Disappointed with the fate of the EOS M line

Shooters on My Squad wrote:

Sittatunga wrote:

But that's a very vague statement and I still don't think that Canon would injure their overall profitability to boost certain unspecified lines. Please give some examples of this behaviour that have no other explanation.

I think this is where your confusion comes from. You need to understand that a company reduces its overall profitability if it sells a product similar to another one that they also sell that delivers 80% of the results, but for 20% of the price. It is natural as an average consumer to compare the “values” of items, and then get the best value for your money.

You usually will also have a higher profit by selling one product for amount x, instead of selling ten products for amount x / 10, even if margins stay the same. You need to take into account additional costs in logistics, and support (10x more packages, 10x more “amateur” customers).

This is true but not an answer to the question I was asking. R2 has been watching the digital market and rumour mill very closely and has come to the conclusion that Canon holds back on high end APS-C in case it reduces their FF sales. I'm not convinced of that and I was asking for specific examples of this behaviour.

What's the relevance of the timing of releases remark?

Timing is important if you want to maximize profits. Just search for “product launch timing strategy” if you are interested in this topic.

It is, but I still don't see how that remark is relevant to the chicken-&-egg question of whether Canon's reluctance to get into upmarket APS-C is the effect of high end APS-C on FF sales or the effect of low end FF on APS-C sales.