and Theta sales, not just Pentax sales).

[Mistral75]

(...) As Mistral75 has posted elsewhere, [Pentax] are one of the few brands that has grown in a time of general shrinkage in the camera market as a whole. (...)

I'm afraid I didn't post that. I posted that Smart Vision a.k.a. Ricoh Imaging are currently growing thanks to the success of the GR III and, to a lesser extent, Theta cameras.

Pentax sales currently decreasing 20% per year in Europe is the only bout of financial data related to Pentax I have posted.

[Jean Poitiers]

It comes down to too high costs and insufficient return, not manpower. For more than a decade Pentax under their various owners have relied on Pentax enthusiasts paid in kind (equipment sold at discounted price) to run the Pentax booth at Salon de la Photo.

Wow. Are you joking here ...

[Rondec]

I'm afraid I didn't post that. I posted that Smart Vision a.k.a. Ricoh Imaging are currently growing thanks to the success of the GR III and, to a lesser extent, Theta cameras.

Pentax sales currently decreasing 20% per year in Europe is the only bout of financial data related to Pentax I have posted.

True. Obviously that is including Theta and GR III, not Pentax cameras alone (there have been no new Pentax cameras for quite awhile).

[Mistral75]

Wow. Are you joking here ...

No, I'm not. The purpose is to avoid paying 50+% social charges on top of compensation. Legally, it's borderline at best. I'm pretty confident they aren't the only one to do so, until someone in a public administration takes offence and an 'energetic' inspection knocks the whole herd into line.

[Reed]

After a bit of time with borrowed DFA*50 , and few years owning my own few of Sigma(EX DG&Art) primes and zoom(Art) lenses I don't really want to buy any new Sigma lens. I have sold all of that stuff within last few months. But there is no DFA*(yet) that I could use instead- maybe in some near future we will see DFA*85, that is also on my list.

More sad to me is that Tamron did the same move with K mount, and there is no chance to get a new SP line primes for my K-1II.

[Serkevan]

No, I'm not. The purpose is to avoid paying 50+% social charges on top of compensation. Legally, it's borderline at best. I'm pretty confident they aren't the only one to do so, until someone in a public administration takes offence and an 'energetic' inspection knocks the whole herd into line.

Similar thing to why some companies insist that their full time employees are "just freelancers". Typically, stuff like this only gets looked into if the violations are deep into illegal territory (or if the issue is ridiculously widespread). I'm afraid that for a situation like this nothing will be done.

[Zygonyx]

It comes down to too high costs and insufficient return, not manpower. For more than a decade Pentax under their various owners have relied on Pentax enthusiasts paid in kind (equipment sold at discounted price) to run the Pentax booth at Salon de la Photo.

If that ever happenned, that's [very] old history.
I can confirm that for the last 10 years where i attended, people were paid in cash for material presentations in the Ricoh booth during the Salon de la Photo.

As far as costs are concerned, a Sony rep.told me recently they represented around 1000€/m2 in this year Paris Salon de la Photo edition.....
And this is only external expenditures.

[miguelfenoglio]

I think what the Sigma rep meant was that Pentax is not supporting themselves, in terms of marketing and advertising, thus giving the impression that the brand is not doing well. I work in Marketing, have done so for over a decade and this allows me to understand what's behind some of the stuff that gets thrown at us every day. Just like Pentax, the brand I work for has to decide whether to attend shows or not. Attending a major show can cost a lot (hundreds of thousands, trust me) and may not always have the return one would expect.

As a marketeer I try to stay clear of brands that clearly spend a lot on marketing. There are brands that spend half of they total budgets in Marketing. That doesn't make sense to me. I'd rather have someone who spends more on R&D. If I have to choose between two brands (provided they both satisfy my requirements) I will often go for the one that I've seen less ads for.

Would it be nice to see Pentax everywhere? Yes. Would it be nice to be able to go into any shop and have a look at Pentax cameras and lenses? Yes. Would it be nice to have official Pentax Service readily available in, say, Madrid? Of course. Should I be worried because they decided not to attend a relatively major show? No. I'd rather see a couple of hundred thousands going into R&D for new gear than throwing them in a large booth just to prove they are still in the game. Marketing is dangerous, as it can very easily alter what we perceive to be real. Any major company can throw money into Marketing and make lots of people believe whatever they want.

In my view, Pentax is not one of the "big ones". It's not consumed by the masses like other brands. Personally, I don't think Pentax cares, because that has a very easy solution: throw millions of dollars into marketing and you are done (yes, that's how the world works). I moved from Nikon to Pentax because I had a few SMC M lenses I wanted to use without adapters. Glad I did. Now I was able to finally get a K-1 at a very reasonable price for a FF and I don't think many manufacturers can offer that quality at that price. Am I sorry I didn't see ads, TV commercials and K-1 cameras all over? No. I knew what I wanted and knew everything I needed to know. This strategy will not really help Pentax grow their business, but it may very well be what's allowing them to stay profitable. If that's what they are after, then good for to them.

[Mistral75]

If that ever happenned, that's [very] old history.
I can confirm that for the last 10 years where i attended, people were paid in cash for material presentations in the Ricoh booth during the Salon de la Photo.

(...)

We didn't talk to the same people then or they didn't talk as freely.

[Jean Poitiers]

No, I'm not. The purpose is to avoid paying 50+% social charges on top of compensation. Legally, it's borderline at best. I'm pretty confident they aren't the only one to do so, until someone in a public administration takes offence and an 'energetic' inspection knocks the whole herd into line.

OK ... and thanks a lot for your reply and information. Wow.

Well, as a former law professor at a French business school ("Grande Ecole") who taught for several years a Masters level class concerning French/International Labor Law ... well, I can see a lot of illegal and problematic issues in this type of remuneration in France. Lots of criminal and civil liabilities on several fronts and it's not necessary to detail here.

Before teaching for 11 years, I was in-house counsel in Paris (a transplanted American attorney) and I would have never given the "green light" to this kind of scheme. Never. It's an insane risk ... even if one does not get caught by the Labor Inspection forces. It may be the "status quo" for many expo participants, but that does not make it right.

I am not really totally surprised after having lived here so long ... just disappointed as usual.

I guess now I have another reason to understand why Pentax was a "no-show" at the Paris Photo Salon/Expo.

[Jean Poitiers]

If that ever happenned, that's [very] old history.
I can confirm that for the last 10 years where i attended, people were paid in cash for material presentations in the Ricoh booth during the Salon de la Photo.

As far as costs are concerned, a Sony rep.told me recently they represented around 1000€/m2 in this year Paris Salon de la Photo edition.....
And this is only external expenditures.

Without a signed labor contract between the parties involved, that would be illegal in France.

One cannot pay cash directly for "labor". A labor contract is mandatory in France.

The problem with a signed labor contract (short-term, even for a few days work) is that it triggers additional expenses on both the employee and the employer.

The employee would have to declare "revenue" for income tax purposes ... plus pay mandatory contributions to the French health care system(s) and retirement funds, etc.

The employer has more payment obligations and must declare each of its employees. Criminal violation(s) are applicable for failing to comply as per the legislation in force.

[panonski]

These days when you see what Sony, Panasonic, Leica, even old Zenit come back in the big style, or Olympus, specialy Sigma, do with their cameras - wow - the hyperspeed is just changed the level, and become even faster !
--
Not to mention Nikon is also back with new style, and Canon - also.

--
--
Big big succes for everybody. Literaly no one of them - would not lose one penny - in next years -- The technology jumped, and they succesfull folow it, and customers - are folowing to buy - their favourite brands.

-- or maybe - loose some, and get some newbies into their systems.

--
PENTAX IS THE ONLY ONE - WHO OFFER ONLY DSLR NICHE.
--
The sector - where they were succesufully been before - mirrorless - with K-01, or even Q sistem,

was abanoded

when every - earlier mention brands - was investigate into that hardly ! - except Nikon and Canon.


---

Why ?

---
OK, I'm quite sure - They had their own reasons. maybe some of it, are justifed, but - I still think - what I think, - because I don't judge the reasons - I'm just customer., and observer what is happening.

---
PENTAX MUST WAKE UP.

--
This K3 III - is not what Market needs - Nobody need it. Except for those who already invest to K mount and Pentax System.

--
No new customers ( except for GR III niche )

--
Videography - Zero
--
Portability - Zero ( maybe the KP is the best they can offer )
Usability - No Changes
---
---
I REALLY DON'T KNOW how the futured K- FC ( why in the name of Lord, this remainds on Chicken KFC fast food company ! ) will look like.

---
Maybe - it would be the beast - !
--
It's hard to say - but the overall truth - is outhere.

----
Everybody from the bussines are well - Pentax so so.
---
many of this are related to their POOR MARKETING skills !
--
I'm really sorry - but at pthe past few years - they certainly could beter advertise themsleves - because they had more to show - paired with others system !
--
Now - its a different situation.

--
If they plan advertise - The old technology - not offering anything what became almost normal in competion brands - well - that not' gone work either !
--
So .

Maybe we have luck - They didn't came to the show !