Still, if they give the film away, they are also giving away the profit on 100 rolls of film, every time they do it. So it's $250 cost + the potential profit on selling those rolls (not real money until it's in their pockets, I admit). What ever that adds up to...
I still wonder how sales of this unit are doing. It seems Kodak either has a lot to get rid of, before they are forced to sell at a greatly reduced profit margin, or they have a big inventory of film they need to move. Or both. To the buyer though, it's like $600 back. Very tempting Tom C. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 7:16 AM Subject: Re: Just got my Kodak RFS 3600 s canner working - WOW! > Bob S. writes: > > >Let's see, give them a $600 discount off the scanner or give them $600 > in > >film which costs us only $250... > > Yes, that makes sense. If they reduced the price $600 it would cost them > $600 but if they give you $600 in film it only costs them $250. It's still > a lot of nice film for the end user, though! > I also expect that a big price reduction would be more likely to generate > an outcry from the people who bought it at the old price. I'm hoping the > rebate program is a "buffer" between the current $900 street price and an > imminent reduction to something more reasonable. At the rate scanner hardware > is improving and the prices coming down, this unit has to come down in price > soon. > > >So are there any stand alone dust/scratch removal programs like Nikon's > > >'digital ice' which could be added to this scanner? > > Digital ICE is hardware dependent: It requires that the scanner have infrared > capability of some kind (I haven't researched the details on this) and > compares the visible vs. infrared information to determine what's a scratch > and what's in the image. > > >With a $300 net price, we are starting to talk about a price I could afford. > > Looking at it that way, this is an *amazing* scanner for the money, based > on my preliminary observations. > > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > ><< I agree. I'm guessing that they've realized that the scanner is overpriced > > compared to the competition, but I can't imagine why they're doing this > > instead of just reducing the price. >> > > > -- > Mark Roberts > www.robertstech.com > - > 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 .
