That's completely out of thin air, they might be losing thousands of immediate camera sales and probably losing no actual lens sales in the long run. I don't think that the lack of an aperture simulator is a long term deal breaker, but I'll bet they'd sell more cameras during the immediate release when they sell for a premium price than without, at least on the first model that offered it. How much lost revenue is it when say 10-20% of those who'd buy immediately wait for the inevitable price drop?
John Forbes wrote: >Without the aperture simulator, they might lose half a dozen body sales. >With it, they might lose thousands of lens sales. > >It's a no brainer, except, it seems, for the truly brainless. > >John > >On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 16:14:00 +0100, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote: > > > >>Couple hundred dollars for cam sensor? that's absurd >>if anti shake is only $100 retail. $25.00-35.00 retail >>is probably a more accurate figure. Cheap! That is one >>of the reasons I am so pissed off about it, a key feature >>is missing for virtually NO savings in the final cost >>of the body. That's dumb. >>jco >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >>William Robb >>Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 10:08 AM >>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>Subject: Re: The JCO survey >> >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "P. J. Alling" >>Subject: Re: The JCO survey >> >> >> >> >>>They don't know how many more sales they'll get with an aperture >>>simulator included, part of the reason they're getting these >>>pre-orders >>>it the touted backward compatibility. If were better wouldn't it be >>>logical to expect better sales to old farts like us? I'm certain that >>>they'd have one more if it had one. In fact I think there'd be a lot >>>more. There may even be pre-orders by old users who don't know the >>>limitations caused by lack of an aperture simulator, it's so seldom >>>mentioned in the reviews. Those people will be disappointed and won't >>>help create positive buzz about the next camera release. We get a >>>number of questions on this list about that regularly. How many of >>>them >>>decided to stay with Pentax or move on. We don't know, and neither >>>does Pentax. >>> >>> >>> >>>>The success of these, and earlier Pentax DSLR's, indicates that the >>>>lack of the aperture simulator isn't costing them sufficient sales to >>>>be concerned about. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>Which may not last. They still need all the sales they can get, and >>>every useful feature helps. >>> >>> >>They need every sale thay can get, and the market is very price >>sensitive. >>Add a couple of hundred dollars to the price of a camera, and someone >>else will come along and scoop that camera's potential customers with a >>lower priced unit, and the product becomes a money loser. >>Or, they have to sell the unit at a price which does not allow them >>sufficient profit to make up for the extra feature (in this case, an >>aperture simulator), and the product becomes a money loser. >>It's purely a money thing. >>I'm surprised you don't understand that. >> >>William Robb >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > -- Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler. --Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
