yanidel Posted November 25, 2009 Share #81 Posted November 25, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Those people reporting to the "delivery register" that they got their camera are just agents of Leica's enemies to spoil this marketing game. My name is Cron, James Cron. M9 Platinium finish - delivered 007/11/2009 to MI5, Thames House, London Delivered with special charging station M9 to Aston Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 25, 2009 Posted November 25, 2009 Hi yanidel, Take a look here M9 Delivery Delay again ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
tester Posted November 25, 2009 Share #82 Posted November 25, 2009 You dont understand me....there is NO question that M9 is unavailable because of 50 or so cameras/day limit. Problem is that in my opinion Leica know very well that people are waiting and grumbling for delivery but ... but nothing. They know. They took this into consideration during M9 designig/marketing phase and accept it. No matter how many people are waiting, Leica don't change anything because of company policy/strategy (for example to make 150 not 50 cameras/day) You want your candy you must be patient. Regards T. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted November 25, 2009 Share #83 Posted November 25, 2009 You dont understand me....there is NO question that M9 is unavailable because of 50 or so cameras/day limit.Problem is that in my opinion Leica know very well that people are waiting and grumbling for delivery but ... but nothing. They know. They took this into consideration during M9 designig/marketing phase and accept it. No matter how many people are waiting, Leica don't change anything because of company policy/strategy (for example to make 150 not 50 cameras/day) You want your candy you must be patient. Regards T. I agree with you that patience is never wrong. One may assume a very clever marketing strategy worked out by people who are able to predict everything and have all the resources they wish. Sometimes a different theory may work as well. Leica is producing in Portugal and in a small town in Germany (in a former furniture plant with very limited space) relying on a staff which needs much and long training for their work. Essential parts of the M9 can only produced manually with no chances of automatisation. When Leica brought the M9 to the market they did so after a year of considerable losses.Their source for financial capital is a single person who has invested several millions during the last years. International markets - especially in the US, Japan and UK - are difficult at the moment to say the least (a short look how Nikon, Canon or Panasonic are employing very radical programms of cutting costs might give some impression). When somebody is calling for changes to ensure that the M9-production goes much quicker he proposes that Leica takes a lot of money to invest in plants, machines and working staff. Wherefrom? Wouldn't it just be reasonable to say: we have to earn the money first, stabilizing the situation of the company which has been on the verge of bankrupcy several times in the last years? After this - and when we can exspect that good sales are going on with new products (the X1 and S2 still have to prove, that they will be selling well) we can invest into our production capacities. It is easier to make up theories of clever marketing strategies than to be responsible for a company to exist even tomorrow - and perhaps better than today. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_dykstra Posted November 25, 2009 Share #84 Posted November 25, 2009 Uli - this time I follow your thinking, and agree. The slow production rate (actually, flat out for Leica) will enable this small niche product company to make a profit. Good! I should dig into my records and see how long my R8 took. At least a couple of months I think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
melissah Posted November 26, 2009 Share #85 Posted November 26, 2009 i am understanding of leicas predicament in terms of production. handmade takes time. we order we wait. in a way leica is endorsing a back-up system, nikon, canon... and thats ok too. what im most disturbed about is that leica is allowing their big distributors to force their clients into pre-pay and/or large deposits. i realize that im in the us and policies may differ here than in the rest of the world. here money in the bank can collect interest, not to mention be used to pay bills or whatever. i feel its unethical ( or just simply wrong) for places like B&H to take 7k lock it up and collect interest for 3-6 months. 7k @ 5% a yr = $350. leica has control of their dealers. is it possible that they are un-aware that the us dealers are requiring this? ive been told that the US dealers legally cant make you pay in advance but i believe its a grey area. im not a lawyer... what i dont understand is why am i the one saying this? why arent i reading this posted by someone else. many photogs here have been in the industry for decades and are independent. theyre entire world is about cash flow. im not saying this to start a bitch fest, but to simply point out that like leica we are small and we cant afford to tie up our money. btw i too am a long time customer of B&H and have had ok experiences with them. so please forum members dont think this is some thinly veiled complaint from a passed experience. i will post this in the thread where the guy went off at B&H so mods, please excuse. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 26, 2009 Share #86 Posted November 26, 2009 It is clear you are not a lawyer. The only control Leica has over dealers is to kick them out of the dealership. In the case of B&H that would be a well-aimed shot in their own foot, as B&H sells a considerable amount of Leica gear - from Leica's point of view. But for B&H it is just a minor part of their turnover. So who has control over whom? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanhulsenbeek Posted November 26, 2009 Share #87 Posted November 26, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) It is easier to make up theories of clever marketing strategies than to be responsible for a company to exist even tomorrow - and perhaps better than today. Well put indeed. Aren't the marketeers the chair-borne heroes of today's battle for a company's existenca? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.