Matthias Wilke wrote:
>A price of 4000 Australian
>dollar (which are, if I remember right, circa 4000 DM) is a joke. There is
>no reason, why the OM-4 Ti and the OM-3 Ti must cost more than for example
>a Nikon FM 2. This is also a high quality built mechanical camera, and it
>costs circa 1000 DM here in Germany, I don't know the probably higher price
>in Australia. Even if i consider the low number of sold OM-4 Ti and OM-3
>Ti, this offering as the only bodies is not reasonable at this price.
We have discussed the problem of the OM-3/4 Ti prices before. A lot of people
on this list seem to regard Olympus' pricing on these two bodies to be too much.
I took only one economics class when I was in college in Japan and I am thus no
authority on the subject. However, I would like to point out what Olympus
Optical has been facing. Part of it is that they were able to offer the OM-1/2
bodies at so low a price in the past. In those days the average Japanese
workers' wage was not as high now and all the manufacturing was done in Japan.
The industrial production cost was relatively low compared to the US, for
example. I don't know how Germany fitted into the wage/production cost in those
days.
According to a Japanese article I've read recently, the Japanese workers' wage
rose as a result of an agreement made among the five developed nations in 1985.
At that time the US was suffering from a great trade deficit and the national
debts. In order to rescue the US economy, it was agreed that the exchange rate
between the dollar and the yen was allowed to reach the level of the weaker
dollar/stronger yen. However, this strategy would lead to the flowing of more
funds into Japanese economy rather than the US economy. I don't really
understand this next step of keeping the interest rate low, lower than the US
rate that was done to stimulate the economy, but according to the article this
step plus the strong Japanese yen led to "Bubble Economy".
The "Bubble Economy" and the strong Japanese yen made Japan with the highest
wage and the highest land values among the world. Naturally this phenomenon
made the Japanese industrial cost production to rise, and it became too high for
the Japanese companies to compete with the products of other Asian countries
which started developing their own manufacturing capabilities. In order to
become competitive, the Japanese industry has started exporting their
manufacturing to overseas.
Now I don't know whether the Nikon FM-2 is made in Japan or not, but even among
the Olympus product lines, the price-competitive P&Ss appear to be produced in
China while the OM system equipment is still produced in Japan. I doubt that
the Olympus management would want to export the manufacturing of the OM series
bodies and lenses to China.
I noticed something interesting today. I am using the Alps MD-1300 printer.
Alps Electric is a Japanese company, but much smaller than Olympus. Therefore
one would expect that their employees are paid less. The printer bears "Made in
Japan" while my older printer, an Epson Stylus Pro, was made in China using
Japanese parts and parts from other countries. You know Epson sells a lot of
inkjet printer models very cheap. Now I know why the Epson printers are
cheaper. I don't want to bash the skills or the brains of people in Asian
countries, though, in this last analysis. Last fall I purchased a new German
scanner and a new Olympus MO drive, neither of which was made in Germany or in
Japan. I got the defective products in both cases the first time around and I
had to have them replaced. My Epson Stylus Pro, which I purchased three years
ago, developed a misalignment problem which had to be repaired. Then I
remembered my brother experienced a mechanical problem with his Epson printer
which he purchased in the US. Obviously the quality control is not good in
these products even though the plants producing them must be producing
reasonably good products.
I doubt that the Olympus management would risk such a problem with the OM line.
Finally I want to point out that we tend to think the cheaper the better in some
ways and we end up paying for it in the long run. Why is it the entry level
camera has to stay at the same price for 10 to 15 years while everything else
has gone up in prices? Something has to give.
Tomoko Yamamoto
mailto:tomokoy@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.charm.net/~tomokoy/
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|