I don't have a dog in this fight beyond wanting Pentax to keep making great DSLRs for taking still pictures. I own a 1080 video camera which makes excellent video, and weighs less than my 18-135WR lens, and fits into every camera bag I use except the single DSLR holster bag (which doesn't even hold an extra lens, much less an extra camera. But I see a lot of entrenching in this discussion and perhaps not as much reason and logic as would be appropriate.
Consider that in the business world there are really only a couple of annual revenue strategies - either you want to drive overall revenue, or overall margin. In rare instances, these can be mutual goals, but ultimately, businesses fundamentally choose one or the other, rather than both. They do it consciously or unconsciously, but they choose. In considering market share, there are a few options, as well. You can chase overall market share, or you can chase share within a segment, or you can declare you are a premium item and share is irrelavent. Examples of all of these exist. In beer, Bud light has the highest market share. It's not premium beer, and it's not expensive beer. I suspect the margins on Bud Light are about what the margins on most standard beers are, so my guess is, Bud Light (along with Miller Lite, Budweiser, Coors Light, and others) are pursuing market share as a strategy. Contrast that with some of the real craft breweries, who may have fractions of a percent of market share (where Bud Light has over 15% share of beer sold in the US), but who are building a brand aimed at a specific market segment, rather than the general population. Examples of true premium products aren't easily identified in the beer market, but think about companies like Rolls Royce, Ferrari, or Weatherby Rifles, and you see brands who are not chasing share as much as they're chasing a premium market which pays premium pricing for items which may or may not do a job better than other less premium options, but which carry an air of prestige and exclusivity.
Now, with that said, it appears Ricoh is pursuing profit margin, apparently at the expense of market share. If they can position Pentax as a premium brand, with a boutique status (which isn't far from where they are now, delays in lens and APS-C flagship body release notwithstanding), they stand a good chance of remaining solvent. Market share is holding somewhat steady, hovering in the mid-4% range for the last few years, with two anomalies in share, coinciding with the release of the K-30/K-5ii/K-5iis in 2012 when share reached 7.5%, and coinciding with the release of the K-1 and K-70 in 2016, when share reached 6.7%. What that tells me is that in years when Pentax drops a couple of very strong new camera bodies, they gain share, and in years when they drop only one quality new body, they are weaker. If I'm in the corporate office at Ricoh, this is a trend I identify pretty quickly and begin to discuss as much as possible. I'm not suggesting two bodies a year is a necessary pace, or even one I'd want to sustain, but I'd start talking about 5 bodies over 36mo as a reasonable goal. With the K-1 introduction into the FF arena, it would be pretty feasible from a thought standpoint to produce a new body in APS-C and FF every 14-16mo (not including basic updates like the K-1ii). Right now, if the new APS-C flagship rolls out in early 2019, the pace is almost on track to accomplish 5 bodies in 36mo. The only fly in that ointment is the K-1ii, which isn't a fully new body, just a refining of the K-1. If (and if is an awfully big word here) Ricoh were to introduce a new FF late next year (and I have no idea if they're really considering that or working on it or what) with 7-8fps and a buffer big enough to hold a number of shots comparable to the K-3, with the next improvement in autofocus, I suspect they could command $2500 for it, and find a number of users who would jump at the chance to try Pentax for the first time, based on image quality alone.
Now, all of what I posted above is pure conjecture, as I have neither a backchannel to Ricoh nor a crystal ball. But it's certainly feasible for Ricoh to get a head of steam under this segment of their business by catching up on the lens roadmap and releasing a new flagship APS-C body, and maintain that momentum with releases of lenses and bodies at only a slightly faster pace than the last six or seven years. With higher margins will come the opportunity to invest in a bit of advertising, which would further build the momentum. Obviously, coulda-woulda-shoulda is worth what you just paid to read it, but it is possible for Pentax to maintain a 4-6% share and be profitable, without trying to really drive a lot of share growth, just as it's possible for them to drive profitability for a time and then leverage that to trek back to north of 7.5% share. Will they? I wish I knew. I hope they don't disappear, as I really like Pentax designs and features.
