Originally posted by illdefined And you insist the investment was only a result of the scandal. Do you have proof of that? The decision to go with Sony sensors preceded the scandal as you know, who's to say what talks started when? even Woodford couldn't break through Japanese corporate dealings, how can you be so sure? Olympus likely couldn't pay off its debts to Sony and they had to step in but unless you were there who really knows? my point is, they are and have been tied to each other for a while now - they have a unique relationship, more intimate than just contractor/contractee of the other camera manufacturers.
Have you even read about the scandal? Olympus stock lost 75% of its value in a month. Almost all the major share holders dumped stock. Their stock was de-listed from the Tokyo Stock Exchange. Read up on the story. At one point Olympus projected that they would be able to survive without seeking investment from an outside source.
Everything you have said has been pure speculation with NOTHING to support it.
What do you mean
"they are and have been tied to each other for a while now"? Pentax has bought more from Sony than Olympus. Olympus has used 1 Sony sensor for a ILC in history of the company. Kodak provided all sensors up to the E-3 and Panasonic provided all of the 12MP sensors that Olympus has been recycling for the last 4 years. Why did Olympus elect to use Epson EVF technology and not Sony if they are so intertwined?
There is nothing to support the claim that Sony had a double top secret agreement with Olympus prior to the scandal. The sensor used in the OM-D is the newset Sony sensor technology used in any crop frame camera.
There is nothing to support the idea that Sony wont sell the latest sensors to Pentax or anyone else. Sony is a product whore. They sell anything to anyone who can pay and there is nothing wrong with that.