Olympus survival strategy

dv312

Veteran Member
Messages
9,431
Solutions
8
Reaction score
8,021
Location
Bay Area, US
Thanks for the link.

Didn't realize they had such a big loss in their imaging division last year, ¥23.1 billion.
 
Olympus should completely rid itself of all compact camera manufacturing, not just half.

Now that Sony has gone to full frame mirrorless bodies, they should just drop their aps-c system, start making bodies for their micro four-thirds sensors and force Olympus to let them use the Micro four-thirds mount so they have access to all the micro lens system. It's not like Sony had developed much of a lens line for NEX anyway.
 
I thought 43rumors had an interesting take on this interview. According to them 'Olympus and Sony are working together on the camera and lens front. This means “one-step” integration in the distribution network and camera parts purchases to reduce the costs.'

Now if Olympus was to merge its imaging division into the distribution of Sony, there really are serious cost saving to be had. The biggest problem that Olympus imaging faces is that its sales have fallen 75% from US$3.2bn 5 years ago. This has left the company with far too low sales to support its SG&A overhead which is US$500m a year or 54% of sales. To put that in perspective, I cannot think of a single product manufacturer on the planet that has a SGA/sales ratio as high - and even Apple would lose money with this ratio. (And this incidentally is a company that many people think should spend more on marketing and whose corporate overhead of US$300m is a separate line item.)

Consequently, Olympus will lose another US$100m this year in its imaging division and sales are too low for the business to be profitable. Now merging its distribution operations with Sony would allow them to make serious cost reductions in that US$500m overhead. Of course it really wouldnt be that surprising to see the whole of Olympus's imaging division to eventually become part of Sony.
 
Sharing supply and distribution chains is a fairly smart thing for both companies, as the camera market is definitely contracting.

On the downside, if Sony starts trying to call the shots with Oly imaging (not likely, as Oly uses camera imaging to feed tech to their very profitable medical imaging business, so they don't necessarily have to profit from that line), I can't see that they'll do any better than they have in the past. There is, however, another possibility.

I've been watching all the hype over the A7, and wondering how that will end up. All Sony has right now is promise, a hot body with sexy sensor specs, and not much else. Especially, not much glass, large or small. And Sony hasn't been very good about supporting it's non APS Alpha ILC's with glass.

Their plan seems to be - adapt existing C/N FF glass, which isn't going to work very well without C/N's cooperation, which Sony will not get. With the few Zeiss lenses planned, Sony has another FF Alpha with marginal handling. That's what really hurt Alpha FF - not much FF glass.

Without full integration of lens and body electronics, the result will be slow and clumsy to operate. Which leads to the question - what's the point? Small body, a few big lenses, a few small lenses, made by a company that has a history of not making lenses. I suspect that, once the novelty wears off, people will quickly tire of using adapted glass on the A7, much as most people didn't want to use ZD glass on the EM5, and all it had was poky AF, otherwise ZD's were fully integrated with aperture control and focal length reporting.

The same is true, somewhat, of NEX: interesting platform, elegant body design, not much glass, and what exists isn't particularly small. Outside of the Zeiss primes, it isn't particularly outstanding, either - Sony doesn't make a PL25 or a 12-40 or a 75 1.8, lenses that really dazzle.

Still, Sony is on to an interesting idea: a multi aspect sensor, carried to the next step. What they're missing is a really good lens system to go with it, and they don't appear to have the ability to design and implement that glass. Certainly didn't with Alpha FF, not really with NEX.

What if... an A7 like body could be developed with access to a full line of size optimized lenses, like... µ43? And, at the same time, by changing the flange, put on FF glass for the times that higher ISO and shallow DOF control are desired? Very small when you want it, very capable when you want it, and C/N have nothing to compete with that?

Trouble for Sony is - they can't field a µ43 capable body without getting the approval of Panasonic, and they won't get that.

But... Olympus could do that. With Sony's help, or as an offshoot of developing FF lenses for the A7.

Interesting possibility, isn't it?
 
Will Oly take the responsibility of making the Sony FF line of lenses?

Then one could think of further integration: an Oly branded FF35 body with dual compatibility.

Perhaps in the LT Sony adopting the m4/3 standard.

Despite Oly losses don't forget that Oly aims at 800,000 cameras, according to the PC. That's not small, that's not giving up.

And in fact after the news of Sigma joining m4/3 with new cameras and lenses m4/3 is really becoming the 'big Kahuna' (TOP) of formats.

It makes no sense to drop it.

Am.
 
Are there any info, real or rumors, available somewhere on the net about Sigma M43 cameras and lenses?
--
Best regards
/Anders
----------------------------------------------------
I'm from Sweden, but my pictures are in all languages: http://500px.com/anderslattermann
 
Olympus should completely rid itself of all compact camera manufacturing, not just half.

Now that Sony has gone to full frame mirrorless bodies, they should just drop their aps-c system, start making bodies for their micro four-thirds sensors and force Olympus to let them use the Micro four-thirds mount so they have access to all the micro lens system. It's not like Sony had developed much of a lens line for NEX anyway.

--
"There's shadows in life, baby.." Jack Horner- Boogie Nights
I think Sony has seen the light now, that there is no future in the NEX line of tiny cameras. There is more future in M43.

Sony is doing something about it, working with Olympus. I do hope Sony will release an M43 camera soon and that help make M43 a universal standard mount for mirrorless cameras.
 
Last edited:
Now if Olympus was to merge its imaging division into the distribution of Sony, there really are serious cost saving to be had.
I do not like to talk about "survival" in forums, "survival" thread headers are unfriendly.

Oly survived the last 84 years and will survive the next 84 years, probably will live longer than the original Poster .

But one recommenation: I think Oly and Sony (and Panasonic) should unify their Flash system ( not Lens Mounts or so, just the Flash mount ) to one system. So then there will one big "Sony/Oly/Panny" as alternative to canikon, with m43-APS-FF and ONE flash system, so people can change systems between Oly and Sony more easily or shoot both.
 
Last edited:
Now if Olympus was to merge its imaging division into the distribution of Sony, there really are serious cost saving to be had.
I do not like to talk about "survival" in forums, "survival" thread headers are unfriendly.

Oly survived the last 84 years and will survive the next 84 years, probably will live longer than the original Poster .

But one recommenation: I think Oly and Sony (and Panasonic) should unify their Flash system ( not Lens Mounts or so, just the Flash mount ) to one system. So then there will one big "Sony/Oly/Panny" as alternative to canikon, with m43-APS-FF and ONE flash system, so people can change systems between Oly and Sony more easily or shoot both.
And also one battery system, i.e. sharing a few standard batteries with different capacities. They should be honest here. Batteries are pretty much the same technology and are not really items with designs that can differentiate their cameras' capabilities and not really relevant to camera designs or performances. More standardisation like these will attract buyers due to lower costs, choices and convenience, which will attract more lens and camera makers to join M43 and release M43 products as it becomes a compelling standard, and that in turn will mean even more buyers.... Standardise, unite, and survive and thrive, that was how the small PC makers and component suppliers beat the dominating IBM in the 80s. That is how the duopoly of Canikon can be broken too. Standardisation can mean much much much lower costs.
 
Last edited:
Now if Olympus was to merge its imaging division into the distribution of Sony, there really are serious cost saving to be had.
I do not like to talk about "survival" in forums, "survival" thread headers are unfriendly.

Oly survived the last 84 years and will survive the next 84 years, probably will live longer than the original Poster .
'Survival' threads sound 'unfriendly'? Well unfriendly for whom? I am sure that Olympus shareholders would think that Oly remaining in the imaging business is unfriendly to them.

Oly has lost US$450m in imaging in the past 3 years - its mirrorless division will have sales of US$400m in the current year.
 
Despite Oly losses don't forget that Oly aims at 800,000 cameras, according to the PC. That's not small, that's not giving up.
Oly sold 250,000 mirrorless cameras in the first half of their financial year. The total number of ILCs sold this year should be about 18 - so Olympus is about 3%.
Are you worrying? Numbers can tell you only so much... It does make a difference if it will sell 250.000 E-M1, or 250.000 E-PM2 - LOL. And what about inventory?

I always suspect there is a troll element in this type of headers. Or is the OP concerned that m4/3 will vanish as a system? Are you?
Or are we doing small chat? ;)

Am.
 
Oly has lost US$450m in imaging in the past 3 years - its mirrorless division will have sales of US$400m in the current year
1. As I heard the medical division is doing well and they achieved being market leader together with Panasonic on the mirrorless world.

2. Part of the losses can be viewed as advertising-like money - its a bit like formula one racing, no company makes monetary wins in formula-one-racing but it helps to sell its main products

3. Most japanese companies had problems the last 3 years because of the high Yen. But meanwhile the Yen goes more to the normal range.

4. I will not answer because to any replies because this would lead to endless bickering.
'Survival' threads sound 'unfriendly'? Well unfriendly for whom?
5. Assume you earned less money last year than the 10 years before, and everywhere in the internet people are speculation about your survival. Would you enjoy this ?
 
Last edited:
5. Assume you earned less money last year than the 10 years before, and everywhere in the internet people are speculation about your survival. Would you enjoy this ?
No but I think it would help the industry knowing there are customers of yours that are getting worried. And are loyal enough that the thought of losing the company devastates them.

It's different from bashing (like that Nintendo bashing going on every gaming generation for the past 10 years, saying Nintendo is dumb and doomed). And you know, Olympus could use the input one way or the other, from their most loyal customers.

Besides, decisions like these, and strategies companies use, also affect us as consumers.
 
I think its a good idea to share parts. Let face it, the entire compact (point/shoot) market has collapsed, even the mighty professional dSLR market has fallen. There is no longer ROOM for all Big 6 makers (Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax (Ricoh), Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji); someone will died or disappear in 2-3 years. There is probably room for a Big 4, but not a Big 6.
  • M43 Panasonic is getting cozy with an APS-C Fuji, while
  • M43 Olympus is getting in bed with APS-C/FF Sony
The traditional bond between Panasonic-Olympus has long been weaken. Matsushita (Panasonic parent company) has always hated Sony and have a history of antagonism. Sony investment into Olympus only sour the fragile Panasonic-Olympus relationship.

Instead of lamenting the past that cannot be change. I choose to look forward to a Future of a Sony-Olympus Alliance with some out-of-the-box thinking:
  • Olympus should make a FF camera using Sony Sensor; as well as maintaining M43 format
  • FF is vastly different from M43 to justify making both mounts. It is far less conflicting than a M43-vs-APS-C format war
Likewise, now that Sony has abandon SLT and APS-C NEX, why not make a M43 as well?
  • Sony could just rebadged E-PM2 and E-M5 as a Sony A2000, A5000
Since Sony and Olympus will be sharing camera parts, why not re-badge each others camera to (1) reduce cost (2) reduced R&D (3) speed-up Time to Market.

Basically, Sony and Olympus should persuade the Toyota/Lexus strategy. Lexsus ES-300 is nothing more than a soup-up Toyota Camry. They share the same chassis, same engine, even the knots & bolts are the same. Yet each brand/vehicles is different enough to attract different buyers.

I like to see a merger of Fuji + Panasonic vs Sony + Olympus in the near future.
 
Last edited:
Are you worrying? Numbers can tell you only so much... It does make a difference if it will sell 250.000 E-M1, or 250.000 E-PM2 - LOL. And what about inventory?
I always suspect there is a troll element in this type of headers. Or is the OP concerned that m4/3 will vanish as a system? Are you?
Or are we doing small chat? ;)

Am.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric/sets/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric
Well there is a sort of logical disconnect between the 'success' of mirrorless cameras or at least perceived success of certain mirrorless cameras and the underlying financials of the manufacturers involved. (Look at the current thread about the Fuji X system article in the NYT.)

For instance over the past 3 years Olympus has sold 1m 'mirrorless' digital cameras and has lost US$500m in imaging. That works out as a loss of approximately US$500 for every mirrorless it has sold.

So in order for M43 to 'survive' (which would be nice as I dearly love their product) they do need a sustainable business model which they clearly dont have and show absolutely no signs of achieving. I sincerely doubt that Olympus will have an imaging division in 5 years time.

Now is this really important or is it small chat? Well if Olympus disappears it isnt the end of the world, my cameras will still work and there are plenty of other systems out there. So I guess it is all really idle chatter. But people happily spend hours comparing the relative technology merits of say mirrorless and DSLRs - while however great the technology is, it will not matter a fig if it is a massive destroyer of capital.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/robcoll/
 
Last edited:
Are you worrying? Numbers can tell you only so much... It does make a difference if it will sell 250.000 E-M1, or 250.000 E-PM2 - LOL. And what about inventory?
The loses are real regardless what they sell. Inventory would be the last thing to go. That means there would be no production, therefore no Olympus.
I always suspect there is a troll element in this type of headers. Or is the OP concerned that m4/3 will vanish as a system? Are you?
Or are we doing small chat? ;)
Nobody wants to buy expensive equipment knowing it will be worthless in few years down the road. The FT could not be a better example, and mFT is not really that far from it. In fact it is in a worst state than any troubled consumer product has been in so far.

Things may change, yes, but for now it does not look like it is happening. They may ship more than they did at the same period last year, but it also means they did spend more on building and pushing it around. And if they do not sell up to a certain numbers they will continue the same trend as it has been for them so far. Most people who see it know what it means - No matter how big the company is, it can not continue losing money indefinitely.

--
- sergey
 
Last edited:

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top