Jump to content

Leica NJ does not have any CCD now, turnaround time might take longer

jiheng779

By jiheng779
in Leica M9 / M-E

Recommended Posts

IkarusJohn

IkarusJohn

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Jaap, I hope you can tell the difference between people asking you to publish, and knowing you will.

 

Your discussions with people at Leica about the weather does not preclude people at Leica "feeding" you a message that they know you will repeat here.  In fact, you acknowledge above:

 

 

 

I check whether I am free to publish any confidential inside information when the occasion arises

 

There's nothing wrong with that, but what I am suggesting (with some justification) is that "your source" does seem to provide a particular perspective on various issues; a perspective which is not universally accepted, and which the more cynically minded might call "spin".

 

I'm sure you would acknowledge that in many exchanges on this forum, you present a version of events which can be, at least, sympathetic to a Leica view ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply
jaapv

jaapv

Posted
Posted

Given the nature of the talks that is certainly not the case. For one thing, they are too random to concoct some spin to feed. At worst they might be in the order of checking back on some assertion here, like "Hey, Heinz, forum members are complaining about six months' delivery delays on the M11! What is going on?"

 

I might add that most if not all of those posts you refer to are fed by a feeling of -well, outrage may be to

o strong a word, but for want of anything better- at uninformed unjust negative posts, not by any particular desire to make Leica feel good. 

If you do read my posts from time to time, you should know that I can be as critical of Leica as any member if the occasion warrants it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
IkarusJohn

IkarusJohn

Posted
Posted

To be honest, Jaap, I try not to and life is better if I don't.  There was a blissful period when I seemed to be able to ignore your posts, but sadly some code was corrected.  I don't mind your moderation posts, but too often I read your posts defending Leica as the writings of an apologist.  Sadly, I have read those.

 

That may be completely unfair, but not so long ago you justified a particularly egregious post by saying don't blame the messenger.  That showed a lack of critical thinking to me.  This exchange is pointless, to be honest; what I think really doesn't count for much.  The issues are more interesting, and I will almost certainly continue to challenge what I see as hubris.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jaapv

jaapv

Posted
Posted

I see. When I report something that doesn't fit into your bubble I should edit it to fit your view?

Let's move on, it is not going to happen.

It appears to me that the distinction between an explanation and an apology escapes you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ronazle

Ronazle

Posted
Posted

I smell oversimplification here. In Dutch we have a saying: The best helmsmen are standing on the coast...

 

We don't know the lead times, we don't know the variability in demand, we don't know the timing of management decisions, nor the reasons behind them, the production parameters, etc.

Exactly the same problems beset the sensor manufacturer. They have to keep control of the silicon wafers coming in, the microlens supply, the optical glass for the filters, keep multi-million dollar machines running, and much more, again without tying up capital in overstocking.

 

It is not like running out of crisps at a barbeque party with a 7-Eleven next door.

 

As Darylglo mentions, in other businesses we do have similar experiences with supply lines being snarled up, capital being tied up in stock, variability in demand, etc. At least we are not normally tied to one single supplier.

 

A good example is the case about half a year ago when the entire world ran out of an essential (Thyroid IIRC) medicine because of a manufacturing problem in the only factory that makes them. Slightly more important than a few weeks extra wait for a camera in my book.

 

While I see some merit in the old Dutch saying, one might note that the rocky coasts of the world are cluttered with many, many wrecked ships none of which was sunk by a landlubbing helmsman. Regards, Ron

Link to post
Share on other sites
Luke_Miller

Luke_Miller

Posted
Posted

The issue of Leica NJ being out of replacement sensors is just a continuation of the situation when Leica announced the first version of its sensor replacement policy.  Those who experienced sensor corrosion early on went through the same thing. Wetzlar provides sensors periodically and when they are exhausted, everyone in the queue must wait for the next batch.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
jaapv

jaapv

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

While I see some merit in the old Dutch saying, one might note that the rocky coasts of the world are cluttered with many, many wrecked ships none of which was sunk by a landlubbing helmsman. Regards, Ron

Do your ancestors come from Devon, by any chance? ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ronazle

Ronazle

Posted
Posted

Yes, one can blame wreckers, dysfunctional lighthouses (and the like), lack of marine chronometers, and all sorts of things but the fact remains, for whatever reason, the helmsman (by definition) pretty much positions the ship for the subsequent wreck. To get more on track: I would think the Leica sensor problems and remedy related decisions are figurative helmsman related. Regards, Ron

Link to post
Share on other sites
Luke_Miller

Luke_Miller

Posted
Posted

If one chooses to speculate:

Assuming (which seems likely) there is a cost sharing agreement between TrueSense (now owned by On Semiconductor) and Leica, that agreement may be coming to and end.  Leica may be looking to place its final replacement sensor order at the discounted price and needs to size that order accurately.  Hence the change in the replacement policy to flush out the bulk of the remaining corroded bodies.  And possibly the sharing of costs with the camera owner after the 15 of August reflects the additional sensor costs going forward.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jager

Jager

Posted
Posted

... it may well be that Leicas cooperation contract with the sensor manufacturer on product liability had  a deadline.

 

This makes more sense than anything else as to why Leica chose to change their CCD replacement policy.  It may very well be that Leica's original and much lamented wavering on the CCD corrosion issue several years ago happened prior to a (sensor replacement) contract being signed with their supplier, or while that contract was being negotiated.  If that contract had a sunset date it doesn't surprise me that Leica would wish to limit their financial exposure going forward.

 

Still doesn't make the recent policy change any more palatable.  But it helps to understand context.

Link to post
Share on other sites
pico

pico

Posted
Posted

[...] It may very well be that Leica's original and much lamented wavering on the CCD corrosion issue several years ago happened prior to a (sensor replacement) contract being signed with their supplier, or while that contract was being negotiated.  If that contract had a sunset date it doesn't surprise me that Leica would wish to limit their financial exposure going forward. [...]

 

What is the business rationale for Leica not informing its customers of such a case?

.

Link to post
Share on other sites
IkarusJohn

IkarusJohn

Posted
Posted

I don't think that it is  standard business practice to reveal supplier contracts to customers. Leica is a company, not a democracy.

 

 

Not sure I understand your point.  No one ever suggested that Leica is a democracy.  How did that ever come up?

 

Leica does, however, depend on its customers for its business.  Basic commercial reality, annoy your customers enough, no business.  Democracy, like fairness, doesn't come into it.

 

I don't recall Pico suggesting it did.  Keeping people informed, and honesty, doesn't really have a lot in common with democracy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jaapv

jaapv

Posted
Posted

Maybe you missed my point. It is very unusual for companies to publicize contracts with suppliers and they are under no obligation to do so. In the public sector that is different, as elected bodies have a legal duty to inform their voters.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Luke_Miller

Luke_Miller

Posted
Posted

What is the business rationale for Leica not informing its customers of such a case?

 Possibly for competitive reasons.  I can imagine an advertisement for a Sony A9 "We make our own sensors so you don't have to worry about parts supply in the rare instance of a failure".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...