Please see interlaced comments... "Gregory L. Hansen" wrote: > > Keith Whaley said: > > > "Gregory L. Hansen" wrote: > > > > > > Mike Johnston said: > > > > > > > But Boz, this can never happen. It ignores the reality of producing products > > > > for a market. The company cannot make the decision as to which way it will > > > > go. It has to be responsive, not prescriptive. > > > > > > But they can and should have a broad business strategy. How do they plan > > > to position themselves as SLR manufacturers? Do they plan to hit the low > > > end? Will they make another attempt at professional users? Do they plan > > > to waffle indefinitely without a clear strategy? > > > > If they did, why ever would they tell you? Or, if you want, us? > > Knowledge of a competitor's plans for evolution of their products and > > the guarding of your OWN plans is more secret and more zealously > > guarded than most top secret Government work. > > Industrial espionage is widely practiced, very sophisticated and > > in-house protection of design secrets is severe. > > I have worked in both industries, and I guarantee you that commercial > > security can be more strict...at least in the areas of product design. > > Because a broad business strategy usually isn't sensitive information. > Everyone already knows they make cameras! Because it's the sort of thing > that investors will want to know about.
We, the Pentax owners, are very probably not investors, or stockholders. If we were, we wouldn't have been bitching on a public forum about how the company does their business...and expecting the mto divulge their near term plans to the world. Investors DO get that info. Curious product owners do not. > Because it could reassure > current Pentax users that are threatening to jump to Nikon when FAJ > lenses are introduced. You mean, 'the sky is falling' hoi-polloi? Har! > Because it could encourage manufacturers of > third-party equipment, and a large pool of third-party equipment does > make a brand more attractive to new customers despite some possible lost > sales of lenses and accessories. Because if they have professionals in > mind they could start building awareness of their brand. All it might > take is for some rag like Business Week to interview a corporate officer. Not if the company is savvy at all. They don't set company strategy on rumor and hear-say reports like that. If they did, they wouldn't be in business for long... > Specific products and launch dates can be sensitive. But which direction > you want to take the business is the sort of thing that's usually pretty > public, or at least the sort of thing that doesn't matter much to > competitors. Not so. Especially if a company is branching out into an area of business his competitor is pursuing, but he has not yet entered. You NEVER give them the satisfaction of knowing which way your company is going in the near future. Not ever! > What would Canon do if they learned Pentax was going to > release IS lenses, produce some of their own? Try harder to make their > lenses better? Come on... I stand by my opinion stated above... keith whaley
