Originally posted by ZombieArmy Yes, it has to do with economies of scale. There will be far less demand so they'll need higher margins to make the product worth it. It's a very specialized product and it'll be worth every penny to those people.
(...)
I agree with a hypothetical GR IIIm being priced a bit higher than the regular GR III, because of (i) higher sensor costs due to lower volumes (still under $100 though), (ii) the incremental costs associated with a specific SKU and (iii) Ricoh Imaging seeking higher unit margins from this niche, low-volume product.
However, all the above doesn't justify a doubled price. $100 or $200 more, why not. Twice the price, definitely not.
Originally posted by lemono Yep, This specially customized sensor itself is more expensive than the common version, coupled with the low sales expectation of the marketing department.
The RRP of the standard Leica Q2 is $4,995. That of the Leica Q2 Monochrom is $5,995. That's 20% more (which is a lot but we are in Leica land), not '
close to twice the price'.
(Another example: the Leica M10-R and M10 Monochrom share the same RRP: $8,295. However, both being low-volume items, one might consider the economies of scale from sensor purchase and SKU management are minimal.)
The RRP of the standard GR III is $/€899. Can you seriously imagine Ricoh asking $/€1,799 for a hypothetical GR IIIm? or even $/€1,699 or 1,599 for that matter?