Leica 'fighting for its life"

[jack_lo_..._t_o]

The other thing is the whole quick-turnover-technology/made-in-Asia-cheaply thing is threatening to the entire German economy, which traditionally has been based on highly well made, durable products sold at high but justifiable prices. There is a character in a Heinrich Boll play who extolls the Mercedes as "the cheapest car you can buy" in much the same way that Al talks about Leica.

 

That may be a thing of the past. Future "cameras" might be video cell phones + TVs + PCs+iPods+movie cameras+toaster ovens(?), etc., churned out like calculators, costing a grand or two and obsolete every two years. Brand loyalty is hard to imagine in such a context.

[steve_levine]

I bet they are planning the "der business is kaput" commemorative model in black paint, as we speak.

[vuk_vuksanovic]

marc.

<br><br>

over the years, i've observed your photographic skill (both capture and mastering), seen some of your non-photographic work and been the recipient your old summicron 50 at a price that qualifies it as a gift.

<br><br>

we share many aesthetic sensibilities and the super-mini-lab you describe is as close to photo nirvana as i can imagine. the problem is you're dealing with a market of users who can't quite perceive the quality you aspire to. some of them pretend to by hanging an m7 around their necks, but know full well (i hope) they don't have any exposures worth dipping into an expensive leica processing machine. then there's the angry, anti-leica, street forum crowd who are happy with images that look like 10% crops from a digital MTV video--a long as a few cool teenagers approve of the result. finally, we have all the people who spend $1000(!!!) on a d70 or digi-rebel without realising the most important part of their new toy (hint: <b>viewfinder</b>) is vastly inferior to the one inside a $50 classic SLR.

<br><br>

let me end by asking (rhetorically, of course) why we still don't have laser-printers capable of exposing conventional B&W paper.

[Spearhead]

Great to feel superior, isn't it?

[ilkka_nissila]

Jeff, I wouldn't know about that. Can you tell us how it feels so good to be you? That a cell phone camera is clearly worth more than a Leica? It must feel super to be such a good photographer.

[vuk_vuksanovic]

<i>"Great to feel superior"</i>--<b>Jeff (www.spirer.com) </b>

<br><br>

jeff.

<br><br>

it would save you a lot of typing to simply include this as an automated signature.

<br><br>

btw--an occasional look at used equipment on a famous internet auction site could eventually land you a nice "user" leica and put an end to all the envy (not to mention offer a bit of enlightenment).

[bill_marshall1]

But, Vuk, you did sound superior as you proceeded to disparage whole categories of people whom you have never met. Either you're clairvoyant or . . . just acting superior.

[vuk_vuksanovic]

bill.

 

one of the miracles of the internet is that you need not meet people to look at their pictures. given the world-class status of leica glass, surely you can forgive me for noticing a discrepancy between equipment and photos presented on this forum.

 

when i bought my (second-hand) M6/tele-elmarit 90, i understood full well well i was facing ridicule (from myself as well as others) if this expensive purchase yielded nothing worthwhile. the decision wasn't guided by wealth or posturing, but a genuine desire to capture scenes/light in the unique/appealing way i'd seen in countless leica images. it's quite possible i've wasted my time, but at least i've made a serious effort at something more than snapshots.

 

as a footnote, let me say i'm very suspicious of photographers who can't see well enough to rate certain brands of lenses above others.

[Spearhead]

I'm suspicious of photographers who can't see well enough to have a great set of tear sheets.

[Brad_]

<I>then there's the angry, anti-leica, street forum crowd who are happy with images that

look like 10% crops...</I><P>

 

And then there's Vuk whose hormones go wacky big-time whenever he gets a properly

exposed shot. Yes, he has a fine lens, but how does that entitle him to put down so many

people, whose SP is many levels above his?

[peter_evans4]

<p><em>But if Alpa can do it, why can't Leica?</em></p><p>I thought

Alpa went bust and much later an unrelated group of people had the

jolly idea of buying the name to apply it to an unrelated product. I don't

know for sure, as "Alpa" seems incapable of making even a working

website. (Try clicking on "History" within <a

href="http://www.alpa.ch/alpa/">this

mess</a>.)</p><p>When I'd read the interesting bits of yesterday's

paper, I turned to something about some old bean called Buffett, whose

main (only?) claim to fame is that he's prodigiously rich. Doesn't

somebody here know somebody who knows somebody who knows

somebody who knows him, and could persuade him to buy Leica -- much

as you or I might buy a couple of rolls of film? He might not make any

money off it, but, well, he might think it could be fun to run a camera

company (paging Charles Foster Kane). Of course, rich American

nincompoops haven't done so well

with troubled companies (think of Howard Hughes' destruction of RKO),

but perhaps he's no nincompoop.</p><p>(There's also Berlusconi. I hear

he'll be out of a job soon, though of course he'll still have Italian TV

companies to play with.)</p>

[pbizarro]

The problem with Leica is that they have a few decades to catch up with, in terms of product specifications and product management. Sometimes they do something right (like the aperture priority mode in the M7), but then they go out boasting how wonderful they are now they have a camera with that feature! Duh, wake up!

[bill_thorlin]

Going back to the original posting.It says Hermes and Austrian Capital Manangement own 60% approx. of the shares.Have Googled ACM and found - nothing !

 

The last published accounts show Hermes 31.5%, Deutsche Steinindustrie 14.0% and Lancet Holdings BV 13.6%. Either something has happened as regards shareholdings that has not been detailed or that this report has got it wrong.

 

What I find very, very difficult to comprehend is that Leica should be trying to put together a rescue package without direct input at an early stage from it's major (and majority) shareholders (one could say "controllers") as you HAVE to have their support to get anywhere.

Unless there is an area of conflict we know nothing about, a company always maintains close and cordial links with major shareholders.

 

Speculation - is there some sort of mind-set in Leica management that cannot accept that they have got it wrong and insist that they can solve it themselves ? If so then the whole lot should be ejected forthwith ! Perhaps the recent appearance and rapid disappearance of a CEO is indicative of this.

 

Speculation 2 - do the major shareholders want to see it go belly up so they can pick up the pieces at no additional cost?

 

Oh to be a fly on the wall.

 

On a lighter note the press report qouted (or mis-quoted ) someone as saying the British Queen will still be around in 100 years.She is already over 70 - I know she is good but not that good !!!!!!

[akochanowski]

Vuk, perhaps your difficulties in things photographic-- exposure, composition, subject matter, coherence-- are related to the half-drunk state in which you experience them?

[fotografz]

There are so many good photographers here that define the spirit of diversity, that I

wonder why all the vitriol ?

 

It seems to me that nothing on this forum has any value because everything is counter

attacked on a personal level in an attempt to discredit the person rather than just offering

an experiential POV from a different perspective and allowing the reader to evaluate the

diverse opinions. I also doubt that one single attack has resulted in an altered POV, but in

almost every case it has resulted in animosity.

 

For example, the endless debates about film verses digital are easily chalked up to the fact

that both are flawed, therefore vulnerable. Some people come on strong for one or the

other because they often made a commitment involving considerable expense. Or, as

some here have implied, really do not see the differences in the mediums, or feel one is

indeed superior to the other in terms of end result.

 

My own beliefs are shaped by a pretty heavy shooting experience both personally and

commercially (and the gray area in-between) and involves a fair amount of both digital and

film work. Not a single word of personal attacks will alter that first hand, experiential POV.

Nor will it keep me from enjoying the end results of other photographers regardless of the

medium used or the cost of the gear.

 

Finally, if we don't diversify our use of the mediums, it will eventually eliminate the choice.

IMO, it will be one more freedom of expression forever lost ... or relegated to the domain

of the wealthy due to cost. I do wish film received more benefit from today's technological

breakthroughs. Convenience and immediacy are not insurmountable obstacles, and hybrid

mixes of digital and film based photography would most certainly be competitive by

uniting the strengths of each and lessening the weaknesses of both.

 

BTW, can't wait for the new Epson 2400 (or 4800) inkjet printer so I can print scanned

films ; -)

[jonathan_reynolds]

Can someone enlighten me whether we are talking about everything that carries the Leica logo (binoculars, cameras, rangefinders, microscopes), or just cameras?

 

Seems to me that it would be difficult to maintain the Leica brand-name on any subset of this production that was separated off.

[bill_thorlin]

Marc - brave but true, sometimes it seems that regular protagonists just use it to continue abusing and "flaming" (if that is the right word) one another usually totally ignoring the thread.

 

Jonathan - most of the rest has already been hived off.

[jeremy_tok]

ACM must have been just a translation. Its name may be something like ֳterreichische Verm�gensverwaltung or somesorts.

[edmo]

<i>"But, Vuk, you did sound superior as you proceeded to disparage whole categories of people..."</i>

<p>

More like an idiot.

[bill_marshall1]

11 man hours per camera is jsut far too expensive. It is an old manufacturing model that cannot compete with modern production techniques. Costs are just way too high.

 

Leica waited far too long to modernize its production methods. Hand built, precision equipment is nice, but it's just a camera & almost no one wants to pay that kind of price tag. It's no wonder that Cosina can offer a very good alternative at a small fraction of the cost.

 

It may be too late for Leica. Their labor force is skilled workers, so they can't just move to a lower cost country for cheaper labor & have it make a difference over night. In fact they would incur additional costs initially by doing this. To revamp their production lines will also take an investment in training & equipment, although some of this cost would be offset by savings from paring back on the number of workers. Either way, they need investment capital & who's going to invest in a sinking ship at a time when the industry is changing in a direction that is not favorable to Leica Camera's main product lines. Would you? Do you think that your money would be secure? Or that the risk/benefit analysis would be in your favor?

 

Bill

[bill_marshall1]

>Bill Thorlin said: "Have googled ACM & have found nothing."

 

Bill, the Kauffman family of Austria is the second largest stockholder in Leica, so I assume that "Austria Capital Management (ACM)" is their euphemism.

 

Bill

[olivier_reichenbach]

"...over-priced crappy cameras..."

 

Hmmm... No wonder Leica has problems if that's the kind of falsehood that is being

spread by its very "supporters".

 

Let's deal with the second part. "Crappy"? Now, that's so laughable a statement that I'm

sure it was intended as a joke.

 

"Overpriced"? Over what? How do you rate ultimate workmanship, engineering and

quallity?

 

Expensive? Sure. Quality is expensive. You can't have you cake and eat it. A Porsche is

expensive. So is an Omega watch or a Mont-Blanc pen.

 

Maybe Leica just needs a whole new marketing strategy, starting with a new

communication plan. Maybe they should (or should have, God forbid) build a new

customer base with the product they have (why on earth have they ceased production of

the M6, which was their best bet?) instead of trying to entice the old base into buying

something new all the time (M7, MP, Leica CM, Digilux...) That's Canon strategy. Not Leica.

[bill_thorlin]

Bill Marshall.

 

Bill - thanks for the info, do you know by any chance if they are Lancet Holdings or Deutsche Steinindustrie ?

 

Thanks. Bill.

[bill_marshall1]

I have no idea, Bill, but maybe if you google Kauffman & ACM &/or Leica, you'll get more info.

 

Cheers,

Bill

[bill_marshall1]

Olivier, of course the comment about "crappy cameras" is absurd to the point of being laughable.

 

However, "overpriced" needs a second look. Not overpriced for what you get, but apparently too expensive for today's market place. Leica has been bleeding red ink for some years now. No matter how good the product is, they won't be able to make it - as the current crisis demonstrates - if they can't sell it.

 

The result of their ultra-conservative approach is that they haven't tinkered with the formula for a long time & have been slow to add new options like AE when the technology became available. It shouldn't have taken Zeiss to come up with a cheaper version of a full-featured body with a more versatile viewfinder. Had Leica tinkered with their design, they would have offered such alternatives & by offering more options would have attracted more customers.

 

Then, of course, there is digital . . .