Winsor Crosby wrote:
>Looking to improve the situation, the company is planning to
>significantly change its overall product mix for the digital camera
>market, which is currently dominated by compact models (72%), with
>digital SLRs making up just 3% of sales, and other products the
>remaining 25%.
>
Guess I wasn't the only one to buy a compact other than an Oly this
year. As I've posted before, I find the Oly line of compacts to be
incredibly confusing, with very different cameras with similar names,
similar appearing models with different sounding names, just a sea of
models with no clear differentiations between them. And don't try to
explain it to me. I'm not in the market now. And besides, Oly had to
make it clear before I bought a camera. Somebody else explaining it
later is of no use to me or Oly.
Not that the model number confusion is anything new to them. When I was
once considering one of the Stylus zooms, I was shocked to discover that
what was really two (or more...) lines, one with higher build quality
and another pushing features and zoom range - all in one set of names
differentiated only be zoom range. NUTS!
Most of the other makes have fairly clearly differentiated lines. The
alpha part of the name tells something about general size/function and
the numbers go up with succeeding models.
The other thing I've said before is that the Oly compact models are
really undistinguished in features and performance. The only semi-unique
thing they have is the splash proof models. Otherwise, everything is
just middle of the pack. And there is a big market out there for really
small cameras with decent performance, and Oly just doesn't do that,
heaven knows why. When I was looking for a small camera for one son's
birthday last year, Oly didn't have a single camera in the size feature
range I was looking for - and Can*n and others had been making them for
2-3 years. I put an Oly in the final three for him to pick from and it
was rejected based on size. Oh, the one he did choose works very well.
So I'm not surprised that they lost money in compacts. Without clear
product lines, marketing becomes a disorganized mishmash. Add to that
neither outstanding feature sets nor outstanding performance, and it's
no wonder sales disappoint. All of these little cameras take decent pics
under ordinary circumstances for the majority of users. So you have to
distinguish yourself in one or more ways from the pack.
>In three years, the company is forecasting 20% of its
>digital camera sales to be DSLR models, with compact models
>constituting 60%. Two years later, the mix is expected to be 30%
>DSLR, and 40% compact models.
>
>
That means either a very much smaller company or an enormous increase in
DSLR sales. What's the saturation point for DSLR sales where growth
rates drop to replacement level? And when will it be reached? These are
crucial questions for anyone aiming to vastly increase their sales and
share and I bet nobody doing the "planning that came up with those
numbers even looked at that. It's so easy to assume that what goes up
will always go up.
Don't get me wrong, I wish Oly well, and wish they would make cameras
for me, too. It's a rough world out there in commodity manufacturing and
Oly hasn't done themselves many favors lately.
Moose, fondling an OM-4
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|