Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-11-2009, 03:04 AM   #91
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gloucester UK
Posts: 441
QuoteOriginally posted by focused Quote
Good point. It seems it isn`t only the VAT in Europe(16-21%). Could be a greater request for some lens in one place or another, so a greater price?





I just hope Pentax will not then double or triple the curent prices for lens , being backed-up by such fans, though I consider a very plausible posibility.
As the originator of the US v. UK price chart, I feel I should update the discussion!

Here is a chart showing the typical German street prices (taken by searching on the heise online price comparison site - heise online-Preisvergleich: Pentax Objektiv smc DA 12-24mm 4.0 ED AL (21577) / Deutschland).

For EU, VAT is removed (19%) and €1 = $1.47. For UK, VAT is removed (15% and 1 = $1.64)

For clarification, US prices are B&H, UK prices are best from SRS, Park or Warehouse Express. Percentage increase shown is over the US prices for both the UK and EU.



Draw your own conclusions.

Mine is that Hoya are taking the opportunity to rape the UK (ROB "Rip Off Britain") market and to a slightly lesser extent Europe (which overall is their largest), in order to try and build US sales (at our expense) as US buyers won't pay high prices, as if they did charge any more the US market would probably dissapear completely. One must ask, maybe this may not be a bad thing?

12-11-2009, 03:18 AM   #92
Veteran Member
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,754
Thanks for the list, Richard. What else is new... The financial world is set up in such a way, that the rest of the world is financing the lifestyle of citizens in the US. It's been this way for a long time. Maybe things will change when the dollar collapses (this will happen in a few years I believe), but not necessarily at our benefit. At least the Americans will then have the pleasure to pay exactly the same amount for the same items, and that's just fair.

Last edited by Asahiflex; 12-11-2009 at 03:27 AM.
12-11-2009, 04:26 AM   #93
Pentaxian
newmikey's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,590
QuoteOriginally posted by Richard Day Quote
As the originator of the US v. UK price chart, I feel I should update the discussion!


Draw your own conclusions.

Mine is that Hoya are taking the opportunity to rape the UK (ROB "Rip Off Britain") market and to a slightly lesser extent Europe (which overall is their largest), in order to try and build US sales (at our expense) as US buyers won't pay high prices, as if they did charge any more the US market would probably dissapear completely. One must ask, maybe this may not be a bad thing?
Would it also be that the bigger the logistics cost, the higher the end price to the consumer is? Does the size of the market matter?

Consider that the US is the biggest single market out there, with the option to import camera's and equipment through 1 central hub, no need for specialized adapted advertisements, documentation or warranties?

The EU comes next in line and although it is an open market for duty purposes, the admin involved in getting the VAT correct across 27 different national legislations and VAT registrations (or representations) would be high. Add to that the need to reflect 27 different jurisdictions on sales and warranty transactions and the need to document in over 22 languages and I would suggest that would account for at least a sizable part of the difference.

Finally, on to the UK. It is the UK's express policy to distance itself legislation-wise as much as possible from mainland Europe. A smaller market than either the US or the continental EU, the UK suffers from many issues that would require an importer to consider the UK as a totally separate market. Logistically speaking, supplying goods to the UK is more expensive if done from one main hub due to the Northsea that separates the UK from mainland Europe. If deliveries are directly to the UK and excluded from the main hub, decreased volumes are likely to induce higher logistics costs.

Not saying it accounts for just about anything (f.i. the higher level of government care in Europe also draws higher taxes) but it does go a long way to explaining the differences.
12-11-2009, 04:49 AM   #94
Veteran Member
Ben_Edict's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SouthWest "Regio"
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,303
QuoteOriginally posted by Richard Day Quote
Draw your own conclusions.

Mine is that Hoya are taking the opportunity to rape the UK (ROB "Rip Off Britain") market and to a slightly lesser extent Europe (which overall is their largest), in order to try and build US sales (at our expense) as US buyers won't pay high prices, as if they did charge any more the US market would probably dissapear completely. One must ask, maybe this may not be a bad thing?
I don't question your list. It was sure a lot of work to research the prices. It does not take into account the import duties, which come on top of VAT and which account for another 6.7% in the case of photographic lenses in Germany.

But this is nitpicking. The real issue is, that basically anything is more expensive in the EU, than it is in the USA. It is not only Pentax. I took the same exchange rate as you and discounted 19% German VAT. All prices in USD... US prices via Pricegrabber and German prices via Idealo (table 1).

This is just meant to put the price difference in Pentax lenses between the US and Europe into perspective.

Now for the Pentax versus Canon pricing. This time I used only German prices (Euros, rounded to the next full number) and did not discount any tax, as we simply have to pay those. It is also not important for this comparisson. I tried to find a few comparable lenses and took all prices from Foto Koch, which is a reputable but cheap seller. (table 2)

As there are only few lenses, which are directly comparable – I think a 70-200/2.8 simply is a different lens, than a 60-250/4 – the picture is very mixed and Pentax does not look too good, especially for some "bread and butter" lenses like the fast 35mm and 50mm, though the 50DA is a modern design, whereas Canon's is old (and amortised). In the wide-angle sector, Pentax is very competitive, I think.

Also, be careful, this is only based on 1 dealer's offerings. Another dealer, with a different business model may have significantly different prices (you easily have 30% price difference!)


Sorry, somehow I can't put the tables in the text flow, only add them as attachments...

Ben

OOPS: just saw, that my table contains a strange lens... the "date" in the lens list Canon versus Pentax should be the 50/1.4 and was "automatically corrected" by my software, without me noticing it

Attached Images
   

Last edited by Ben_Edict; 12-11-2009 at 05:07 AM. Reason: correction
12-11-2009, 04:49 AM   #95
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
It is simplistic to say Hoya is price gouging because there are so many variables that has a direct and indirect effect on final retail price. For one, the strength of the Yen (versus other currencies) does have a bearing on the price the local country distributor acquires stock. Obviously price is also a function of the quantity the local agent/distributor is prepared to commit to buy from Hoya under their contractual obligation. So if the local marketing folks don't have the cash flow to commit to a larger sales order (ie. lower unit cost) to keep excess inventory low, or don't have the marketing dollars to generate sales for moving the inventory, it will obviously have a bearing on how they would price Pentax items at retail. Relative local business costs such as warehousing, logistics and transportation, rental, etc. do add up as do trade allowances with retail outlets. Countries with high VAT/GST or local taxes will see a multiplier effect on cost which all adds up.

With the lingering global economic downturn and commodity fluctuations, Hoya itself would rather not maintain huge inventory (which means money tied up as unsold stock). Lenses for example are made in batches and with such uncertainty with regards to consumer demand, it would be quite obvious to produce in smaller runs, which in turn affects per unit cost.

Anyway cameras and lenses are global products so it makes sense to shop globally for the best prices and buy where one can find it cheapest.
12-11-2009, 05:34 AM   #96
juu
Veteran Member
juu's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 680
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
They undervalued their (underperforming) equipment for years to try to get customers to buy the stuff, and now what they have for a customer base is a bunch of cheap @ss whack jobs who, had they any brains, would have bought Canon Rebels.
Let's return to this. Why were the people buying Pentax, when it (as a system) was cheaper, stupid, and why should they have bought Canon Rebels instead?

QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
No, what i am saying is that in order to make money, Pentax is going to have to charge more per unit than what their competition can charge.
Previously you used the word "equivalent". I think that is key here and changes the whole meaning. Hard to interpret your previous statement otherwise than I did here.


Also, you never commented on the price difference of $460 to $1500 between nearly identical lenses in Nikon mount in the USA to the one in Pentax mount in the UK. Do you think it make sense and is good for Pentax long-term?

Furthermore, does this analogy make sense to you in any way?

Last edited by juu; 12-11-2009 at 05:46 AM.
12-11-2009, 05:41 AM   #97
juu
Veteran Member
juu's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 680
QuoteOriginally posted by newmikey Quote
Would it also be that the bigger the logistics cost, the higher the end price to the consumer is? Does the size of the market matter?
It could be all that, but for some reason the comparison I did for other lenses in Pentax mount a few weeks back showed much smaller differences:

Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 UK $545 (+ VAT), US $479, difference of 7%
Sigma 17-70mm UK $342 (+ VAT), US $369, difference of -7% (yes, the UK version is cheaper until you add VAT)
Tamron 18-250mm UK $531 (+ VAT), US $470, difference 13%

Why is it that some companies have these great extra costs for selling in the EU/UK and some don't?
12-11-2009, 06:38 AM   #98
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,157
QuoteOriginally posted by juu Quote
Let's return to this. Why were the people buying Pentax, when it (as a system) was cheaper, stupid, and why should they have bought Canon Rebels instead?
I don't think Pentax (as a system) really was any cheaper, what was cheaper was all the old glass that would, after a fashion, work on the newer cameras. People were jumping onto Pentax, buying a cheap camera body and then buying cheapo 20 year old glass and syaying how inexpensive the Pentax system was. Now, all of a sudden, they've woken up to the fact that Pentax has some expensive glass.

QuoteQuote:
Previously you used the word "equivalent". I think that is key here and changes the whole meaning. Hard to interpret your previous statement otherwise than I did here.
You are parsing minutiae to try to make some sort of argument. Sorry, I'll debate concepts, but I have little time for this sort of triviality.

QuoteQuote:
Also, you never commented on the price difference of $460 to $1500 between nearly identical lenses in Nikon mount in the USA to the one in Pentax mount in the UK. Do you think it make sense and is good for Pentax long-term?
Lots of stuff is more expensive in Europe. Gas prices are something like 2-3 times USA prices. At least you can buy a lens from B&H Photo easier than you can buy a tank of gas from Mobile.
QuoteQuote:

Furthermore, does this analogy make sense to you in any way?
No. How has your cost of ownership of what camera equipment you own now gone up? Has the Pentax Police come to your door and demanded more money from you?
When did a camera lens become a consumable item like an inkjet cartridge?
Oh wait, I have an answer:
It didn't and your analogy is silly.

Just like what this thread has become.

bye.

12-11-2009, 07:24 AM   #99
juu
Veteran Member
juu's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 680
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
I don't think Pentax (as a system) really was any cheaper, what was cheaper was all the old glass that would, after a fashion, work on the newer cameras. People were jumping onto Pentax, buying a cheap camera body and then buying cheapo 20 year old glass and syaying how inexpensive the Pentax system was. Now, all of a sudden, they've woken up to the fact that Pentax has some expensive glass.
I recall otherwise.

A few years ago there were discussions comparing similar offerings from Pentax, Canon, Nikon, etc. and the Pentax ones were less expensive - even ignoring buying old glass on e-Bay.

QuoteQuote:
You are parsing minutiae to try to make some sort of argument. Sorry, I'll debate concepts, but I have little time for this sort of triviality.
There is a huge conceptual difference between paying more for an equivalent product vs. paying more for a better/different product.

I'm surprised you don't understand that.

QuoteQuote:
Lots of stuff is more expensive in Europe. Gas prices are something like 2-3 times USA prices.
Gas prices are higher because of excise tax on gas in the UK. There is no excise tax on lenses and I had already subtracted VAT. Try again.

QuoteQuote:
No. How has your cost of ownership of what camera equipment you own now gone up? Has the Pentax Police come to your door and demanded more money from you?
When did a camera lens become a consumable item like an inkjet cartridge?
Oh wait, I have an answer:
It didn't and your analogy is silly.
People generally buy interchangeable lens cameras with the idea to have multiple lenses for them.

People generally don't purchase these lenses at the same time as the camera.

Therefore, people generally expect to buy into a system and then keep spending more money on lenses over time, thus constituting a continued outlay of funds not unlike buying cartridges for a printer.

Are you genuinely pretending to not understand that?

Last edited by juu; 12-11-2009 at 07:29 AM.
12-11-2009, 07:42 AM   #100
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 975
QuoteOriginally posted by juu Quote
I recall otherwise.

A few years ago there were discussions comparing similar offerings from Pentax, Canon, Nikon, etc. and the Pentax ones were less expensive - even ignoring buying old glass on e-Bay.

There is a huge conceptual difference between paying more for an equivalent product vs. paying more for a better/different product.

I'm surprised you don't understand that.

Gas prices are higher because of excise tax on gas in the UK. There is no excise tax on lenses and I had already subtracted VAT. Try again.



People generally buy interchangeable lens cameras with the idea to have multiple lenses for them.

People generally don't purchase these lenses at the same time as the camera.

Therefore, people generally expect to buy into a system and then keep spending more money on lenses over time, thus constituting a continued outlay of funds not unlike buying cartridges for a printer.

Are you genuinely pretending to not understand that?
save your breath, his mind is made up, thus mere facts are irrelevant. his is systematically ignoring any facts or arguments against his point, so he can hold on to his conviction comfortably. mere human nature

wheatfield: cool dog (rottweiler, right?), i wish her good health.
12-11-2009, 08:01 AM   #101
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,157
QuoteOriginally posted by nanok Quote
save your breath, his mind is made up, thus mere facts are irrelevant. his is systematically ignoring any facts or arguments against his point, so he can hold on to his conviction comfortably. mere human nature

wheatfield: cool dog (rottweiler, right?), i wish her good health.
You ignore my facts, I ignore your facts.
The fact is, Hoya has, apparently, decided that it wants to make a certain amount of money from the Pentax brand. How they do it is their business, whether or not this seems fair.
Some of it is bound to be economy of scale, some of it is bound to be the cost of restructuring Pentax itself, some of it is probably trying to cover the cost of R&D on upcoming products (perhaps we are paying for 645D development as we speak, so to speak), and if some of it is plain and simple gouging, well, perhaps Hoya just doesn't like Europeans very much. Who knows.

The reality is, the paradigm has shifted, and Pentax no longer wants to be known as the cheap and dirty whore of the camera market.
We either get to suck it up, buy into someone else's system, or we can just boycott new lens purchases until they "come to their senses", but that might make the camera division unprofitable enough for them to close it down entirely...

Thanks for the kind wishes for the dog, but it comes a couple of years too late. We lost Rollei (the one on the right) in 2006 and Leica in 2007.
A person couldn't have asked for better dogs than those two.
12-11-2009, 08:11 AM   #102
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Warwickshire, UK
Photos: Albums
Posts: 196
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Now, all of a sudden, they've woken up to the fact that Pentax has some expensive glass.
Some of us woken up to the fact that prices of some Pentax lenses went up 100% overnight (and I'm not exagerrating here, not much anyway).
VAT was there before, exchange rates could not justify such an increase.

Btw, all lenses I've ever bought were brand new DAs and DA*s, so I'm not one of those cheapskates you've mentioned before as a typical Pentax customer base (or maybe I am? I didn't buy any FA Limiteds...). But with the current pricing, my next lens will be Sigma or Tamron, as simple as that. So much for the extra profit for Hoya.
12-11-2009, 08:41 AM   #103
juu
Veteran Member
juu's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 680
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Pentax no longer wants to be known as the cheap and dirty whore of the camera market.
Correction - Pentax no longer wants (or can afford) to be known as a brand providing a good value for money.

And in your mind anyone who doesn't like it should have, had they had any brains, bought a Canon Digital Rebel years ago.
12-11-2009, 08:54 AM   #104
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 975
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
You ignore my facts, I ignore your facts.
The fact is, Hoya has, apparently, decided that it wants to make a certain amount of money from the Pentax brand. How they do it is their business, whether or not this seems fair.
Some of it is bound to be economy of scale, some of it is bound to be the cost of restructuring Pentax itself, some of it is probably trying to cover the cost of R&D on upcoming products (perhaps we are paying for 645D development as we speak, so to speak), and if some of it is plain and simple gouging, well, perhaps Hoya just doesn't like Europeans very much. Who knows.
facts are not ours to own, they just are. i have not ignored your points, i have actually tried to take the time and explain why i disagree with each, what i meant when i said you ignore them is that, for instance, you state over and over again that "we" "just woke up to the fact that pentax also sells premium glass, which costs "real money"" and that "the price shifted slightly so that now it's merely competitive, instead of dirt cheap, and all the cheapskates started screaming" (or words to that effect), after i and many people have pointed out that we are talking of 100% or near price increases, and huge comparative prices when looking at other brands, with hard figures to back that. it is frustrating to explain something and bring facts (numbers) to the discussion, repeatedly, and have somebody just carry on as if nothing happened.

of course there can be many explanations to what they seem to be doing, but i am not inclined to search for them. i have seen how big corporations work (pentax probably used to be a small one, but now with hoya it is probably different), and i can tell you it is useless to look for inside reason, sometimes things are jsut explained by blindness and stupidity. what i am concerned about is my choices, here and now, based on hard facts. i am not the only one who has to consider these choices.

QuoteQuote:
The reality is, the paradigm has shifted, and Pentax no longer wants to be known as the cheap and dirty whore of the camera market.
We either get to suck it up, buy into someone else's system, or we can just boycott new lens purchases until they "come to their senses", but that might make the camera division unprofitable enough for them to close it down entirely...
my friend, there is a long way from stepping up and saying "that's it, we need you to _pay_ for the good stuff we produce" and saying "starting today, the same lens on the shelf of the shop you went in yesterday is 1500bucks, instead of 800bucks, because we say so" (and yes, our competitor sells something similar on the next shelf for nearly half the price, so WHAT). the difference is very simple, it's not about being fair or feeling warm and fuzzy inside about paying much less than anybody else, it is simply the difference between "yeah, i'll pay 10% more, **** it, it's worth it" and "what the **** have you been smoking? let's see, what does canon have on the market lately... hmm". you understand my problem now? i am not unreasonable, the prices for pentax premium glass used to be good or decent here, i could take "slightly pricey", because i like the system, the bodies, and so on, but we are not talking 100bucks extra for each lens here, we are talking well above 500 in most cases. that makes you think. and if it makes me think, i wonder how many other people are scratching their heads in the same general pattern...

if they need to make revenue somehow, the problem is very simple, from the point which they reached now: you will get 500bucks more on each lens, but only on each lens _you sell_, if you cross the line, you might not be selling enough to make the revenue you used to have (and i am pretty sure that in europe they are well past that point). this is basic economics, i am not such a stranger to these things as you might think.

i don't know, maybe they jsut decided to stop production altogether, and are working on a completely renewed lineup, sdm, quality checks, whole production line, and so on, to clean up the shit they got into with the 16-50, these sdm "scandals" and so on, and they raised the prices such just to slow demand and give them time to cleanup, without running out of stock, but if it's so, they better move fast, or there might be some impact on their market which they didn't take into account.

if they become a loss division as you suggested because of our "pettyness" , i am sorry, but they are doing it to themselves. again, i understand in us prices are still reasonable, and i appreciate that, but things are quite different here, and there are hints that the us trend is similar, if slower.

QuoteQuote:
Thanks for the kind wishes for the dog, but it comes a couple of years too late. We lost Rollei (the one on the right) in 2006 and Leica in 2007.
A person couldn't have asked for better dogs than those two.
sorry to hear that, from your statement i gathered she was 11y old, so good health is all a dog that age can wish for. from my recollections of other discussions with you here, i think they had a happy life with you, so even though sad, it's all good, in the "grand scheme" of things. (if that makes any sense)
12-11-2009, 08:54 AM   #105
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Colorado USA
Posts: 1,337
I'll repeat, Everybodys raising price: I Blame Nikon

I'll repeat, Everybodys raising price: I Blame Nikon

Nikon jacked up their prices first, then Canon followed as did Pentax.

Anyone see the USA price on Nikon's newly announced 300mm f2.8 VRII and its dedicated 2x teleconverter ???

$5,900 plus $500

Canon will now further raise their 300mm 2.8 IS price... It currently sits at $4,350 w/ free delivery:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/183202-USA/Canon_2531A002_Telephoto_EF_300mm_f_2_8L.html

A fun read, newly announced 300mm 2.8 VRII Nikon thread at fredmiranda...

if you're interested:


Nikon 300/2.8G VR II - FM Forums
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!
50mm, af, body, ff, k-7, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, pentaxians, photos, time, turkey
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Good news, bad news. Lloydy Pentax DSLR Discussion 13 05-06-2009 03:05 PM
So I guess this is bad news! Help! Syb Post Your Photos! 21 11-12-2008 12:43 PM
Some bad news... jsherman999 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 10-25-2008 07:02 PM
Old Flash on new bodies = bad news. But what about the inverse? Dubious Drewski Pentax DSLR Discussion 9 05-11-2008 03:28 PM
Bad news davemdsn Post Your Photos! 10 01-25-2008 10:20 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:55 AM. | 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