Jeff S Posted March 5, 2015 Share #81 Posted March 5, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes, that is what Erwin has been saying for some years now. I think it is an astute analysis, lacking one thing: a vision of the future. Looking at the Porsche analogy, it may be sobering to consider Volvo and Jaguar. Both managed to divert the direction of the company from traditional to contemporary , but both orphaned their traditional customer base. But Puts mentions a flaw in the Porsche analogy, which he notes others are suggesting, and is saving that for his next installment… "Porsche started as a high-quality low volume niche producer and managed to evolve into a high-quality-high volume special product manufacturer. Leica seems to want to follow the same route, but lacks one distinctive commodity. This is for the next story. " Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 Hi Jeff S, Take a look here New Leica CEO?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
rosuna Posted March 5, 2015 Share #82 Posted March 5, 2015 Erwin Puts has published this on facebook: https://www.facebook.com/erwinputs/posts/821040281302087 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted March 5, 2015 Share #83 Posted March 5, 2015 Some quotes... I was alone in noting that the T was not a smart product. Now there are serious indications that the sales of the T are not as hoped for. The smartphone has almost killed the compact digital camera and in this segment the D-C-V and X series of Leica are the obvious victims. When Leica announced the intention to grow tenfold it was clear that the then current range of products was not suitable as a platform to support such an ambitious goal. The string of problems that have erupted from the Leica factory are an indication that the combination of fast product introduction and higher production levels cannot be handled with good success, at least not by a company with the Leica-Solms heritage. Porsche started as a high-quality low volume niche producer and managed to evolve into a high-quality-high volume special product manufacturer. Leica seems to want to follow the same route Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted March 5, 2015 Share #84 Posted March 5, 2015 Some quotes... Same article I linked post 73, and have been subsequently discussing. And you left out the most intriguing sentence IMO…post 81. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve P Posted March 5, 2015 Share #85 Posted March 5, 2015 I wonder if the outcome for the departing CEO might have been different if the teaser campaign for the X-Vario had resulted in a genuine mini-M instead of a maxi-X? Perhaps a native M-mount, EVF only body in FF or APS-C much more closely related to the Leica M at a price point markedly below the ME may have been better received by more photographers than both the X-Vario and T put together. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 5, 2015 Share #86 Posted March 5, 2015 I think is difficult to sell a T camera or a S camera to somebody out of a Leica Store. But Leica Stores are a filter. People going there with money in the wallet for buying a camera is very special people. They don't care about discounts, megapixels, etc. They want exclusivity, luxury, maybe reliability, etc. This is the point in which Leica's strategy is failing, assuming it is failing. They cannot attract enough people to those boutiques. Boutiques would best be considered public relations display advertising. From Forbes: An October 2008 survey of high-net-worth individuals–conducted byGoogle and Stevens, Pa.-based research firm Unity Marketing–found that high-earning online shoppers made more per year on average than high-earning in-store shoppers. Their average net worth was also much higher– $21.7 million for wealthy online shoppers, compared with $3.4 million for wealthy in-store shoppers. Wealthy online shoppers also spent more per year on luxury goods: $114,632, compared with $23,000 for wealthy in-store shoppers. That should not surprise us. Leica, strictly speaking, is not a luxury goods maker, except perhaps for some special editions. Luxury means over-the-top ostentatious fluff. Leica is a prestige goods maker. Prestige in this case comes from Leica's historical reputation for precision, well crafted optics and machinery. Gosh knows, Leica earned that good reputation. When I look at the whole Leica line I find something in there to appeal to anyone in my family, and among my friends who are not photographers, but avid picture makers. Unfortunately, they are not at all aware of the Leica line. It is not apparent. We're talking a serious PR (free advertising) effort to turn that around. I'm beginning to think of other consumer items that might pair well with the whole line of Leicas. Some relationships that become a meme. My professional photographer associates would have nothing but an S camera. Consider, however, our ages hover around 70 years-old, and we are entrenched and looking to retirement with the same old stuff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted March 5, 2015 Share #87 Posted March 5, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) The definition of "luxury" depends on the industry where the product is placed, and how you are presenting it to the public. In the camera industry Leica is more and more a luxury focused company. The boutiques are here the key. Zeiss' strategy, focusing the company in the manufacture of pretigious tools, avoiding exclusive commitments to any system or camera maker, seems to be the smarter in the long term. The question is if Apple's example is not good for the camera industry or if Leica's implementation fails due to manufacturing costs/prices or product portfolio design. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted March 5, 2015 Share #88 Posted March 5, 2015 They cannot attract enough people to those boutiques. Maybe there is not enough people willing to buy a complex, old-fashioned $8,000 camera or a big reflex-like $26,000 camera. And the potential target is the same people who expends $6,000 in a purse or a watch, or much more than that in a car. They are out there. The wealthy seek durable value like everyone else. When they buy an $8,000 old-fashioned mechanical Patek or Rolex, it's worn for 10 years and traded-up for another, usually at a profit or cherished 20 years and passed on to a child or grandchild. It will still keep perfect time. This is partly what keeps them buying. An M3? It was likely perceived by the original buyer to be an enduring bit of mechanical art well worth the heady price at the time--if sales numbers were any indication--and six decades on, remains relevant, holding value and functioning for someone--and will be so long as there's film out there. An $8,000 M8.2 or M9 in 2019 and 2029? A dated historical curiosity at the first and a worthless paperweight at the latter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted March 5, 2015 Share #89 Posted March 5, 2015 Some quotes... No, Erwin Puts wasn't alone in doubting the T, I was doing the same on here at the time! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo.Battista Posted March 5, 2015 Share #90 Posted March 5, 2015 Have we gone off of topic, have we? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted March 5, 2015 Share #91 Posted March 5, 2015 Have we gone off of topic, have we? By discussing an article about the future of Leica, including reference to new leadership? Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamey Posted March 6, 2015 Share #92 Posted March 6, 2015 So why don't you use Leitaxed R lenses on a Nikon or Sony? No Thanks. I still use my R lenses with my Film cameras, slide film is still my Primary interest. Electronic imaging is still secondary to me. Ken. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamey Posted March 6, 2015 Share #93 Posted March 6, 2015 No, Erwin Puts wasn't alone in doubting the T, I was doing the same on here at the time! Me too, and that goes for the so called mini M, I am not too impressed with their starship S system either. How long will the S system survive for, will the M system continually prop it up. The R system lasted for over 45 years, then they had no more money for the R system so it was discontinued leaving tens of thousands of owners out there disillusioned by Leica's attitude. However they found planty of money for R&D for the S,X and the T systems, strange indeed. So with the new CEO, what will he be implementing, perhaps a new system called the Leica P (phone) Future will tell, that if it has one. Ken. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delcredere Posted March 6, 2015 Share #94 Posted March 6, 2015 The new CEO should stop Leica prematurely announcing new products when they are not yet ready and cannot be delivered promptly, and fire the person who has been in charge of marketing and PR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 6, 2015 Share #95 Posted March 6, 2015 Err....He should fire himself? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 6, 2015 Share #96 Posted March 6, 2015 Me too, and that goes for the so called mini M, I am not too impressed with their starship S system either.How long will the S system survive for, will the M system continually prop it up. The R system lasted for over 45 years, then they had no more money for the R system so it was discontinued leaving tens of thousands of owners out there disillusioned by Leica's attitude. However they found planty of money for R&D for the S,X and the T systems, strange indeed. So with the new CEO, what will he be implementing, perhaps a new system called the Leica P (phone) Future will tell, that if it has one. Ken. :confused:The S system has been selling far above its projected sales since its introduction.... The R system was discontinued because the projected economics were disastrous. Not surprising, as the R8 and R9 nearly finished the company off. Historically Leica has never been able to offer a competitive SLR system. The Leicaflex SL series had to be discontinued because it was hemorrhaging Marks, for the rest of the time Leica managed to get by by rebadging Minoltas. As soon as they started putting money in their own development with the R8 things went pearshaped again, leading to de facto bankruptcy. Only a loan by Panasonic and Dr. Kaufmann's intervention kept them afloat. Axing the R was a very sound decision. With the present declining SLR market I am sure we will never see a Leica DSLR again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted March 6, 2015 Share #97 Posted March 6, 2015 The S system has been selling far above its projected sales since its introduction... How long was that healthy sales period? My information is the sales of S cameras almost collapsed months ago. M and T sales don't go well either. It is difficult to have the whole picture without specific information, but this change in CEO seems to be caused by slower sales than expected in all the product lines. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 6, 2015 Share #98 Posted March 6, 2015 That is a simple sum: subtract the date of introduction from early 2015... I doubt that the "slowing down of sales for the last months" is grounds for firing a CEO. Not even football trainers have seats that are that wobbly. The new CEO was clearly introduced to the company to be groomed for the job last September, not yesterday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted March 6, 2015 Share #99 Posted March 6, 2015 That is a simple sum: subtract the date of introduction from early 2015... So you are saying S sales goes very well... above expectations... right? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted March 6, 2015 Share #100 Posted March 6, 2015 Me too, and that goes for the so called mini M, I am not too impressed with their starship S system either.How long will the S system survive for, will the M system continually prop it up. The R system lasted for over 45 years, then they had no more money for the R system so it was discontinued leaving tens of thousands of owners out there disillusioned by Leica's attitude. However they found planty of money for R&D for the S,X and the T systems, strange indeed. So with the new CEO, what will he be implementing, perhaps a new system called the Leica P (phone) Future will tell, that if it has one. Ken. The S is apparently used mostly by amateurs. It's a very impressive product but seemingly failed to capture the pro market, which has to be seen as a failure. I suspect the problem is mostly lack of sufficient back up service (as well as the cost of buying into a new system for established pro's). Leica's excuse for not developing a digital R camera was that they wouldn't be able to compete with the likes of Nikon and Canon. But then they release the T which competes with just about every manufacturer, but offers less in terms of functionality than pretty much every other option out there. Their strategy does, in hindsight, seem rather confused. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.