Bob Whitmire wrote:
> $495 for the 510 body. $675 for the two-lens kit.
>
> I wonder if I might be permitted to express a smidge of displeasure
> toward (Mt.) Olympus for the fact that those of us who bought the 510
> earlier in the season paid considerably more, and while prices were
> expected to drop in time, one can't help but wonder if one has been
> milked.
>
I think you may be sure it wasn't intentional. Essentially the only
reason prices are dropped is to sell more product than was selling at
the old price.
Nobody lowers prices on a product that is selling as fast as it can be
supplied. In the camera business, the two most common reasons for a
price drop are because it isn't selling at the desired rate and because
it is in line for replacement. But both boil down to the same thing.
It may not apply to at least higher end DSLRs, but clearly applies to
P&Ss, that models are made in single production runs, with run size
based on planned product replacement/upgrade cycles and anticipated
sales rate. If the sales rate was overestimated, the excess needs to be
moved to make room for the next model. If underestimated, sales and
profits may be lost. A savvy manufacturer would partially time readiness
to introduce the replacement so that it could be moved up if its
predecessor sells out faster than planned - and back if sales are
slower, and if the competitive situation allows.
The E-400 is a clear example of this strategy. They just weren't ready
with the 'real' new models with live view and ran off a fixed run of the
E-400 to stay in the market and people's consciousness as still bringing
out new models.
I don't know whether the E-410/510 situation is one case or the other,
but be assured that Oly wishes they weren't faced with dropping prices
even more than you wish you had paid less.
> Not that I will complain too loudly. I have gotten a good summer's worth of
> shooting out of my 510,
Yeah, that's a bit short. The 5D gave me more time than that before
going down much under what I paid.
> though the kit lenses have languished. Still, I don't recall other "pro
> level" manufacturers
But the 410/510 are not pro cameras, but low/mid-range fodder in the
mass market wars.
> employing such precipitous price drops so soon after introduction.
Again, I think "employing" is the wrong word. "Forced into" is more
likely apt. I think this need for a drop was anticipated by some folks
looking at the pricing and features/performance vs. the competition.
> Perhaps I'm just not recalling. And what does this mean for those
> among the faithful who are even now fondling their new E-3s?
>
The E-3 should be a different kettle of fish. Like the high end Ns and
Cs, it's more likely on a continuous, relatively low volume, assembly
line intended to run for at least a couple of years - and with luck,
many years. That gives some flexibility in production rate and the
ability to incorporate changes as the model goes on. With the right
combo of design quality, market success and just plain luck, the line
can be retooled for the next model at minimal cost.
If you saw the video visit to the Canyon 1D(s) production facility, you
can see what I mean.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|