Actually they haven't. Economic data based on this sort of thing is
done by surveys, a notoriously unreliable method, because people are
people. This list is in many ways an unscientific survey and even less
reliable than the scientific kind, because what people say they'll do
and what they actually do are two different things. However they're not
hearing anything here that contradicts the current wisdom. If they knew
how many of us were dissatisfied, and could extrapolate that out to say
a 2% to 5% increase in immediate sales of the next new body, it would be
worth their while. If everyone says it's all right by them that the
aperture simulator is gone, then Pentax has no incentive to care. All
they know is what they hear, and what they are hearing on this list is
that they gain nothing from supporting the aperture simulator. The
general run of new buyers with no experience with Pentax are getting a
measure of backward compatibility, they have no idea how much more they
could have so they won't complain. I'd like Pentax to know that there's
a good chance to increase sales on the next camera, especially in the
initial period when profits are highest. .
Mark Roberts wrote:
>Perry Pellechia wrote:
>
>
>
>>The real question is how much would you be willing to pay extra for a
>>camera that had the feature.
>>
>>
>
>No, the real question is how many camera sales might Pentax lose by not
>having this feature.
>
>It's been several years since the aperture simulator disappeared.
>They've figured out the answer at this point.
>
>
>
>
--
Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler.
--Albert Einstein
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
