Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-18-2014, 04:13 AM   #31
Veteran Member
aurele's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,217
I see this shrinking as a very good thing : It will push Canikon to reduce the number of models of DSLR they will sell, making space for other company on the shelves, that will contribue to weaken then a bit more.

Considering the marketing power will shrink a bit as the sale volumes.

Very simple way : crisis is a great opportunity for Ricoh.

08-18-2014, 04:25 AM   #32
Veteran Member
Christine Tham's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,269
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote

I've participated in various high level attempts to do so over the years, and all pretty much failed because they missed a big disruptor (or two). Like smart mobile, LOL, which was never even on the radar in one big review I was a part of.
How long ago was this review?

I have been using smart phones since 2002 (anyone remember Microsoft Pocket PC 2002 Phone Edition?).
08-18-2014, 04:30 AM   #33
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 16,394
QuoteOriginally posted by Christine Tham Quote
Yes, by about 9%. Compared to the 20-40% drop in BOTH sales and operating income that Nikon and Canon reported. So who's "winning"?
No one's "winning", Christine.

As consumers we like a competitive market and want all these companies and their boards to do what's necessary to survive.
08-18-2014, 11:56 AM   #34
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Washington Cascades
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,991
QuoteOriginally posted by Christine Tham Quote
Sony's strategy is a little different because they are primarily a sensor manufacturer. They "win" regardless of what device or form factor a consumer chooses in order to take a photo. Their strategy in the camera manufacturing space seems to be to explore as many use cases and form factors as possible. Hence all the disparate models - RX, Alpha, QX, Action Cam. They don't "need" any of these models to succeed, their objective is to generate demand and mind share from consumers. Both Sony and Pentax are playing the role of "disruptors" - they try to find new markets (Pentax - Q and 645Z) in new product segments and play catchup in the established segments (eg. DSLR). They "win" by essentially taking wallet spend away from Canon and Nikon, and attracting new consumers who will never have purchased a DSLR.
Interesting way of describing it. Similar to the 'reference' designs that Intel or graphic chip makers produce. Just illustrating a use and relying on others to see the market and develop it. Perhaps that explains why Sony seems to be all over the place with different products. I'm sure they intend to make money on the products as well, but expanding the market for their sensors has to also be a consideration.

---------- Post added 08-18-14 at 11:59 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by aurele Quote
I see this shrinking as a very good thing : It will push Canikon to reduce the number of models of DSLR they will sell, making space for other company on the shelves, that will contribue to weaken then a bit more.
Good point, flooding the chain with products has long been a competitive tactic to keep others from entering a market. But when the holding cost of unsold inventory amidst declining sales becomes prohibitive that tactic becomes counter-productive.

08-18-2014, 02:15 PM   #35
Veteran Member
Christine Tham's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,269
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
No one's "winning", Christine.

As consumers we like a competitive market and want all these companies and their boards to do what's necessary to survive.
LOL - ok, you "win" with the most hilarious post ever.

You might want to look up the dictionary definition of "competition":

competition

1.process of trying to beat others: the process of trying to win or do better than others
2.contest: an activity in which people try to win something or do better than others
3.opposition: the opposition in a competitive situation, or the level of opposition
08-18-2014, 06:02 PM   #36
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,543
QuoteOriginally posted by wildman Quote
One could argue that Nikon is a "child" of Sony - the limits of sony's sensors are the fundamental limits Nikon must live with in their "own" cameras. In a very real sense most of us are all buying "Sony" cameras.
Very true but that isn't helping Sony much at all. If it wasn't for the success of the Play Station, the vultures would be circling. Most analysts consider their stock a bad investment as most divisions have been loosing money for several quarters.
08-18-2014, 08:18 PM   #37
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Flyover America
Posts: 4,469
QuoteOriginally posted by reeftool Quote
Very true but that isn't helping Sony much at all. If it wasn't for the success of the Play Station, the vultures would be circling.
It's a relative comparison - If the long term survival of of a large diversified company like Sony is in doubt what must it be for a small, narrowly specialized, company like Nikon?

QuoteOriginally posted by reeftool Quote
Most analysts consider their stock a bad investment
But their concern and expertise is only in short term gain not long term viability.


Last edited by wildman; 08-18-2014 at 08:33 PM.
08-18-2014, 09:22 PM   #38
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,913
QuoteOriginally posted by Christine Tham Quote
I have been using smart phones since 2002
Newbie. 1994 was the first major comms review I went through. Took a years worth or work, generated 5 reports and a complicated econometric model of 'interactive services'. In those days people used to think ATM switches were going to kill TCP/IP internetworking, Oracle was the future of digital television, and Internet meant landlines/ADSL/FTTN etc. The handset I was using at the time was a very dumb but nice CDMA Nokia 121. Maybe around the same time I also picked up a Palm Pilot, but it could only do TCP/IP via a nifty little 1200 baud external modem that needed a wired connection.

Everyone understood that there was demand for mobile - and money to be made for the govt from spectrum auctions - but mobile phones were never forecast to be the versatile, ubiquitous [and lucrative] hand sized PC's they have since become. Just voice, maybe fax.

Many researchers at the time made the mistake of assuming the telcos and their suppliers would be driving change and innovation in the market. I got it generally right by pushing hard the proposition that the IT industry would be the change agents in the 'convergence' marketplace - ie the Apples and Googles of the world, and their associated developer and supplier ecosystems - not the telcos. Partly due to different tech dynamics, partly due to culture, partly due to the different regulatory environment each industry had to operate in.

Nostalgia.
08-18-2014, 10:26 PM   #39
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 16,394
QuoteOriginally posted by Christine Tham Quote
LOL - ok, you "win" with the most hilarious post ever.

You might want to look up the dictionary definition of "competition":

competition

1.process of trying to beat others: the process of trying to win or do better than others
2.contest: an activity in which people try to win something or do better than others
3.opposition: the opposition in a competitive situation, or the level of opposition

This is bizarre.


Didn't you say you worked in company strategy - shouldn't you *know* this stuff?


A 'competitive market' is what we forum users want. ("A competitive market is one in which a large numbers of producers compete with each other to satisfy the wants and needs of a large number of consumers.").


Firms beating up on each other until there is a monopoly or duopoly is not what we desire.


Unfortunately, Sony have copped it big time, and analysts rate them as junk:


Sony Credit Cut To Junk Status As Smartphones 'Cannibalize' Its TV And PC Businesses - Forbes

Last edited by clackers; 08-18-2014 at 10:33 PM.
08-19-2014, 02:35 AM - 1 Like   #40
Veteran Member
Christine Tham's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,269
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
Newbie. 1994 was the first major comms review I went through. Took a years worth or work, generated 5 reports and a complicated econometric model of 'interactive services'. In those days people used to think ATM switches were going to kill TCP/IP internetworking, Oracle was the future of digital television, and Internet meant landlines/ADSL/FTTN etc. The handset I was using at the time was a very dumb but nice CDMA Nokia 121. Maybe around the same time I also picked up a Palm Pilot, but it could only do TCP/IP via a nifty little 1200 baud external modem that needed a wired connection.

Everyone understood that there was demand for mobile - and money to be made for the govt from spectrum auctions - but mobile phones were never forecast to be the versatile, ubiquitous [and lucrative] hand sized PC's they have since become. Just voice, maybe fax.

Many researchers at the time made the mistake of assuming the telcos and their suppliers would be driving change and innovation in the market. I got it generally right by pushing hard the proposition that the IT industry would be the change agents in the 'convergence' marketplace - ie the Apples and Googles of the world, and their associated developer and supplier ecosystems - not the telcos. Partly due to different tech dynamics, partly due to culture, partly due to the different regulatory environment each industry had to operate in.

Nostalgia.
Thanks. Don't think the Palm Pilot was around in 1994 though - it was released in 1997, and I bought one for half price at a conference in 1998. I remember because my boss bought one full price only the week before and was jealous. Then Microsoft released the Pocket PC around 2000 - I remember I was visiting the Microsoft Campus at the time and they basically gave one to me (I can't remember the model, but it was the colour model - 16GB of memory!)

Was the Internet pervasive in 1994? I don't remember. When I started working, there was no such thing as the Internet. There was CSNET, which was for academic and research institutions only. Then in the late eighties they opened it up to commercial organisations and called it AUSNET. I remember persuading my boss to let us connect. He asked me what the benefit was, so I had to explain the concept of email to him. In those days, you couldn't really join unless you knew someone who was already on and was willing to let you connect (via 2400 baud modem). And you had the compile the source code yourself.

All we had those days was email and USENET - web browsing came much later I think. I remember the first browser I used was "lynx" - it was character mode only. 1994 would have been around the time I first saw NCSA Mosaic.

In those days all the computers on AUSNET in Australia could be mapped onto a diagram on an A4 paper, with all the interconnecting lines between them. I seem to remember kre ("King" Robert Elz) maintained that map because he basically single handedly maintained the domain name registry for all of .au

I don't think in the nineties people would have even understood the concept of mobile data. I remember when I first started using GPRS it was fast and it was good. Then suddenly all these people started buying "Crackberries" and it was impossible to get any decent speeds out of GPRS.

Dang. Now you got me started on the nostalgia trip.

---------- Post added 08-19-2014 at 08:05 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote

A 'competitive market' is what we forum users want. ("A competitive market is one in which a large numbers of producers compete with each other to satisfy the wants and needs of a large number of consumers.").


Firms beating up on each other until there is a monopoly or duopoly is not what we desire.


Unfortunately, Sony have copped it big time, and analysts rate them as junk:


Sony Credit Cut To Junk Status As Smartphones 'Cannibalize' Its TV And PC Businesses - Forbes
Another LOL, and that was brilliant quoting an article from January 2014! Their TV business has actually doubled in operating income since then, and have made money in the last few quarters (the margins on those 4K TVs must be pretty decent).

I was actually under the impression that till recently the camera industry was effectively operating like a duopoly. How dare companies like Sony and Ricoh muscle in on that nice competitive marketplace of 2!

If you actually believe what you say you should be cheering Sony for taking "drastic cost cutting" measures (PS - it's not that drastic - I happen to know Sony is actually hiring people) and selling assets so that they can "survive" and help make the camera industry a "competitive marketplace" :-)

It's what you say "we forum users" want, isn't it? I'm sorry, I've kind of lost track exactly what point you were trying to make. I still don't understand the concept of a "competitive marketplace" where "no one wins". My apologies - clearly you operate at a level well beyond my limited ability to understand.

Last edited by Christine Tham; 08-19-2014 at 03:16 AM.
08-19-2014, 03:08 AM   #41
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,913
QuoteOriginally posted by Christine Tham Quote
Was the Internet pervasive in 1994?
Not pervasive yet, but it was getting there.

I guess you don't remember Trumpet Winsock?
Winsock - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for Trumpet Winsock | Recognising an unsung hero

Written by our own Peter Tatham, which provided the first mass market way for people to connect to the Internet. MS didn't supply a TCP/IP stack (and a dial-up networking client) for Windows until Windows for Workgroups 3.11 and then Windows 95.

I had been a Compuserve user for many years before 1994, as well as a BBS user too. Both gave limited forms of access to the Internet in one form or another (newsgroups, email, ftp, gopher). My first ISP was OzEmail from 1993, when they were initially attempting to create a walled garden Internet on the model of Compuserve/Prodigy/AOL.

In those days Doom was also new. It sure destroyed a lot of productivity when I loaded it onto the LAN at work.
08-19-2014, 03:36 AM   #42
Veteran Member
Christine Tham's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,269
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
Not pervasive yet, but it was getting there.

I guess you don't remember Trumpet Winsock?
Winsock - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for Trumpet Winsock | Recognising an unsung hero

Written by our own Peter Tatham, which provided the first mass market way for people to connect to the Internet. MS didn't supply a TCP/IP stack (and a dial-up networking client) for Windows until Windows for Workgroups 3.11 and then Windows 95.

I had been a Compuserve user for many years before 1994, as well as a BBS user too. Both gave limited forms of access to the Internet in one form or another (newsgroups, email, ftp, gopher). My first ISP was OzEmail from 1993, when they were initially attempting to create a walled garden Internet on the model of Compuserve/Prodigy/AOL.

In those days Doom was also new. It sure destroyed a lot of productivity when I loaded it onto the LAN at work.
Yes, I did remember Trumpet. But you have to realise, I wasn't a fan of Windows and carefully avoided using it as much as possible.

I did make the prediction though that NT was going win over OS/2. Almost nobody believed me back then, but Microsoft loved me for making that prediction. I remember at one stage Microsoft rang me and invited me for an all expenses trip to Seattle to see Bill Gates, but I had to (reluctantly) say no because I was actually working on a strategy for a bank in London.

Doom was way too gory for me, and I wasn't very good at it either. I did remember this rather important meeting, and there was this guy who was just basically playing Doom the entire time on his laptop!
08-19-2014, 05:06 AM   #43
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by reeftool Quote
Very true but that isn't helping Sony much at all. If it wasn't for the success of the Play Station, the vultures would be circling. Most analysts consider their stock a bad investment as most divisions have been loosing money for several quarters.
The same could be said of Amazon with the strategy of “spend now to make money later” and people know that both Amazon and Sony are leading the way to the future in online shopping and consumer electronics . BTW Amazon lost $126 million in the last quarter and Sony made $250 million profit.
08-19-2014, 08:03 AM   #44
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,913
QuoteOriginally posted by Christine Tham Quote
an all expenses trip to Seattle to see Bill Gates
I used to like those kind of offers when I worked in a certain very big spending government agency. We were once cooking up a large national telecoms project, and all of a sudden I'd get invites to the Australian Open or whatever Grand Final I liked, 'study tour' and conference invitations to exotic places, and CEO's would come to visit us, making all sorts of generous promises. Happened often when vendors got the smell of big money. I don't miss those days at all.

Last edited by rawr; 08-19-2014 at 08:48 AM.
08-19-2014, 09:31 AM   #45
Veteran Member
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
Using one of the links provided by Christine: http://www.nikon.com/about/ir/ir_library/result/pdf/2015/15_1qf_d_e.pdf

It forecasts that unit sales for Nikon for ILC will be down about 30% in 1st quarter 2015 from 2014, 1590 to 1100 (thousands)
Also sales in yen will be down about 29%.

This isn't compact cameras anymore, this is core ILC. yikes

They don't say whether the largest drop is in their entry level APS DSLRs or their FF DSLRs. or both. My impression was that Nikon went into their FF building program a few years back with the idea that the FF were going to be their insurance against drops in compact sales. But there still isn't forecasted any floor in DSLR sales. No wonder that Ricoh apparently isn't going to build a FF this year - i say apparently because of comments on PF.
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!
business, canon, concept, consumers, credit, days, division, drop, dslr, form, income, industry, internet, junk, market, model, models, nikon, pc, people, post, products, results, sales, segments, sony, space, tactic, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The sky is not falling! Kunzite Pentax News and Rumors 70 09-01-2021 03:22 PM
The Sky is Falling! - Adam perhaps you can ask? Docrwm Pentax News and Rumors 258 04-28-2013 11:54 AM
Is the sky falling? mattdm Photographic Technique 15 07-03-2011 10:10 AM
NIKON the SKY is FALLING? Adrian Owerko Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 20 08-20-2009 03:13 PM
the sky is falling PaengBonafe Post Your Photos! 13 05-29-2008 09:41 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:51 PM. | 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