Is Leica in big financial trouble? Is this the end?

The following information was sent today and is available on Leica

web site. An audit has been launched and Leica's new strategy is to

be announced in May! Even though I do not care about digital, I

believe they should get their digital products out as soon as

possible.

 

Dear Leica friends,

 

Leica Camera AG, Solms, expects the existence of a loss

in the amount of half of its registered share capital in March

2005. The Company?s Board of Management will make a

corresponding announcement according to section 92 (1) of

the German Stock Corporation Law (AktG) at a General

Meeting to be held on May 31, 2005. Concurrently, the

Board of Management prepares a turnaround strategy.

I wonder if Zeiss and that Epson digital body will send them over the edge? Seems

like Leica were relatively protected in their niche. Products like the macro M lens seem a

bit misdirected?

Old companies never die ... they just get taken over.

 

Seriously, I am wondering what the bankruptcy laws are like in Germany. Anyone with a credit background in the forum? Some legal regimes are very friendly to debtor companies, others are less so. There are companies in the US and Canada that have gone into bankruptcy and emerged like a revolving door. All it means is they seek legal protection from creditors until they can get their house in order. Which they never seem to do.

 

I would really hate to see a digital M with a Leica-DigiAcme logo. That wouldn't be the end of parts and service, but it may as well be the end of the mystique.

 

Here's a question for you ... if they never made another Leica, would the existing Leicas we know and love be worth two cents or a million dollars? Personally, I'll keep my M6 and buy some real beaters just to canibalize for the parts. There must be enough beaters out there to keep the proud and few working long after I'm dead and gone. (Okay, film will die first, but you get the picture) :-)

this is a legally required public notice. leica's corporate health has been poor for many years. exchange rates are really killing it at the moment (north america is its biggest market, and japan is a big market), possibly more so than the "digital revolution."

"I believe they should get their digital products out as soon as possible."

 

I dunno... maybe they're thinking of going the other way. They're already WAY behind in the digital market... and do they really want to compete (or can they compete) with companies that can produce new digital models every fifteen minutes. Maybe the reality is setting in that Leica should try to remain in the "old school" film market. Their strongest suit is that their brand carries a certain mystique that other brands don't have; and they already seem to be devoting more and more effort to the retro market such as by introducing the MP, which is basically a throwback camera with a meter added on.

 

What I would like to see is for Leica to go full blast in the film camera market and compete with Voigtlander by offering, in addition to the current M bodies, stripped down Leica M bodies... sort of like the Bessa R series but with cloth shutters and no meters. If they can do this without extensive (expensive) re-tooling and use the M body as the basis then they might be able to pull it off.

 

All I know is that they can't continue to lose money and expect to stay in business in their current mode.

That company is misdirected since 25 years or so. But this sounds really bad now..

even scarier to me was the recent announcement that leica will form a japanese "subsidiary" effective march 1, 2005 to be called "leica camera japan co."

 

while it is billed as a distribution company (like leica usa), it certainly could morph into something else entirely. i think you know what i mean!!

 

that really would be the end!!

<i>Their strongest suit is that their brand carries a certain mystique that other brands don't have...</i>

<p>

Apparently their creditors prefer cash rather than mystique as payment.

Leica makes most of their products/parts in Portugal, so Japan doesn't seem like a bad

idea. Besides, their quality would go up. :D

Dennis, - respectufully, I don't see your logic. Why sacrifice the meter? What you are suggesting is just a cheapo M4. Wasn't it called the M4-2? I personally think an M4-2"N" would get crucified by the Bessas. I don't know what the answer is for Leica, but I lean towards 1) Maintain the metered manual mystique and try to make the MP even better (it's outselling the M7 isn't it?) and 2) Develop the Digital M with a full frame sensor and build it to use the full range of Leica M lenses. Price it high; people will buy. I can barely believe people pay what they do for RD-1's. 3) Come up with a new marketing strategy.

 

My only thought about mergers or joint ventures is that any other name next to "Leica" makes it a non-Leica. So if they do partner, they have to really carefully manage the brand, because when that goes they are dead.

The only hope is to stick a metal focal plane shutter that's fully electronic, dump the manual winding and rewinding for a motor, ala Hexar RF, then sell it for $500. Keep the old M7/MP around for the users that have the $$$. At the same time you will need Cosina to make a bunch of lenses in M mount for cheap so somebody can setup a 28/50/90 with the Hexar RF look alike for under $1500.

 

Else they are doomed, you can't lose 1/2 the value of the company and keep going.

<i>i think you know what i mean!! </i>

<p>

Does it mean Mr. Kobayashi will be peddling cubic zirconia "Leicas" and calling them diamonds?

I think it doesn't matter. According to FIATs financial statement for 2003, Ferrari lost 13 million euros that year. Your think FIAT cares? They sell a ton of cars, farm tractors and god knows what just because M. Schumacher stands on the podium every two weeks. Yeah, Leica MAY be in trouble, but if Hermes feels they sell a ton of expensive handbags and scarves because of brand identification...to them it may be an acceptable loss. You're better to check out Hermes financial statement than Leicas.

A: Leica has been "badly" run (if you choose to think of it that way) for decades now.

 

B: Companies make statements like this all the time when things aren't going to be rosy. Leica's future may be up in the air, but this is just an accounting/disclosure type thing.

Will you buy Fiat stock?

Prices in those markets are increasing at the same time demand for all film cameras including Leicas is decreasing. That usually sets the stage for rebates, to reduce inventory and transfuse cash. But they and 10%-off Leica Days seem to have faded into Leica history. I'm curious to see what direction the new CEO heads, if he's really got any say or Hermes dictates everything. If I were running things I'd do away with the middleman distributors and sell wholesale direct from Solms to the dealers. The only thing I might leave standing might be the repair service departments. I might even subcontract that out to people like DAG and Sherry if they were interested. At some point I might even abolish the dealerships and go to selling direct from Solms via an e-commerce website with a virtual showroom. From what I've been told by dealers, the bulk of new Leica products are sold pre-oredered and sight-unseen anyway. There are very few if any full-stocking brick-and-mortar Leica dealers anyway, and located mostly in NYC with a couple on the west coast.

The economy of their home market in Germany is hardly booming and the $-euro exchange rate must be making the US market a nightmare (they are stuck with it being as they are in the Eurozone which limits their room for action).It is also hardly the time to go into Japan and very late anyway.

 

There have been many famous companies who have lived in a comfort zone founded on their (supposed) mystique and woke up to the realities too late. Often the management has been stuck in this time-warp and have,despite their protests to the contrary,become resistant to change and then rush off at tangents.

 

I do not know the Leica situation in detail but it has all the hallmarks.Sadly the prognosis is rarely good !

i, of course, have long argued in favor of dennis's approach. succeed or fail doing what you do best. frankly i think there will be a strong market for many years for ultra-high end film cameras. digital will actually encourage this market the same way digital audio actually encouraged the ultra-high end phono market for many years (even to this day).

 

leica does not have the wealth or manufacturing scale to compete in the fast-evolving world of home electronics -- i.e. digital photo.

 

i also think that leica should look to the zeiss model. slap leica lenses on everything. this will be profitable and will NOT hurt their film camera business.

 

leica should be happy that epson is willing to make their M mounts. the real money is in lenses anyway.

 

if leica fails it will be because they tried to compete with sony, kyocera, panasonic et al in the digital world. digital was a great opportunity for them to scale down, go super high end with their film cameras, sell a ton of lenses for other people's digital cameras, and make a mittful. they have played this all exactly wrong.

maybe it's time to rush for a summilux 50 asph. before it's too late ... are they any in stock somewhere?

They could just shrink into becoming even more of a boutique manufacturer, and offer

repairs and parts for the million plus bodies and lenses still in use. It may not be a big

business, but if they do it right, it could be a excellent and profitable small business (as in

only a handful of employees.)

 

Simply licensing their designs and brand to Panasonic or some other Asian imaging

company has to be worth a lot. And so what if they do? The transparency of internet

forums like this one makes it easy to determine whether a lens is made in GhuaongZou or

Solms.

 

I've given up waiting for a true digital Leica. Even if they could produce a good one, they

wouldn't be able to keep up with the fast product cycles and the next cycle would quickly

make their model obsolete. Nikon is finding that out as we speak - Canon is running

circles around them - the new Rebel 350XT just killed the D70 competition, with the pro

bodies already as much as conceeded to Canon.

Frederick:

 

I wonder how much Leica has spent on research and development with respect to digitalizing the M and R series cameras? I don't know the answer. Other camera makers are presently selling and making money on their high end digital lines. Leica is not. My point was that I don't think Leica can compete in the high end digital market right now (unless it had a huge cushion of money... which apparently it doesn't).

 

Why not stick to what it does best? Film cameras. But cover the entire market by making less expensive Leicas as well as the current M series.

 

As far as a less expensive, meterless Leica body... I'd buy one in a heatbeat over a Bessa.

 

Anyway... isn't it great that sometimes we can discuss these things (with differing opinions) and still be nice. ;>)

Yeah do what Apple have done. Customise your M on the website. order

direct.

There are companies in the US and Canada that have gone into bankruptcy and emerged like a revolving door."

 

Oh great, a venture capitalist buying out the company for brand equity, Leica jeans, Leica outer-wear.

 

Leica's assets are primarily a skilled work force, its ability to manufacture very high end film cameras and its brand name. If they are failing there doesn't seem much recourse. In the eyes of some Leica might as well be a buggy whip company, although I personally believe the digital dust needs to settle before film and digital take their respective places in the global toolkit of creative media (They still manufacture artists paint after all). Maybe Hermes will buy out the rest of the company at a discount and float it until there's more long term visibility. Probably better for them to cut back on R&D and focus on what they know and do best, maybe even look into producing an economy line of M bodies and lenses.

A) Leica's depended on Asia for at least forty years for all sorts of technical/medical devices. I doubt our cute cameras have ever been the heart of their business.

 

B) German banks are all in deep trouble because they've remained national socialist/feudal... modern Europe will force them to become real capitalist institutions. To the extent that Leica depends on

historic relationships with German banking it's inevitably in trouble.

 

C) A Japanese institution will buy Leica and keep making it, just they have Browning (expensive shotguns and rifles). Who loves Leica and fancy shotguns more than the Japanese? Who owns more vintage Leica equipment?

As Josh and other said, Leica hit a "trip-wire"(section 92(1)) that requires them legally to publish a notice. Better that than trying to pull an "Enron". I panicked over Ilford's receivership, which has turned out to be less horrible than imagined (for photographers - Ilford employees still got it in the neck). So I'll wait and see.

 

The next paragraph says something about "new capitalization plan" to be presented also in the May meeting - which could mean selling Hermes more of the company, or selling part to Shriro(sp?), the folks who bought Hasselblad and Imacon. Or any number of things. Heck, Kobayashi-san might buy "ein stuck". Or even "ein tausend tausend stuck".