Originally posted by rawr Since CRK are also the Australian distributors for Slik, Metz, Sigma, Tamrac, SanDisk, Black Rapid, Vanguard, Hoya, Tokina, Xrite, Eye-fi, Hasselblad, Ilford, even Lenspen, they probably have a good enough relationship with local camera retailers already, without Pentax ever needing to be part of the discussion
Nonetheless, what do you reckon the wholesale markup on the K-3 body is? A little arithmetic may be instructive: if, say, the wholesaler aims for 10% of the retail value of the product (I'm guessing what it might be for a camera body) and they only sold 1,000 K-3 bodies every year, that would be $130,000 profit before overheads, interest and tax. That's enough to pay the wages and overheads of 1.5 non-managerial people in their import, sales, despatch and marketing divisions. I could be way out with those figures, of course, and they would no doubt have an overhead formula to determine the nett profit on each item, but you get the idea.
Then, of course, there's the K-50/500 bodies, Q bodies and lenses. They would sell more of the lower-priced bodies, one would think, but each one of those would contribute less than a K-3. The lenses are anybody's guess, but with the internationalisation of Pentax lens pricing, they'd have to be selling more locally, now, and the opportunity to sell even more must surely be an incentive to try even harder.
We're not talking sheep stations here, but if you were them, would you be excluding discussion about Pentax with your retailers? If you have a low-volume product that is capable of being converted into a higher-volume product, you'd be pushing pretty hard, I'd venture.