Having had the opportunity to review a reasonable number of product programs, I have
observed that products that have their pricing/specs set without regard to competition
are seldom successful in meeting their other objectives.
PAUL STENQUIST wrote:
> The price of any product isn't necessarily determined in regard to the
> price of other products. There are a number of other factors that must
> be considered. Most important are these three: How many people will buy
> the camera if we price it at $XXXX. Will we sell all we can produce at
> that price? Will we make enough money to recover our investment and
> begin making a profit in a reasonable amount of time?
> I'm sure Pentax doesn't expect all of us to run out and buy the
> MZ-S. If we were to do that, it would be certain evidence that it was
> underpriced. And if we expand that purchase rate to the entire universe
> of Pentax users and enthusiasts, production couldn't possibly keep up.
> So rejection by a certain number of potential buyers is obviously going
> to happen. It's a good thing.
>
> Pål Jensen wrote:
> >
> > Wieland wrote:
> >
> > > This is not obvious to me.
> > > Ok, what is so much better with the MZ-S that is is almost trice the price of
>the Z-1p?
> > > (if your $1700 is correct).
> > > durability - ok. AF is better but one should expect this for a newer camera
>after 7 years
> > > at no cost.
> >
> > Maybe the same logic that make the F100 cost way more than the Z-1p?
> > Remember also that Pentax has been litterally dumping the Z-1p the last years.
>When released the Z-1p costed the same as the Nikon F90. Late in life of the F90 it
>sold for $900 while the Z-1p was reduced to $500 (B+H). So a new Z-1p would costed
>significantly more than the current one.
> >
> > I have no problem with the price of the MZ-S and I doubt anyone else would have
>had if it was a Nikon. Imagine the MZ-S made by Nikon as the F100 Compact. Sold for
>the same price as the F100. Marketed at those who want F100 qualities but in a
>smaller body. Nikon would have said that compensate for the slower motor, they had
>added mirror prefire (made the Nikon users wild), data imprinting, an extra AF point,
>mid roll rewind with memory. I can see all the whining on Pentax discuss wanting this
>Nikon compact to be a Pentax- Luckily it is.
> >
> > Pål
> >
> > -
> > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
