Well that's good, you're honest about it. :-) Sort of like my wife being upset with me today because 3 months ago she told me how to put the pots and pans away and now I can't remember. It's not because I can't remember today. She's upset because I obviously wasn't listening way back when.
Honestly, Peter, I'm struggling to see how Herb's post can be called bashing. It sounds highly complimentary to me. It sounds more like you have a problem because his opinion of something may differ from yours. I expect that to be the case fairly often whenever I deal with another one of the 6,500,000,000 inhabitants of the planet. Tom C. >From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but... >Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 20:01:51 -0400 > >I have a problem with Herb for other reasons. He often seemed to bash >Pentax equipment for no particularly good reason. Take this example >from DPReview. >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=17269059 >Now every lens has it's problems, but I've found the 43mm Ltd. to be >acceptably sharp at just about all apertures, a bit softer wide open >like most Pentax "normal" lenses, and have never had a problem with >corner sharpness when I used it on my LX or MX cameras.. Based on his >report, he must have an entirely different lens, not even related to the >one in my bag. When someones reports on equipment are so much at odds >with my personal experience, what should I think of their other opinions? > >Tom C wrote: > > Pentax WAS in the red with the camera division, you know that. It was > > underperforming, so stating so was a matter of fact. > > > > The one basic thing that Herb and some of us were trying to say, is that >it > > really doesn't matter how Pentax percieves itself or how you, I, other > > Pentax brand owners perceives the company. First they're a public >company. > > Second they have a small footprint in consumers' eyes, face competitors >that > > are better healed, more competitive, and have 10X higher profit margins, >and > > better brand recognition. Third, looking at what was happening to other > > small and long recognized camera brands, it wasn't rocket science to >figure > > out that things weren't looking great. > > > > The raison d'etra for any company is making money. When a division >ceases > > to be profitable, or is seen as a liability when compared to other more > > profitable divisions, prudent investors question the management, and >prudent > > management look for ways to make changes. > > > > I don't understand your problem with Herb in particular. He was no more > > parroting the industry than a newspaper parrots it's sources when it > > encloses words in quotation marks. Repeating what one hears in an >attempt > > to disseminate information, and interpreting it, is not a crime. Even if >one > > presupposes what will happen and they're wrong, so what? Who isn't >wrong at > > times? It seems like a case of shoot the messenger. > > > > Tom C. > > > > > > > >> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> > >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> > >> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but... > >> Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 17:08:44 -0400 > >> > >> Pentax was never exactly in trouble financially, camera sales were not > >> world beating but they made a reasonable return on investment. Part >of > >> that was due to what I see as Pentax's philosophy which is that Pentax > >> is a Camera and Lens manufacture, everything else Pentax did was to >make > >> that possible. That's one of the problems with Herb's analysis. He > >> looked at Imaging as an under preforming division, not a "Raison > >> d'Etra". Based on the Pentax board's behavior I'd say I'm closer to > >> right about the internal view of Pentax had of itself than Herb ever >was > >> about the external view. I've always been a realist about Pentax's > >> position. However I have a very hard time with Financial Analysts they > >> often parrot back the conventional wisdom within their own own > >> community, weather it's correct or not. The majority are wrong more > >> often than they are right on investments in my experience, but it seems > >> you can never go wrong in finance following a herd mentality. > >> > >> Tom C wrote: > >> > >>> No one predicted the details of what would happen Peter. How could > >>> > >> they? > >> > >>> Pentax's camera division turnaround was still a drop in the bucket, >both > >>> volume-wise and profit-wise compared to their competiton in the > >>> > >> industry, > >> > >>> and that competition has the means to force the smaller companies to > >>> > >> their > >> > >>> knees in a price/profit war. > >>> > >>> It was simply suggested that Pentax appeared to be in trouble > >>> > >> financially, > >> > >>> and that the future was uncertain. They could exist as a small-time > >>> > >> player > >> > >>> for some period of time independently, they could go away, or the > >>> brand/mount could survive with the assistance of another company, > >>> Sony-Minolta fashion. > >>> > >>> > >>> Tom C. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> > >>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> > >>>> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but... > >>>> Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 14:36:24 -0400 > >>>> > >>>> Pentax is being forced to sell out to Hoya by the Japanese equivalent > >>>> > >> of > >> > >>>> a Corporate Raider brought in as a White Knight, after they began to > >>>> turn their Camera Business around. That seems to be the exact >opposite > >>>> of what Herb was predicting. > >>>> > >>>> Tom C wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>> On 21/05/07, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> I'm just tired of all those who spend so much time watching the >sky > >>>>>>> to see if it's falling. If I were inclined to dump my Pentax gear, >I > >>>>>>> would do it now. But I'm not going to. It works quite well, thank > >>>>>>> you. A yawn is appropriate. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> Rob Studdert wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> It's not really, this is a conversation about Pentax on a Pentax > >>>>>> discussion list. Try to exercise just a little empathy, granted > >>>>>> Pentax's future is not entirely clear at the moment. However >consider > >>>>>> for just a moment that some others here may not be made of money >and > >>>>>> may have had to save and sacrifice to buy into the Pentax system >and > >>>>>> as such are simply concerned that it may not have a future. Surely > >>>>>> scenarios are worth discussion. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> Remember Rob. This is America, where one has the freedom to >suppress > >>>>> other's freedom of speech if they don't like it. And the one who > >>>>> > >> shouts > >> > >>>>> longest and hardest wins. > >>>>> > >>>>> It is a Pentax list and Pentax is being discussed. Nobody has ever > >>>>> suggested dumping Pentax gear except the guys that are also saying > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> they're > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> not going to dump it. > >>>>> > >>>>> I wasn't ever going to say this, but I guess I will now. For all > >>>>> > >> those > >> > >>>> that > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> have been ridiculing the so-called Chicken Littles on the list who >are > >>>>> supposedly claiming the sky is falling by discussing Pentax's > >>>>> > >> financial > >> > >>>>> condition in comparison with the industry... > >>>>> > >>>>> Well, guess what? The sky IS falling. Two or more years ago those > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> taunts > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> were voiced when Herb (who has in depth knowledge of the camera > >>>>> > >> industry > >> > >>>>> financials), Rob Studdert, and myself were discussing Pentax's >future. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> At > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> that time we suggested the outlook wasn't good and if things didn't > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> change, > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Pentax was possibly headed the same way as companies like Contax, > >>>>> > >> Ricoh, > >> > >>>> or > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Minolta. We suggested that they good possibly either cease to exist >or > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> that > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> they may be acquired or taken over. None of us knew what was going >to > >>>>> happen and none of us outright predicted what would happen. There >was > >>>>> > >> no > >> > >>>>> prescience. > >>>>> > >>>>> So a scenario quite similar to what we were talking about two years > >>>>> > >> ago > >> > >>>> is > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> now taking place, has been in progress for the last 6 months or so, > >>>>> > >> and > >> > >>>> is > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> in the front page Japanese financial news. And what's happening? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> There's > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> still folks on this list that are spouting the same "Chicken >Little", > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> "Sky > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> is falling" rhetoric as they were two years ago (hoping to sqaush > >>>>> discussion) before Pentax penned a deal with Samsung, and before > >>>>> > >> rumors > >> > >>>> and > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> news of a Hoya/Pentax merger. > >>>>> > >>>>> I rest my case. > >>>>> > >>>>> Tom C. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> All dogs have four legs; my cat has four legs. Therefore, my cat is a > >>>> > >> dog. > >> > >>>> -- > >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >>>> PDML@pdml.net > >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> -- > >> All dogs have four legs; my cat has four legs. Therefore, my cat is a >dog. > >> > >> > >> -- > >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >> PDML@pdml.net > >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >> > > > > > > > > > > >-- >All dogs have four legs; my cat has four legs. Therefore, my cat is a dog. > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >PDML@pdml.net >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
