John,
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, John A. Lind wrote:
> At 16:55 2/7/01, John Hermanson wrote:
> >Looks like they want you to replace everything.
>
> This sounds like a marketing strategy to me. Developing a product line
> incompatible with prior generation accessories, which forces entire system
> obsolesence, is basic MBA material.
In that case, I don't give crap for MBA's. No offence, but teaching
"Loosing customer loyality" doesn't seem to be that good of an idea. Let
me explain below...
If Olympus manufactured equipment, compatible with what they made in the
past, then I am sure that many more from the list would be excited and
jump in to buy. The lesson, I thought, from system-cameras was, that they
allowed you to grow. For example, the lenses and the flash I bought for my
very first OM still works on the latest OM's in the series. Which ensures
(to some extend) that I continue to buy OM as long as the product line is
alive and reasonable well (and the quality is good etc. etc. etc.).
However rendering the old system "obsolete" and requireing that I purchase
all new (which even upgrading from Camedia 3030z to E10 does - the
tele- wide- and macro-converters are different, possibly other things
too) does two things:
1. makes me reluctant to upgrade to digital (I could buy -
actually I just did buy - a decent film-scanner...and still
have money left)
2. makes it a more viable option for me to consider other brands,
N*kon and C*non both make decent digital equipment.
Both of these things possibly attracts customers away from Olympus.
>
> Bluntly stated, the bottom-line objective of every for-profit business is
> to get as much of your money as possible from your pocket into its pocket.
>
Well, in that case Olympus are doing a very very bad job. In fact, the
incompatibilities between the old OM-gear and the new digital line PLUS
the incompatibilities between the different digital cameras makes it that
more likely that the next camera we buy will be a C*non digital.
Now, sorry Olympus - that was about $2000 which went from my pocket
without going into yours.
Maybe I'm mind-numb here - after all, I am an engineer not a MBA. However
if what you described above is basic MBA-stuff, then I prefer just being
mind-numb ;)
Disclaimer: I do not have an MBA, nor do I know what they teach. I am
sure, that it is a very good degree and that most of the stuff included is
valueable. My comments above are solely related to John Lind's observation
that the marketing strategy of Olympus is "basic MBA material". I do not
intend to offend any listmemers with an MBA - I have high regards for
degrees and for the effort it takes to get them. (just to avoid being
flamed or misunderstood)
--
Mange hilsner / Sincerely
-------------------------------------------
Thomas Heide Clausen
Civilingeniør i Datateknik (cand.polyt)
M.Sc in Computer Engineering
E-Mail: T.Clausen@xxxxxxxxxxxx
WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop
-------------------------------------------
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|