The Price of Leica Products and Services

[Peter H]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Your point seems to be that because you have no need for a fast wide lens no one else has either. That's a rather sweeping generalisation and not something I believe myself.

 

The other error should be obvious too: He concedes that the 21 lux may be prohibitively expensive because he can't afford it. But he also believes that if you really want something, you can afford it!

 

And furthermore, because he can afford some Leica lenses, the ones he can afford must be priced correctly and are affordable to everyone.

 

If ever there was a case of interpreting the whole world through ones own experience alone, this is it.

 

The fact is they are too expensive for some people but not for others. This unfortunately is the way of the world.

[stunsworth]

I didn't say that.

 

what you said was...

 

"People were perfectly content with f/2.8 lenses in the extreme WA category before it appeared, and I don't see why they still could not be so"

 

Now to these eyes that reads as saying people don't need the faster lenses as they would be 'perfectly content' with the slower ones.

[Guest Ornello]

what you said was...

 

"People were perfectly content with f/2.8 lenses in the extreme WA category before it appeared, and I don't see why they still could not be so"

 

Now to these eyes that reads as saying people don't need the faster lenses as they would be 'perfectly content' with the slower ones.

 

Not what I meant.

[Guest Ornello]

The other error should be obvious too: He concedes that the 21 lux may be prohibitively expensive because he can't afford it. But he also believes that if you really want something, you can afford it!

 

And furthermore, because he can afford some Leica lenses, the ones he can afford must be priced correctly and are affordable to everyone.

 

If ever there was a case of interpreting the whole world through ones own experience alone, this is it.

 

The fact is they are too expensive for some people but not for others. This unfortunately is the way of the world.

 

I never implied anything about Leica prices being correct only for the items I could afford. Where did you get that idea?

 

I agree with you, and what you say here is for the most part true. There is a subtlety you missed, though:

 

It is true that even if one cannot afford everything one wants, one can often afford that special thing one wants. As I said, I would love to own a 280 APO-Telyt, and I could afford it if I sold several other lenses, and this is something which I am unwilling (not unable) to do.

 

In like manner, consider how much people spend on cigarettes and coffee every day. Are they willing to give these up?

 

Five years ago, the 21 and 24 Summilux lenses did not even exist; the market for such lenses is naturally going to be somewhat limited by the price and actual needs of Leica photographers. The speeds of the wide-angle Leica lenses had not been an issue; so far as I know there was no outcry for 21mm and 24mm f/1.4 lenses: they were pleasant surprises.

 

But to point at these lenses and exclaim: "Who can afford that?!" misses the fact that there are many much less expensive Leica lenses.

[Peter H]

I don't quite know why we're arguing.

 

Other than the fact that Ornello (sorry, I don't know whether this is your name) has a style that seems to get under the skin of some of us!

 

I can't believe there's much of validity that hasn't already been said on this subject, in this thread, is there?

[Guest Ornello]

I don't quite know why we're arguing.

 

Other than the fact that Ornello (sorry, I don't know whether this is your name) has a style that seems to get under the skin of some of us!

 

I can't believe there's much of validity that hasn't already been said on this subject, in this thread, is there?

 

I do know something about this first-hand. I used to work in the retail photo business in the late 1960s and early 1970s. We were Leica, Alpa, and Hasselblad dealers. Occasionally I would see customers drive up in big Benz cars, wearing Rolex watches, come in and buy cheap Japanese equipment, claiming that they could not afford Leica or Alpa equipment. To be generous, I believe at least some of them were sincere, and just could not 'justify' such purchases to themselves; but they certainly could afford them.

[Peter H]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I do know something about this first-hand. I used to work in the retail photo business in the late 1960s and early 1970s. We were Leica, Alpa, and Hasselblad dealers. Occasionally I would see customers drive up in big Benz cars, wearing Rolex watches, come in and buy cheap Japanese equipment, claiming that they could not afford Leica or Alpa equipment. To be generous, I believe at least some of them were sincere, and just could not 'justify' such purchases to themselves; but they certainly could afford them.

 

I'm sure that's correct.

 

But equally, I wish you would understand that there are many people who genuinely cannot afford the equipment that they would like to be able to use, and its not always just a case of giving up the coffee and cigarettes.

 

Its as if you don't believe some people have already made those sacrifices, and have borrowed all, perhaps more, than they can now afford to repay.

 

No one's suggesting that Leica is or should be a philanthropic organisation. But simply denying that their products are genuinely beyond the reach of very many people is far too simplistic.

[Jeff S]

This thread could use

.

 

Jeff

[Guest Ornello]

I'm sure that's correct.

 

But equally, I wish you would understand that there are many people who genuinely cannot afford the equipment that they would like to be able to use, and its not always just a case of giving up the coffee and cigarettes.

 

Its as if you don't believe some people have already made those sacrifices, and have borrowed all, perhaps more, than they can now afford to repay.

 

No one's suggesting that Leica is or should be a philanthropic organisation. But simply denying that their products are genuinely beyond the reach of very many people is far too simplistic.

 

I don't deny that, but I am willing to bet many of those people spend or invest an equivalent amount in other things, perhaps without even realising it. Cell phones, wine, comic books, you name it. It all adds up. You have to look at Leica as a long-term investment; if you do that it is much cheaper than you might think to own.

[Guest Ornello]

I don't quite know why we're arguing.

 

Other than the fact that Ornello (sorry, I don't know whether this is your name) has a style that seems to get under the skin of some of us!

 

I can't believe there's much of validity that hasn't already been said on this subject, in this thread, is there?

 

The traditional way to begn was always to buy used. A nice M3 and a couple lenses, in the 1960s, was inexpensive.

[erl]

Deciding what other people can or can't, will or won't afford is a stupid argument. It is totally a personal matter. I am a living example. Oft discussed by other other people; never enlightened.

[bocaburger]

Deciding what other people can or can't, will or won't afford is a stupid argument. It is totally a personal matter. I am a living example. Oft discussed by other other people; never enlightened.

 

What I really find pathetic is the assertion that if someone chooses not to buy, the real reason must be he can't afford it.

[Guest Ornello]

What I really find pathetic is the assertion that if someone chooses not to buy, the real reason must be he can't afford it.

 

I agree. One of the sales tactics I used to use was what I call "double reverse psychology". As I have mentioned before, I used to work in photo retailing back about 40 years ago. The store carried European products, Alpa, Leica, Hasselblad. Obviously well-to-do gentlemen would come into the store, and I would show them the equipment. I was perplexed that they did not buy at first (I was very young at the time). So, quite by accident I discovered "double reverse psychology". That is, I would show the goods to the customer, make sure he took it into his hands and operated it, and then take it out of his hands and put it back on the shelf, with words to the effect of "....well, if you really can't afford it...." (but never saying it that crudely). Now, challenged in this way, the only way he can prove that he can afford it is to get out his checkbook and buy it.

 

You see, he wanted to buy it all along, but he did not want to seem too eager or be regarded as a sucker. It's a habitual learned behaviour. He expects you to "hard-sell" him, but I learned not to do that. Instead, I simply showed him the product as though it were a box of soap. These are smart people, business owners, doctors, lawyers, professors. Gushing would not be the way to communicate with them.

 

Once the customer bought from me, he would always come back to me for lenses, accessories, and film, and I was quite happy about that. I had quite a loyal following of customers in those days.

 

You see, the customer really does want to own the item (otherwise he would not be in the store)...I considered my job to be that of removing the impediments. And of course, from that point on, history was re-written...in the retelling of it by the customer, there was never any doubt or hesitation about the purchase. All the hemming and hawing that occurred before the purchase is forgotten and banished from memory.

[bocaburger]

If some salesman pulled that crap on me I'd walk out no matter how badly I wanted to buy the item. Never kid a kidder.

[Guest Ornello]

If some salesman pulled that crap on me I'd walk out no matter how badly I wanted to buy the item. Never kid a kidder.

 

It's all a matter of timing and finesse. If the customer is allowed to take too long, he will take up the whole day. You have to show, subtly, who is in charge, that it's not his property....yet. And you would never even notice, I assure you, that I was doing this. That's the point. Businessmen, people who are in business, know that time is money and they won't think a thing of it that you subtly let them know that you are there to sell products, not to recite poetry.

 

They have to want it, and if you let them keep it in their hands just the right length of time, not too long, not too short, you will let them 'bond' with it. I always encouraged customers to hold and handle the camera. Let them grow accustomed to its feel, shape, etc. I always liked Alpas and loved to sell them.

 

But the important thing is to hint, ever so subtly, so subtly that they are not consciously aware of it, that if they don't buy they cannot afford it.

 

"If it's more camera than you need, well I certainly understand...."

 

http://www.alpareflex.com/Cameras/Images/10Dfront.jpg

[MarkP]

What a load of dross...a good salesman, from the consumer's perspective, sells them the right item for their needs, not necessarily the most expensive item. Who is in control? Me as I have the money to spend as I choose. This sort of behaviour from a saleseman would also have me out of the door.

 

As per an earlier post that someone can afford a Mercedes or Rolex but thinks a Leica is too expensive, it may be well to expensive for what they want and they are sensibly allocating their money to things that are of more value to them. This may be a nice car and watch vs a camera that perhaps is more than they may need for happy snaps - for which an M-Leica is a most inappropriate choice.

[Guest Ornello]

What a load of dross...a good salesman, from the consumer's perspective, sells them the right item for their needs, not necessarily the most expensive item. Who is in control? Me as I have the money to spend as I choose. This sort of behaviour from a saleseman would also have me out of the door.

 

As per an earlier post that someone can afford a Mercedes or Rolex but thinks a Leica is too expensive, it may be well to expensive for what they want and they are sensibly allocating their money to things that are of more value to them. This may be a nice car and watch vs a camera that perhaps is more than they may need for happy snaps - for which an M-Leica is a most inappropriate choice.

 

Well when they ask about the Alpa or Leica and have in their mind the desire for it...and want to buy it...that's what I am talking about. I never shoved it down anyone's throat. On the contrary, I took it out of their hands and put it back on the shelf! That was the whole point I was making! I used double-reverse psychology! What is that? They expect a 'hard sell'. Reverse psychology would be acting nonchalant about the sale. Double reverse psychology goes further, and subtly lets the customer know that he is being qualified by me to see if he is worthy and able to buy the item. All good salesmen have to qualify the buyer. You don't have all day. Ever buy a car? Does the salesman size you up? Of course! Do they want you to take a test drive? Of course! Once you drive the car you want to take it home.

 

You can tell by the gleam in their eyes. And remember, these became loyal customers from this point on.

 

Did I ever sell a high-end product to someone who had not anticipated it? Of course. I once sold a pair of Leica Trinovid binoculars to a woman who never heard of them. Was she happy? She was ecstatic! Her camera had been stolen or ruined and she had an insurance payment (qualified) but did not want a 'luxury' item. She had moved to a rural area and wanted something for birdwatching. I explained that the Trinovid, though costly, was 'all function', unlike a diamond-encrusted watch. I allowed her to look through various models of other brands and she bought the Trinovids.

 

She had the money; the issue was whether it was a 'luxury' or not. I convinced her that the Trinovids were all business and that sealed the deal.

 

You probably think that the only people who bought Leicas or Alpas are ones who already knew about them before they walked in the door. Not at all!

 

Yes, there is a certain 'gamesmanship' involved in selling, but the goal is happy customers. I never had a customer who bought an Alpa or Leicaflex or M4 or M5 return it or complain.

[NB23]

some time ago, just before the M8 was released, there was a lot of taok about Leica goin bankrupt. That's when all the Leica prices were going down, not up. 20% off sales were not uncomon at BH-Photo and all the known stores. A Noctilux was going for 1500$ on the used market and it wasn't selling fast.

 

Owning Leica equipment, 5 years ago, was a gamble. You could lose it all or win it all.

[Ellie]

I just got a new 50mm lens and my requirements were,

- small size

- low weight

- good functional hood

- great image quality

It turned out to be the Summarit-M 50/2.5, not the most expensive 50mm though

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pgk]

You have to show, subtly, who is in charge, that it's not his property....yet. And you would never even notice, I assure you, that I was doing this. .....

 

They have to want it, and if you let them keep it in their hands just the right length of time, not too long, not too short, you will let them 'bond' with it. I always encouraged customers to hold and handle the camera. Let them grow accustomed to its feel, shape, etc.....

 

But the important thing is to hint, ever so subtly, so subtly that they are not consciously aware of it, that if they don't buy they cannot afford it.

When I was a student I worked in Central London for a Leica dealer to supplement my income. I can never remember anyone using such a sales technique and further I doubt that it would have been tolerated. If anyone tried such a technique on me they would find out exactly who was in charge - as I walked out of their shop never to return. Crass rubbish.