At 06:08 PM 1/31/99 -0800, you wrote:
>
>However, I cannot believe some of you are suggesting that we simply lie
>down and roll over. I am also surprised that some people think that
>buying a product buys nothing _but_ the product -- and if you buy the
>"wrong" product, well, tough.
>
Just because YOU perceive the above does not make it so. You have created a
problem where none exists.
>I could draw parallels with Betamax and the Macintosh (the relative
>"failures" of both products being due almost wholly to their
>manufacturers' failures to market and/or license them properly), but I
>won't. Instead, consider this.
>
What makes YOU the expert to determine the above statements? do you have
some special inside knowledge that none of the rest of us are privy to?
>The OM system is a _system_, aimed at advanced amateurs and
>professionals. Like other system cameras, it has a wide (and hopefully
>growing) range of accessories that allow it to be used for a lot more
>than "family snapshots."
>
Are you suggesting here that Olympus did not in fact create a system,
change models and gear as needed over a relatively lengthy period of time?
Did they not make efforts to get into autofocus, new styling etc? Did you
buy any of these new products when they came out?
>Anyone buying into such a system should reasonably expect that camera
>bodies, lenses, accessories -- and service! -- will be available for a
>long enough time to let them put together the system they want or need.
>We (and I mean most of the people on this group) have substantial
>investments in elaborate photo systems -- not just a camera and two or
>three lenses we can "dump" and replace.
>
And did you assemble your system over a "reasonable" period of time with
all new equipment purchased through the dealer network?
>How many times do I have to repeat that the OM's decline is Olympus's
>fault? THEY are the ones who "created" the decline in demand by not
>advertising, not promoting, and not "improving" the system. Why are WE
>-- the loyal OM owners who supported the system -- supposed to sit back
>and blame _ourselves_ if we can't get parts or service? It's not our
>fault -- we BOUGHT the camera, lenses, and accessories. And Olympus --
>_any_ company, for that matter -- owes us more than just the right to
>possess the hardware.
>
Now it is Olympus who "created" the decline in overall sales of SLR
systems. Take a look at total sales for all slr manufacturers and compare
them to the figures twenty years ago -- just WHO "created" the decline? Are
parts and service not available from Olympus for the products which are
currently being sold? Does this mean I cannot get parts and service today
for my OM1 that is now twenty four years old and out of production some 20
years?
Is your statement, perhaps, the ultimate 90's victim philosophy?
>When Olympus introduced the OM _system_, they made an implicit
>commitment to keep the system going. We therefore have the right to
>insist that, should the system be discontinued, Olympus continues to
>provide parts and service consistent with A: the long life of a system
>camera expected by its owners and B: the practical truth that most
>cameras have a surprisingly long working life (ie, most cameras do not
>quickly wear out).
>
I haven't seen anything from Olympus saying they are getting out of the
business -- if anything they seem to be making an effort to at least
maintain a presence in the off chance that this market might come back.
They seem to have more faith than you do.
>Businesses exist to provide consumers with what they want -- they have
>no "right" to be in business, or make a profit, otherwise. Companies
>that feel differently are companies I don't want to do business with.
>
The first part of your statement is correct, however, you forgot the part
about as long as they can make a profit at it. If I was an investor in
Olympus I would DEMAND that they pursue those products and services at
which they can make a profit. Currently that appears to be in the P&S, and
digital markets. By the way, how many shares in Olympus do you own? Since
you seem to have a real understanding of sales, marketing, production,
pricing etc why don't you just buy the company and show us all how it
should be done? This is not quite yet a socialist state where profit is NO
consideration in the existence of a business.
>Now -- what do you people think would be a sensible, intelligent,
>non-threatening way to approach Olympus on this matter? (We can always
>sue later. <grin>) I'm listening.
>
Your "class action" nonsense is the same thing that drove the Light
Aircraft Manufacturers out of the business in the mid 80's. They are just
now, after changes in legislation, getting back into the business of
producing aircraft.
The sensible way to approach the matter would be to show some empathy for
what they have accomplished to date. How many times have you written to
them praising their product and guaranteeing that you will buy that new
OM5/6 when it comes out. How often have you encouraged someone else to buy
a new SLR from Olympus? That would be the real encouragement they need to
continue production into the millenium.
Barry
>< 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 >
>
>
< 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 >
|