PENTAX - Why Are They Interested in Extremes?

Started Feb 5, 2013 | Discussions thread
PhotoHawk
Contributing MemberPosts: 545
Like?
Re: 5-6%
In reply to Russell Evans, Feb 5, 2013

Russell Evans wrote:

Stig Vidar Hovland wrote:

In Japan, the total share of FF cameras sold by Canon, Nikon and Sony are around 5 to 6%. The rest 94-95% is shared between aps-c DSLR and mirrorless cameras.

So how much of this 5% marked do you think Pentax can take? They are around 10% of the marked with aps-c and 10% of the smaller 5% marked is 0,5%.

Why should Pentax be enthusiastic about a 0,5% share of the marked?

http://www.photoxels.com/cipa-forecasts-2012-camera-shipment/

"shipments of interchangeable lens cameras reached 15.70 million units"

That was for 2011, the 2012 numbers were forecasts, so sticking to known numbers, and making the kluge assumption the rest of the world is like the Japanese market, 5% of 15.7 million DSLRs shipped, means 785,000 FF cameras. Taking your 0.5% number, that would be about 4000 Pentax FF cameras.

If Pentax can gain 0.5% of the market per year, then is can lose 0.5% of the market a year as well. Pentax can lose about 4000 customers a year to other manufacturer's FF offerings. Those customers will be top end customers, so you have to assume they are the ones owning multiple high quality lenses. That's not only going to effect Pentax's body revenue, it's going to impact lens sales. How many thousands of those top end buyers can Pentax afford to lose?

I would say the clock started ticking in 2012 with the FF hitting US $2500 and below. It doesn't look like Pentax is going to have anything for 2013, so that's 8000 gone. 2014? 12000 gone. Three year development and assuming they stated in 2012; 18,000 top end Pentax customers gone before the hemorrhaging can stop in 2015.

Think Pentax can skate by longer without having a FF offering?

Thank you
Russell

Actually Russell I do think they can.  And they should (not offer a FF model).  Any manufacturer has only a relatively constrained amount of resources.  The more you sell the better your total profit (ideally) and the more money you have to improve your product.  The existing DX lens lineup needs development and Pentax needs to keep its DX line fresh.  It also needs to put money into improving quality.  The Kx, Kr K30 and K5, K5II and K5IIs where all very good products that either maintained the market share or increased it.   There is also the excellent 645 with its lens lineup where both the body and the lens lineup itself needs attention.I think they should continue to develop what they have - it is their bread and butter.

So lets talk numbers.  Supposing that Pentax does make a competitive FF camera that sells for $2500.  How much profit do you think that unit has?  Lets take a flyer here and say $1000.  That's is very probably high but lets start there.  So using your numbers suppose they lose 18,000 FF units to the competition by 2015 because they didn't introduce a FF camera.  That would be a foregone profit of 18,000x$1000 or $18M.  If they did introduce a camera that $18M  wouldn't likely cover the NRE and production tooling costs much less make a profit - and that is over three years (2013, 2014, 2015).  Meanwhile there would be NRE on FF lens and opportunity costs in not addressing the DX lens and body lineup or 645 lineup with the constrained resources Pentax has. And in three years they'd need to spend more money to refresh that FF body.

Nope - Pentax may introduce a FF, but its not a profitable move.  If its done, its done as a defensive move and questionable at that.  And probably with less success than the Sony A99 - Sony's only FF model.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow