On 5/31/07, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I also heard some really scary stories of baskets catching fire during
> flight when cheap fuel lines ruptured..
A similar sort of thing happend to an Australian navy replenishment
vessel. They had a fuel leak due to non-approved type fuel
- Original Message -
From: "David Savage"
Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
> Yeah, and the bolts that hold the wings on can be substituted for some
> found at your local hardware store.
The balloon that I flew years ago used what appeared t
Yeah, and the bolts that hold the wings on can be substituted for some
found at your local hardware store.
Cheers,
Dave
On 5/28/07, graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I remember when the alternator for a Cessna 172 cost $600. Except for the FAA
> inspection tag it was exactly the same altern
- Original Message -
From: "Cory Papenfuss"
Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>>
>> The subject is consumer grade electronics.
>>
>> William Robb
>>
> Actually, the subject was "electronics." If you'
>>
>> Citing examples of consumer-grade electronics failing often negate
>> the original assumption of properly and correctly designed with decent
>> components. Take a piece of aircraft avionics they live in a
>> *horrible* environment with heat/cold/vibration/shock/corrosion and last
>> lit
I remember when the alternator for a Cessna 172 cost $600. Except for the FAA
inspection tag it was exactly the same alternator as in the Olds Cutlass of the
same year which cost $44. So, you guys, go ahead and believe what ever you
want.
Just remember that car prices more than doubled when th
On 5/24/07, Cory Papenfuss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Citing examples of consumer-grade electronics failing often negate
> the original assumption of properly and correctly designed with decent
> components. Take a piece of aircraft avionics they live in a
> *horrible* environment wi
- Original Message -
From: "Cory Papenfuss"
Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>
> Citing examples of consumer-grade electronics failing often negate
> the original assumption of properly and correctly designed with decent
> components
This started from my saying that I wasn't expecting any major improvements
in digital photography in the next few years, and that the K10D is
remarkable for its specification/price ratio rather than for breaking new
ground. However it is done, shake reduction has been with us for a while,
a
On 25/05/07, John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This started from my saying that I wasn't expecting any major improvements
> in digital photography in the next few years, and that the K10D is
> remarkable for its specification/price ratio rather than for breaking new
> ground. However it is d
Think of it as adding 2 -> 2&1/2 stops.
or...
Think of it as allowing me to mount my camera on my motorcycle bars.
That means a lot to me.
Regards,
Bob Blakely
From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>I agree, Peter, but it's not a specifically digital breakthrough.
> Theoretically i
Actually, in-body anti-shake is digital-only, there's too much mass in a
film transport system to do it reliably. That's why film setups only use
in-lens (both technologies have been understood at the theoretical level
for years).
-Adam
John Forbes wrote:
> I agree, Peter, but it's not a speci
I agree, Peter, but it's not a specifically digital breakthrough.
Theoretically it would be possible to build a film body with anti-shake.
And also, it doesn't improve image quality generally, only with slow
shutter speeds.
John
On Thu, 24 May 2007 00:36:13 +0100, P. J. Alling
<[EMAIL PRO
On Wed, 23 May 2007, Digital Image Studio wrote:
> On 23/05/07, Cory Papenfuss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Most likely a mechanical failure in the camcorder, and either a
>> mechanical failure or electronic overheating in the DVD player. Properly
>> designed solid-state electronics wi
Actually if the Anti Shake works the way Pentax claims it is a
breakthrough. It may not be apparent in any flashy way but it's there.
John Forbes wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2007 15:47:24 +0100, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
I was simply being kind and was at a loss for words. If I k
>
>It's just economics, Tom. For hundreds of dollars I could prolong the use
>of my lovely Pentax lenses for many years. To switch would cost thousands.
>
>John
>
>
I understand. When/if it comes to it, switching will be a slow process for
me.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@
On May 23, 2007, at 9:35 AM, John Francis wrote:
> ... perhaps the
> research that Pat Hanrahan's group are doing over at Stanford on a
> camera that captures more than just a single plane of focus. It's a
> little early to tell, but I suspect the tradeoff in lower resolution
> may relegate this
On Wed, 23 May 2007 18:45:21 +0100, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Tom, you're nearly there. It's because bodies are more likely to fail
>> that I would be keen to buy a couple and that way ensure that my lenses
>> could still be used. I wouldn't buy more lenses because eventually
>> t
Don't worry about bodies, Cotty is gonna show us all how to make
Frankenlenses out of our best Pentax gear and mount it on Canons.
Regards, Bob S.
On 5/23/07, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >Tom, you're nearly there. It's because bodies are more likely to fail
> >that I would be keen to
>
>Tom, you're nearly there. It's because bodies are more likely to fail
>that I would be keen to buy a couple and that way ensure that my lenses
>could still be used. I wouldn't buy more lenses because eventually there
>would be no body to use them on. That would be a waste.
All this is hypoth
On Wed, 23 May 2007 15:47:24 +0100, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > I was simply being kind and was at a loss for words. If I knew a
>> camera
>> > company was going out of business I certainly would not run out and
>> buy
>> > more
>> > of the same because it will eventually stop
In my experience things usually fail right away, or wait until they are
unrepairable .
Besides this list is just like the evening news, there is no interest in good
news. Seems to me the only time we do not want to hear about someones problems
is when they are close enough to them that we fee
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 08:47:24AM -0600, Tom C wrote:
>
> Who knows what advancements could be made in digital picture technology in 5
> - 10 years?
>
> Tom C.
Well, we don't know, but I should think we could make a pretty good guess.
Digital cameras have been around that long, and digital ima
On May 23, 2007, at 7:34 AM, Tom C wrote:
> Send it to Godfrey. It will start working again.
Most likely. I have that effect on devices, it seems.
G
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> >
> > I was simply being kind and was at a loss for words. If I knew a camera
> > company was going out of business I certainly would not run out and buy
> > more
> > of the same because it will eventually stop working, likely not be
> > supported, and be worthless.
> >
> > Tom C.
>
>Let me expl
>
>I should add by citing a very recent example of equipment failure that
>I experienced. Yesterday my network printer printed one job but the
>next was stuck in the queue and would not print. The problem turned
>out to be the JetDirect network interface card in the printer, it was
>simply no more,
Donations gladly accepted.
Tom C.
>From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 21:59:11 -0400
>
>Yes.
>On May 22, 200
You get one from Verizon?
Norm
Doug Brewer wrote:
> thin Q
>
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On May 23, 2007, at 2:06 AM, mike wilson wrote:
> Hmmm. In the three(?) years I've known you, you have replaced your
> computer, HDDs, car, cameras, lenses and cell phone. The two
> things that you have mentioned that you have owned for what I would
> consider a decent length of time are
Just a friendly reminder from the List Guy:
Please remember to trim posts to fit them under the 10K size limit.
thin Q
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Wed, 23 May 2007 00:04:03 +0100, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> He bought a K10D a long time after he was predicting Pentax's demise on
>> here, and he did so because his predictions about Pentax going belly up
>> were proved wrong.
>
> Do you consider two years a long time? John. What i
>
> From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2007/05/23 Wed AM 04:26:05 GMT
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>
>
> On May 22, 2007, at 8:23 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
>
> > In th
>
> From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2007/05/22 Tue PM 10:37:08 GMT
> To: pdml@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>
> >image sensors generally become noisy over time and can suffer degradation
> >of their
On 23/05/07, Cory Papenfuss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Most likely a mechanical failure in the camcorder, and either a
> mechanical failure or electronic overheating in the DVD player. Properly
> designed solid-state electronics will last practically until the sun burns
> out (or the el
Yada...yada...yada
--
Bruce
Tuesday, May 22, 2007, 9:34:43 PM, you wrote:
WR> - Original Message -
WR> From: "Paul Stenquist"
WR> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>> This thread is now about old Nikons, appliance repair an
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Stenquist"
Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
> This thread is now about old Nikons, appliance repair and totally
> inept financial speculation. It's a real hoot!
We've Seinfelded it.
Excellent.
On 23/05/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On May 22, 2007, at 8:23 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
> Listening to people on this mailing list moan and complain about
> everything under the sun, you would swear that absolutely nothing
> works at all. You must all live in a differ
On May 22, 2007, at 8:23 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
> In the real world laser diodes fail with alarming regularity even when
> the current regulation feedback systems are doing their job 100%
Listening to people on this mailing list moan and complain about
everything under the sun, you wo
On 23/05/07, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's not supported by the numbers I've seen. Like most of the
> financial information posted here, ti's a wild ass guess.
It's information that's publicly accessible if you'd care to look
(though I know you don't).
--
Rob Studdert
HURSTV
On 23/05/07, Cory Papenfuss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Most likely a mechanical failure in the camcorder, and either a
> mechanical failure or electronic overheating in the DVD player. Properly
> designed solid-state electronics will last practically until the sun burns
> out (or the el
ower surges.
>
> In the case of other items, I guess nothing lasts forever.
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>> From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Don't want to soun
This thread is now about old Nikons, appliance repair and totally
inept financial speculation. It's a real hoot!
Paul
On May 22, 2007, at 9:30 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>
> On May 22, 2007, at 12:57 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
>
>> The F2's a wonderful beast. I picked up a late-production black one
>
Exactly.
On May 22, 2007, at 5:06 PM, Tim Øsleby wrote:
> Yawn ;-)
>
> Tim Typo
> Mostly Harmless
>
> - Original Message -
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 8:47 PM
> Sub
That's not supported by the numbers I've seen. Like most of the
financial information posted here, ti's a wild ass guess.
Paul
On May 22, 2007, at 6:30 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
> On 23/05/07, John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> You were saying then that Pentax couldn't make money
>
>
>> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>> Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 18:10:37 -0400
>>
>> My poin
On May 22, 2007, at 12:57 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
> The F2's a wonderful beast. I picked up a late-production black one
> with
> a DP-11 head a few months ago and it's quickly become one of my two
> main
> film bodies.
>
> I'd take the F2A or F2AS over the F2S though, AI coupling is less
> hassl
On May 22, 2007, at 12:34 PM, William Robb wrote:
> My old F Photomic used a PX13 battery that went into the metering
> head.
> There was no power in the body at all. The F2 put the battery into
> the body,
> in the traditional spot under the bottom plate.
My memory is faulty then. Too much
- Original Message -
From: "Digital Image Studio"
Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>
> All well and good but the two top players manage to combine high
> volume and high profit per unit.
Gotta love cachet value.
William Robb
--
They didn't always.
Digital Image Studio wrote:
> On 23/05/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> It's balancing act, if you don't look at it in a vacuum.
>>
>> Lower costs/Lower Profit per unit. -> Lower unit prices -> Higher demand
>> -> Higher volume -> Higher overall profits
>>
>>
On 23/05/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's balancing act, if you don't look at it in a vacuum.
>
> Lower costs/Lower Profit per unit. -> Lower unit prices -> Higher demand
> -> Higher volume -> Higher overall profits
>
> Of course this assumes you can meet the demand.
>
> Japanese
On 23/05/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You can spend it any way you want. I just find non computerized
> appliances to be much easier to repair.
It's not so much computerized but customization that comes back to nip
you on the butt years down the line. I just retired an expensive
It's balancing act, if you don't look at it in a vacuum.
Lower costs/Lower Profit per unit. -> Lower unit prices -> Higher demand
-> Higher volume -> Higher overall profits
Of course this assumes you can meet the demand.
Japanese companies have in the past valued market penetration over
highe
time.
>
> Is there anything wrong with that?
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>
>> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist
>He bought a K10D a long time after he was predicting Pentax's demise on
>here, and he did so because his predictions about Pentax going belly up
>were proved wrong.
Do you consider two years a long time? John. What is a prediction? A
prediction is a statement regarding what one believes will ha
>On 23/05/07, John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > It would appear that Pentax is selling more K10Ds than it expected.
>That
> > suggests lower unit costs, and more profit. Lower prices, I grant, mean
> > less profit. But since this division is making much more money than it
> > did, it
On 23/05/07, John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It would appear that Pentax is selling more K10Ds than it expected. That
> suggests lower unit costs, and more profit. Lower prices, I grant, mean
> less profit. But since this division is making much more money than it
> did, it suggests th
Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 18:10:37 -0400
>
>My point is you spent 10 hours fixing a broken washer. I value my time
>at about $70.00 an hour spending 10 hours diagnosing somethi
>> > So who doesn't know what they're talking about?
>> >
>> > Tom C.
>>
>> "Quote: 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
On 23/05/07, John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You were saying then that Pentax couldn't make money as a camaera maker.
> Well, guess what, you were wrong.
> The present situation is totally different. Hoya has come along with a
> good offer for Pentax because it thinks the medical busines
>image sensors generally become noisy over time and can suffer degradation
>of their
>Bayer filters and photosites due to overexposure.
>
>--
>Rob Studdert
That does it. I'm not taking the lens cap off of my *ist D ever again!
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdm
ackages and stock otions.
> >
> >
> > Tom C.
> >
> >
> >
> >> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> >> Subject: Re: Don't want to
William Robb wrote:
> We used to get service peopl in from CX Systems to work on our rather flakey
> Gretag 3140 printer. One of their favourite troubleshooting methods was to
> take circuit boards from one machine and put them into the other one until
> they moved the problem.
>
>
>
This is
On 23/05/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That said, electronics can fail occasionally but mechanical
> components *will* fail. Some things, while theoretically possible to
> repair, are very difficult to do so or too expensive to be worth the
> effort in either case.
In digital
tly, etc. Much
> of that, in the end, was time spent isolating the problem, not actually
> repairing it.
>
> You can't make me feel bad about it. :-)
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>
>> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-D
ROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>> Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 16:28:21 -0400
>>
>> I believe that Norm is being sarcastic, since Time/AOL and HP/Compaq
>
>He was of course as far from reality with that as with everything else.
>If Pentax does disappear, I would think it is much more likely that lenses
>will lose their value, but that the better bodies will gain. People will
>want to be sure that they have a working body to use their lenses with,
See below where I blather in response to your blather.
>From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 22:17:
On Tue, 22 May 2007 17:27:02 +0100, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Tom,
>>
>> Neither you nor Herb had or have the slightest idea what you are talking
>> about.
>>
>> Pentax is in better shape now than it was two years ago. What has
>> changed
>> is that it has a major shareholder that own
Yawn ;-)
Tim Typo
Mostly Harmless
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 8:47 PM
Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>
> -- Original message ---
iring it.
You can't make me feel bad about it. :-)
Tom C.
>From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 16:
Except for those executives walked away with multi-million dollar severance
packages and stock otions.
Tom C.
>From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too a
Last report I saw, I seem to remember Sparx owning a bit less than 30%.
Gonz wrote:
> On 5/22/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> In a message dated 5/22/2007 11:04:57 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>> I dont know why Pentax does not just take a poi
I believe that Norm is being sarcastic, since Time/AOL and HP/Compaq
both lead to the executives who brought them about losing their
positions. Something that indicates something less than rousing success.
Ralf R. Radermacher wrote:
> Norm Baugher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> Are you su
t; only becoming popular in the USA over the last decade for home use) is
>>>
>> that
>>
>>> they use about 1/3 the water as older top load washers and are much
>>>
>> easier
>>
>>> on clothes.
>>>
>&
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>> Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 13:53:24 -0400
>>
>> It's seldom that the results of such a merger are better than building
>> the business
>
> >I think the new technology is often easily repairable. It's just that
>most
> > of the electronics is now manufactured overseas and it's incredibly
>cheap.
> > A company makes more profit replacing an entire circuit board that costs
> > $20
> > and charging $250 + 1 hour labor, than they do
William Robb wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi"
> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>
>
>
>>> The F2 uses S/76 or Dl1/3N lithiums. I think the DP-2 head has better
>>> components than the olde
On 5/22/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 5/22/2007 11:04:57 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I dont know why Pentax does not just take a poison pill if it does not
> want to be acquired by Hoya. I.e. take on alot of debt and buy back
gt;
> Tom C.
>
> >From: Gonz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> >To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
> >Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
> >Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 12:52:37 -0500
> >
> >I don
>Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > A company makes more profit replacing an entire circuit board that
>costs $20
> > and charging $250 + 1 hour labor, than they do trouble shooting the
>board
> > for an hour and replacing $.10 and $1.00 parts.
>
>Not to forget that formerly service departme
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C"
Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>I think the new technology is often easily repairable. It's just that most
> of the electronics is now manufactured overseas and it's incredibly cheap.
> A comp
- Original Message -
From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi"
Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>
>> The F2 uses S/76 or Dl1/3N lithiums. I think the DP-2 head has better
>> components than the older F Photomic heads. They seem to be pretty
>> b
He was being facetious, Ralf.
-- Original message --
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ralf R. Radermacher)
> Norm Baugher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Are you suggesting that the mergers like Time/AOL, HP/Compaq,
> > Daimler/Chrysler, etc. were not smashing successes
Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A company makes more profit replacing an entire circuit board that costs $20
> and charging $250 + 1 hour labor, than they do trouble shooting the board
> for an hour and replacing $.10 and $1.00 parts.
Not to forget that formerly service departments used to b
Norm Baugher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are you suggesting that the mergers like Time/AOL, HP/Compaq,
> Daimler/Chrysler, etc. were not smashing successes?
Daimler-Chryslera smashing success? You haven't just returned from a
looong holiday at a Russian prison camp or a year-long coma, by any
c
gt; slinked back to the table.
>
> According to Japanese reports it was an internal management feud that
> brought this about.
>
> http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/editorial/20070522TDY04005.htm
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>> From: Gonz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-T
It's a big deal in Japan, if Pentax declines, and Hoya mounts a hostile
takeover it will be a first for Japan, or so it's been reported. The
Japanese are very polite and to not find agreement is just too uncivilized.
Gonz wrote:
> I dont know why Pentax does not just take a poison pill if it do
-- Original message --
From: Wilko Bulte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 02:03:32PM -0400, Norm Baugher wrote..
> > Are you suggesting that the mergers like Time/AOL, HP/Compaq,
> > Daimler/Chrysler, etc. were not smashing successes?
>
> Daimler-Chr
s Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but...
>Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 14:40:39 -0400
>
>Front loads have been around for a long time, even here. The old
>technology is much easier to repair, and usually costs less than ne
se) is that
> they use about 1/3 the water as older top load washers and are much easier
> on clothes.
>
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>
>> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
I think history speaks for itself.
Norm Baugher wrote:
> Are you suggesting that the mergers like Time/AOL, HP/Compaq,
> Daimler/Chrysler, etc. were not smashing successes?
> Norm
>
> P. J. Alling wrote:
>
>> It's seldom that the results of such a merger are better than building
>> the busine
On May 22, 2007, at 9:54 AM, William Robb wrote:
> We've been down this road before, it must have been before you
> found us. The
> MX uses some proprietary circuitry for the light meter, and this is
> the
> component that failed.
Thanks, sounds like they didn't do a particularly good job of
On May 22, 2007, at 9:35 AM, Tom C wrote:
>> What all these problems really indicate is how cheap, low-spec most
>> of the electronic components being used are, even in high-end
>> cameras. Curiously, my 1966 RCA transistor radio that cost me $20
>> (expensive back then!) is still going strong.
>
I could be mistaken, but I thought it was Pentax that originally approached
Hoya regarding a merger.
Tom C.
>From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too a
as an internal management feud that
brought this about.
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/editorial/20070522TDY04005.htm
Tom C.
>From: Gonz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too a
On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 02:03:32PM -0400, Norm Baugher wrote..
> Are you suggesting that the mergers like Time/AOL, HP/Compaq,
> Daimler/Chrysler, etc. were not smashing successes?
Daimler-Chrysler definitely was not a smashing success..
>From my own experience I can tell that mergers are a mixe
In a message dated 5/22/2007 11:04:57 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I dont know why Pentax does not just take a poison pill if it does not
want to be acquired by Hoya. I.e. take on alot of debt and buy back
tons of its stock. Isnt that what american companies do with
It's seldom that the results of such a merger are better than building
the business you already have. Most such mergers result in
disappointment. (That doesn't stop them from happening however). A
classic example was Sperry and Burroughs merging in 1986 to take
advantage of their "Synergy",
Are you suggesting that the mergers like Time/AOL, HP/Compaq,
Daimler/Chrysler, etc. were not smashing successes?
Norm
P. J. Alling wrote:
> It's seldom that the results of such a merger are better than building
> the business you already have. Most such mergers result in
> disappointment. (T
I dont know why Pentax does not just take a poison pill if it does not
want to be acquired by Hoya. I.e. take on alot of debt and buy back
tons of its stock. Isnt that what american companies do with some
hostile takeovers? Maybe its not an option in Japan?
rg
On 5/21/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[
1 - 100 of 241 matches
Mail list logo
