The P&S camera market is dead.

It's not certain that camera companies can divest of their P&S mass product business and make advanced cameras only for a tiny few, unless they adopt the Leica business model and pricing.  Mass use of film products was important to keep overall manufacture of film products profitable or affordable.

What would any HDTV or automobile cost, if the R&D and fixed costs had to be spread over a mere 10,000 units, instead of 10,000,000?

Even new DSLR models are designed to complete, albeit lamely, with phone cameras.  Consider WiFi and whatnot.

If most photos that get viewed at all will be viewed on phone screens, what the whampus does it matter that a doughty camera connoiseur croaks that "My high ISO DLSR shots look better at pixel level on my 36' display."  The point is moot: soooo what?

One can witness hundreds of public events or ceremonies where most of the cameras, if any, are phones or tablets.  You see as many big cameras as you see fedora or bowler hats.

People have become accustomed to devices used with one hand.  Why trouble with a beer can mounted on a brick that has a lot of knobs, wheels, and ratchets that resemble an Edsel dashboard.

Besides, no matter what the camera, the market or attention value of most photos probably does not support spending a single cent over what phone cameras offer.  To spend an extra $1,000 or $2,000 for gear and lenses won't add an iota to how people enjoy all those mundane shots taken of friends, pets, kids, or parties.

Inertia will assure that (too many) companies continue to compete in the camera field, perhaps another 10 years, until their equity disappears, as in the case of Kodak.  However, the resources and scope for innovation will diminish.  DSLRs will be like sewing machines: something used by industry, which pays dirt wages, or something your grand-dad plays with when he's not like, dissing, like, the younger generations.