# Nikon Rudderless?



## cgw (Sep 21, 2016)

Hard to fault Hogan's argument:

Nikon Swimming Wrong Direction | DSLRBodies | Thom Hogan

They're apparently struggling in Canada: firing reps, parts and inventory shortages, pissed-off dealers.


----------



## nerwin (Sep 21, 2016)

What doesn't struggle in Canada?


----------



## cgw (Sep 21, 2016)

nerwin said:


> What doesn't struggle in Canada?



Deep...


----------



## nerwin (Sep 21, 2016)

cgw said:


> nerwin said:
> 
> 
> > What doesn't struggle in Canada?
> ...



Look at Target, they built ton of stores and shut them all down in a couple years, lost all that money.


----------



## dcbear78 (Sep 21, 2016)

"Long ago (now 18 years) I started writing that Nikon was losing their connection to the actual customer of their camera products."

So he's been bitching about Nikon for 18 years now and here he is, still using them. Hmmm? Can't be doing too bad.


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 21, 2016)

I think it's called competition.

I recall Hogan complaining at one time Nikon didn't have enough models.  Now they have enough models but still.
When mirrorless first came out I compared it (I dont' recall which models) to getting a d7000.  I chose the d7000 for many reasons.   But with the newer Olympus mirrorless cameras it makes you wonder what Nikon could have done.  But Olympus is putting all their money in one line.  Whereas Nikon is always trying to "fit" a model someone in the lineup instead of, as Hogan mentions, have them compete against themselves.   I think that's the main thing is Nikon is trying to fit things in the lineup instead of creating a new lineup with it's own strengths and weaknesses.

But then Hogan states the d5, d500, d700 are great cameras.  and d750, d810 are near great.

wish I had the money to buy any and all cameras at any time. Then I might be in the same position to say Nikon is blowing it.

Makes me glad Samsung makes cameras.  Oh wait, at least quality cellphones .. oh wait, those are exploding.
Anyways, we'll all ditch out DSLR and Mirrorless when the iPhone 8s come out anyways.

I really like the specs of the Olympus OM-D E-Mii.  But it's new price is way beyond my means.


----------



## nerwin (Sep 21, 2016)

dcbear78 said:


> "Long ago (now 18 years) I started writing that Nikon was losing their connection to the actual customer of their camera products."
> 
> So he's been bitching about Nikon for 18 years now and here he is, still using them. Hmmm? Can't be doing too bad.



Right? I thought I was bad for saying Nikon was shutting down, lol.


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 21, 2016)

nerwin said:


> cgw said:
> 
> 
> > nerwin said:
> ...


walmart
kmart
et all

competition draws a bunch of new development and competing stores.  Sooner or later the stores can't maintain enough sales to maintain break-even or profitability.  Thus they have to shut them down.

Just look at the history of K-Mart over the years.  Missteps in every phase of development of the organization.  The mid-90s just crippled them and they haven't ever recovered.


----------



## nerwin (Sep 21, 2016)

astroNikon said:


> I think it's called competition.
> 
> I recall Hogan complaining at one time Nikon didn't have enough models.  Now they have enough models but still.
> When mirrorless first came out I compared it (I dont' recall which models) to getting a d7000.  I chose the d7000 for many reasons.   But with the newer Olympus mirrorless cameras it makes you wonder what Nikon could have done.  But Olympus is putting all their money in one line.  Whereas Nikon is always trying to "fit" a model someone in the lineup instead of, as Hogan mentions, have them compete against themselves.   I think that's the main thing is Nikon is trying to fit things in the lineup instead of creating a new lineup with it's own strengths and weaknesses.
> ...



That's just the Note 7, not all Samsung phones.  Not fair.


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 21, 2016)

nerwin said:


> That's just the Note 7, not all Samsung phones.  Not fair.


Yes, just the Note 7.  Their Premier, newly released, newest model phone. 
If it was a low end model it wouldn't have gotten as much press.  But since it's their newest top of the line phone, well, it gets the most exposure.

Apple went through antenna-gate with their newest phone a few years back.
Samsung is large enough to handle it.

btw, you seemed to forgot about Samsung and their camera business ==> After conquering cameras with the NX1, now Samsung may quit them forever
Olympus and Fuji will have to do what Samsung decided not to.


----------



## nerwin (Sep 21, 2016)

astroNikon said:


> nerwin said:
> 
> 
> > That's just the Note 7, not all Samsung phones.  Not fair.
> ...



Yesterday I read an article which I'm pretty sure it was written by a die hard apple fanboy and they were talking about how Samsung will be shutting down next year because of the faulty battery. I'm like oh my goodness people. Just another silly rumour blog...

Samsung doesn't just make phones, they are quite a large electronic corporation and it would take A LOT for them to shut down.  

Unfortunately....these things happen from time to time. Anything with a battery could potentially catch fire or explode, camera batteries have done so in the past and iPhones have too. I've seen some laptop batteries become pretty scary lol.


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 21, 2016)

nerwin said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > nerwin said:
> ...


Yeah, start a rumor that Samsung is shutting down.  Even their profitable shipbuilding business !!

But Samsung wasn't first to have battery issues, and I'll guess won't be the last.

For a higher profile problem just look at Lithium batteries that have been known to catch fire and explode in relation to shipping, warehousing (Package Explodes Inside Fed Ex Building), and unfortunately aircraft (Aircraft Fires Tied to Lithium-Battery Cargo Prompt New UN Rule).  There's many instances of airlines banning them and learning about the issues.  But not just being shipped but also being used (aka Boeing 787 issues).


----------



## nerwin (Sep 21, 2016)

astroNikon said:


> nerwin said:
> 
> 
> > astroNikon said:
> ...



Yeah, every time I order something online that contains a lithium battery..it's easily visible on the box to say the least lol.


----------



## cgw (Sep 21, 2016)

nerwin said:


> cgw said:
> 
> 
> > nerwin said:
> ...


Target Canada stocked its echoing hangar-like stores with over-priced merch totally unlike their US offerings. Unforced marketing error of biblical proportions and classic b-school case.


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 21, 2016)

cgw said:


> Hard to fault Hogan's argument:
> 
> Nikon Swimming Wrong Direction | DSLRBodies | Thom Hogan
> 
> They're apparently struggling in Canada: firing reps, parts and inventory shortages, pissed-off dealers.



So the entire argument is, they didn't build their latest camera release with me in mind, therefore the entire company is going the wrong direction?

Rotflmao.  Right.  Ok, well not a thing worth seeing here.  moving right along.


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 21, 2016)

cgw said:


> Target Canada stocked its echoing hangar-like stores with over-priced merch totally unlike their US offerings. Unforced marketing error of biblical proportions and classic b-school case.



Sorry, but given your track record of anti-nikon posts, well hard to take any of this at face value.


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 21, 2016)

cgw said:


> nerwin said:
> 
> 
> > cgw said:
> ...


they're not the only ones ==> Target not alone in Canadian misfire

a more in depth article of various impact related items ==> Why Target Failed in Canada: the overlooked reason - Cantech Letter

tons of canadian license plates during the weekends around here.


----------



## fmw (Sep 21, 2016)

Personally I see Canon and Nikon to be equals in terms of equipment. It is ridiculous to think that Canon knows its customers better than Nikon.  They are the same customers and comparable equipment.  Nikon Canada may have some management issues.  I don't know.  But what is hurting Nikon Canada and Nikon USA is the internet which has opened the whole world to buyers.  It makes it hard for product cartels to thrive.  Perhaps they will both do us a favor and go out of business.  Nikon is doing fine.  These importers may not be doing fine and that is fine with me.


----------



## zombiesniper (Sep 21, 2016)

The author seems to be one of those people that can only see the tree and even though they're standing in the middle of it can fathom the concept of a forest. One camera offering doesn't kill a company or they'd all be gone by now since they've all screwed up at some point.



nerwin said:


> Look at Target, they built ton of stores and shut them all down in a couple years, lost all that money.



Target f*%$ed themselves when they jacked all the Canadian prices 2.5 times the US ones. It was still cheaper to cross the border, shop in a US Target than to shop in a Canadian one.
Nothing to do with the market. Just F#*ktarded people thinking we wouldn't notice the price difference.



cgw said:


> They're apparently struggling in Canada: firing reps, parts and inventory shortages, pissed-off dealers.


Can't find any news on this and normally our news loves to report on the loss of jobs.


----------



## Braineack (Sep 21, 2016)

dcbear78 said:


> "Long ago (now 18 years) I started writing that Nikon was losing their connection to the actual customer of their camera products."
> 
> So he's been bitching about Nikon for 18 years now and here he is, still using them. Hmmm? Can't be doing too bad.



He's not wrong here.

I've had a N60, D40, D3100, D5100, D600, and now a D610.

I only still own the N60 and and D610.  I have really lost connection to the D40, D3100, D5100, and D600 -- i'm not even FB friends with them...

Not to mention all the Nikon lenses that have come and gone...


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 21, 2016)

Braineack said:


> dcbear78 said:
> 
> 
> > "Long ago (now 18 years) I started writing that Nikon was losing their connection to the actual customer of their camera products."
> ...



Well, you've made your D600 cry.  Hope your happy.  Meany.


----------



## Braineack (Sep 21, 2016)

I found this funny:






I wonder what nikon is doing... it certainly didn't put out the best "pro" DX body that everyone has been pining for over the last 10 years...  nope.


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 21, 2016)

Braineack said:


> I found this funny:
> 
> View attachment 127830
> 
> I wonder what nikon is doing... it certainly didn't put out the best "pro" DX body that everyone has been pining for over the last 10 years...  nope.



As for the D3400 granted for me the addition of wireless and a microphone jack would be meaningless, but then again I'm not in the market for an entry level camera.  For some folks those features might be big selling points.  I'm guessing the guys at Nikon marketing probably have a lot more actual hard data on this than say, an internet blogger with no access to their internal sales reports and marketing research whatsoever.


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 21, 2016)

Braineack said:


> dcbear78 said:
> 
> 
> > "Long ago (now 18 years) I started writing that Nikon was losing their connection to the actual customer of their camera products."
> ...


I've had the N80, D70, D7000 and still have the D600 and D750.
The first 2 don't write
and I know who uses the d7000 and it's still going strong last time I checked.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Sep 21, 2016)

I think the issue he's bringing up here (or what I consider relevant about his points) is that Nikon is pushing into a contracting, and ever crowded, market.    Low end consumer camera sales peaked years ago and have been on a downward spiral ever since.   How much Nikon actually rely on those sales I don't know though, as I really don't care enough to research it.  If they really are heavily reliant on low end sales, well, that sucks for them.  At least Canon have office and medical equipment to fall back on.  

As far as Samsung,  I think they'll survive.  I still have a Note 2, Note 4, and Note 5.  When the time comes I'm sure I'll pick up another one.    The thing that kills me about Samsung is the shear variety of products they produce.   People see the effort they invested in the camera market, only to back out of it after producing what was a pretty solid camera, as a somewhat surprising disappointment.  Personally, I'd be even more surprised if Samsungs customer support people even knew they made a camera.  I have a Samsung desktop audio unit and their reps didn't even know Samsung made one.  It's a very nice, high quality unit, yet the people responsible for helping consumers with issues related to the product didn't know it existed or how to even find it in their system. 

As far as Target Canada, could the pricing issues have anything to do with differing import costs and taxes?  I've heard downright horror stories about getting goods through customs there.


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 21, 2016)

yeppers about Target Canada pricing in relation to GST/import duties ==> Some Target prices could be higher in Canada than in U.S.

Samsung isn't going anywhere.  They are a massive gov't supported company with massive subsidiaries in many industries, services, products etc.  But this is the internet .. we can start false rumors


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 21, 2016)

Scatterbrained said:


> I think the issue he's bringing up here (or what I consider relevant about his points) is that Nikon is pushing into a contracting, and ever crowded, market.    Low end consumer camera sales peaked years ago and have been on a downward spiral ever since.   How much Nikon actually rely on those sales I don't know though, as I really don't care enough to research it.  If they really are heavily reliant on low end sales, well, that sucks for them.  At least Canon have office and medical equipment to fall back on.



Well I'd trust the guys with the marketing data a lot more than the guys without it for making those kinds of decisions.  

I'm sure they've looked at not just the total sales figures on the"low end consumer cameras" but also at things like, how many of the folks that we sold one of these entry level models too eventually came back and upgraded to something more advanced?

It's data we don't have, can't really analyze properly and can only guess about anecdotally.   Keep in mind too that markets change.  Nikon still hauls in billions in revenue, I think they did something like 586 billion yen last year.  Granted I have no idea how much that is in real money but I'm guessing it's a lot.

So yes, that might be down from a few years ago, but you have to be doing something right if your making those kinds of numbers.  So yes, the market will change.  It will fluctuate.  But to base the notion that Nikon is doomed because one guy didn't like the update they did from the D3300 to the D3400?  Ya, not buying into it.

Nikon has to look at things from a much different perspective than some self proclaimed internet expert.  Ok, folks, no offense meant to Thom here.. he's a great photographer.  But, I'm a pretty damn good driver.  That doesn't mean I'm qualified to become the CEO of General Motors or make marketing decisions for them.

So, from Nikon's point of view - you can't really do a huge upgrade to the D3400 without taking sales away from the D5500.  It's not just about total sales of the D3400, it's about inventory levels, etc.  A lot more goes into those decisions than just looking at it from a how many of these can we sell perspective.  They also need to balance the cost of each unit with a prospective price point.  They also consider things like, what do people buying an entry level camera really want the most, and what do they consider more optional... nice to have but not necessarily a must?

So yes, a lot more goes into this stuff than most people realize.  So with all do respect to Thom, lets face it.. he was never the target audience for the D3400 to begin with.  He shouldn't be shocked that he would be so disappointed in it.


----------



## goodguy (Sep 21, 2016)

nerwin said:


> cgw said:
> 
> 
> > nerwin said:
> ...


I went once into the first Target store that was open in north of Toronto, the store was half full, it looked miserable, I never walked into a Target store again. The lost of Target didn't move me much. Their entry to Canada was so unimpressive especially considering Walmart is already so strong here that they really needed to come out running and not walking backwards.


----------



## Braineack (Sep 21, 2016)

Nikon will always refresh the consumer camera each year.  ez revenue stream.

the Key Mission stuff is entering a hot market.

They come out with a bunch of nice f/1.8 and f/1.4 lens over the last year.  24mm, 35mm, 105mm, 200-500mm, etc.

they came out with the D500 and D5.

Once they replace the D810 with the D850 they have a pretty fantastic pro-DSLR lineup.

the snapbridge stuff is a step in the right direction.

the P900 seems to be really popular.

they still blow Canon out of the water in terms of cost:benefit.



How about this, what exactly is Canon doing that Nikon isnt?



> Canon: swimming slowly upstream with the 5D Mark IV, new significant higher end lenses, the EOS M5.



Okay, the D810 will be replaced soon, with specs and cost that will win out like always.
Again, they've been releasing higher-end lenses.
Nikon is also in the mirrorless market... what's so great about the M5?


----------



## nerwin (Sep 21, 2016)

Braineack said:


> Nikon will always refresh the consumer camera each year.  ez revenue stream.
> 
> the Key Mission stuff is entering a hot market.
> 
> ...



I'm pretty sure that 200-500 5.6 has been calling my name. But I'm not allowed to buy gear anymore thanks to TPF


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 21, 2016)

nerwin said:


> I'm pretty sure that 200-500 5.6 has been calling my name. But I'm not allowed to buy gear anymore thanks to TPF



Merely suggested that if you really want to improve your photographs I'd start by working with what you have and getting to know it intimately, instead of switching cameras/lenses so much.  But the choice is ultimately yours, your money, spend it however you want.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Sep 21, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> Scatterbrained said:
> 
> 
> > I think the issue he's bringing up here (or what I consider relevant about his points) is that Nikon is pushing into a contracting, and ever crowded, market.    Low end consumer camera sales peaked years ago and have been on a downward spiral ever since.   How much Nikon actually rely on those sales I don't know though, as I really don't care enough to research it.  If they really are heavily reliant on low end sales, well, that sucks for them.  At least Canon have office and medical equipment to fall back on.
> ...


I'm familiar with what goes into corporate decisions regarding production, inventory, etc.  However, I know better than to rely on the corporate brass to know what is best.   There is a long list of failed corporations that show otherwise.    Of course, as  I said before, I don't really care enough about Nikon to look into their corporate reports and see if they really are hurting or not.  As Thom Hogan himself pointed out, he's been decrying Nikons corporate decisions for almost 20yrs.   At some point it just becomes a broken record.


----------



## nerwin (Sep 21, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> nerwin said:
> 
> 
> > I'm pretty sure that 200-500 5.6 has been calling my name. But I'm not allowed to buy gear anymore thanks to TPF
> ...



I know, I was just trying to be funny. haha


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 21, 2016)

Scatterbrained said:


> I'm familiar with what goes into corporate decisions regarding production, inventory, etc.  However, I know better than to rely on the corporate brass to know what is best.   There is a long list of failed corporations that show otherwise.    Of course, as  I said before, I don't really care enough about Nikon to look into their corporate reports and see if they really are hurting or not.  As Thom Hogan himself pointed out, he's been decrying Nikons corporate decisions for almost 20yrs.   At some point it just becomes a broken record.



Well in this case the corporate brass seems to be doing as well as the other folks who make a similar product.  If their sales had dropped say twice what Canon's had, then yes I can see maybe some validity to the points Thom wishes to make.  As it is, I don't.

I think the most telling point in all of this was Thom mentioning that Canon was on the right track with the 5D MKIV - well of course they are from his point of view.  It's the sort of camera a guy like him would buy and use.

A D3400?  Eh.. not so much.  So no, I doubt anything they could have done with this upgrade would have made him happy unless they made it a full frame camera that could shoot 8 FPS, etc, etc..


----------



## cgw (Sep 21, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> Scatterbrained said:
> 
> 
> > I think the issue he's bringing up here (or what I consider relevant about his points) is that Nikon is pushing into a contracting, and ever crowded, market.    Low end consumer camera sales peaked years ago and have been on a downward spiral ever since.   How much Nikon actually rely on those sales I don't know though, as I really don't care enough to research it.  If they really are heavily reliant on low end sales, well, that sucks for them.  At least Canon have office and medical equipment to fall back on.
> ...



Having said very little at great length, all you need to read are Nikon's quarterlies and the CIPA numbers. That Hogan bases his unpopular, unwelcome analysis on such data--and not magical thinking--seems to be a real irritant hereabouts. Anti-Nikon?Please...


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 22, 2016)

cgw said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > Scatterbrained said:
> ...


I said a great deal that was instantly discounted because of a clear bias against Nikon.

Since neither you our Thom is currently in charge of a company that makes billions every year I will put my money on the guys that do, as opposed to listening to a couple of self proclaimed experts with zero experience and a very incomplete picture based on extremely limited information.

I'm just funny that way I guess.

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 22, 2016)

nerwin said:


> I'm pretty sure that 200-500 5.6 has been calling my name. But I'm not allowed to buy gear anymore thanks to TPF


If it makes you feel any better, you can buy gear for us?
I really need that Nikon 200-500 too  
I'll forward my shipping address, as I'm sure most everyone else on TPF will do shortly ...


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 22, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> cgw said:
> 
> 
> > robbins.photo said:
> ...


It is very evident that Thom compares all his reviews to the top end cameras.
With that, it's going to be impossible to compare a low budget consumer camera to a top end spec camera and lens.  Everything will disappoint except for the top end equipment.

So, one can guess how his review is going to be with anything that is not top end.

What Thom is missing, is he needs to analyze the R&D costs associated with adding new features.  Just because a new feature is added don't just think that they "shoved" it into an empty spot in the camera body.  There's usually a lot of design changes, new chip sets, motherboards, etc.  Look at tear downs of camera bodies and compare one model to the next.   Better features require more space.  a Larger AF module require more space. Add a internal focusing motor .. more space.  Larger motherboard to accomodate newer and better chip sets ... more space.  This requires a redesign of the body making it every so slightly larger, or new material to make it thinner. more compact chipsets/boards etc.   So much more goes into a new camera then just a new model number., though we wonder sometimes. 

Thom is an end user and photographer, not a business/ engineering analyst.

All it needs is for him to look at a break down of the Canon 1dx and SL1 .. shouldn't they be the same size, and why not ??


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 22, 2016)

astroNikon said:


> nerwin said:
> 
> 
> > I'm pretty sure that 200-500 5.6 has been calling my name. But I'm not allowed to buy gear anymore thanks to TPF
> ...



Looked at the Nikkor 200-500 myself, the constant 5.6 was appealing, so were samples shot wide open.  Not so sure about the zoom ring though, 160 degree throw seems like a real hassle to deal with when trying to zoom in and out in the field.  So leaning towards the Tamron G2 at the moment.


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 22, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > nerwin said:
> ...


well if Nerwin is buying, just get both of them!!


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 22, 2016)

astroNikon said:


> It is very evident that Thom compares all his reviews to the top end cameras.
> With that, it's going to be impossible to compare a low budget consumer camera to a top end spec camera and lens.  Everything will disappoint except for the top end equipment.
> 
> So, one can guess how his review is going to be with anything that is not top end.
> ...



Sad thing is whenever Nikon release anything but a top of the line camera in like the D810/D500/D5 range, Thom is apparently going to be pissing and moaning about what a waste of time it was to work on anything else.

I understand, those are the cameras he's interested in and wants.  But from a business perspective the D3400 makes good financial sense for Nikon, because that's what most people buy.


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 22, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > It is very evident that Thom compares all his reviews to the top end cameras.
> ...


I'm not sure how accurate this is but this certainly is my perception of the sales model based on demand.
==> How Do FX and DX Sales Compare? | DSLRBodies | Thom Hogan

Also with lenses, if most are d3x00 and d5x00 how many do you think are satisfied with the kit lenses.  How many people with a d3x00 or d5x00 have a 70-200/2.8 ?    I think generally (wihtout any analytical data) that only higher end camera buyers buy higher end lenses.  So making a 18-55/1.8 lens that costs 3-4x the body would be ridiculous as if demand was low, and production costs high, you would have an even higher cost lens.

Does Canon have a 70-200/2.8 APS-C only lens?
what's the Cost/Benefit of making one for FF *and* APS-C, versus just one lens for both platforms ?

Thom clearly doesn't understand business economics.


----------



## Braineack (Sep 22, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> Sad thing is whenever Nikon release anything but a top of the line camera in like the D500/D5 range, Thom is apparently going to be pissing and moaning about what a waste of time it was to work on anything else.



The D500 and D5 are amazing-- recently released--bodies with specs unmatched and technology that WILL trickle down, yet he's still pissing and moaning. 


What exactly is better about IV over the III?   slightly more MP, newer processor, okay cool...but that's typical.  Similar AF module, similar Burst rate, similar DR, similar ISO, same old tired storage system.  

Oh neato it can now shoot 4K video.  oh cool touchscreen.  oh tubular a new trendy cell-phonesque RAW mode so you can fake Bokeh.  

It's just the same but upgraded...


----------



## chuasam (Sep 22, 2016)

nerwin said:


> What doesn't struggle in Canada?



Freedom, Justin Trudeau, black people.


----------



## chuasam (Sep 22, 2016)

zombiesniper said:


> The author seems to be one of those people that can only see the tree and even though they're standing in the middle of it can fathom the concept of a forest. One camera offering doesn't kill a company or they'd all be gone by now since they've all screwed up at some point.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No it's true. But that's only the loss of like half a dozen jobs or so.


----------



## pixmedic (Sep 22, 2016)

every year Nikon does its thing, and every year good ole Thom tells us all how Nikon is doing it wrong and will soon be out of business because
they aren't basing their production strategy around *his* advice....
meanwhile...nearly 2 decades of "not taking Thoms exact instructions" later...Nikon is _*somehow *_still in business, and still putting out tons of new gear.  nearly 2 decades of Nikon "not doing it right" and Thom is *still *shooting with Nikons "not what the public wants" products. 
Thom has long since lost any credibility with me.  If he was half as photography clairvoyant as he thinks he is, one of the other smaller companies would have hired him up a decade ago and have long surpassed both Nikon AND Canon....and yet, Thom still bitches about nikon from his computer desk, while simultaneously ordering their newest flagship camera and lenses.


----------



## cgw (Sep 22, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> cgw said:
> 
> 
> > robbins.photo said:
> ...



Innumeracy isn't much of an excuse. Hogan is numerate, you're plainly(or willfully)not. Publicly available reports are all *anyone *has to go on in figuring out Nikon's performance--not "truthiness." I've been close to Nikon.ca for 20 years and have never seen it in such disarray or its employees so demoralized. I can only guess it's a reflection of a degree of corporate malaise--none of which makes me at all happy. That Hogan's reports reflect concern isn't obvious to you--and I guess never will be.


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 22, 2016)

cgw said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > cgw said:
> ...


Oh please.  Your looking at sales figures but your looking at them in a vacuum and so is Thom.

All manufacturers have seen a decline in dslr sales.  It's a market fluctuation caused by a number of factors.  I realize you want to pretend it's only occurring over at Nikon but that's complete and total b.s.

Neither your or Thom have the slightest clue as to what there internal numbers show and those are the ones that matter.

You have no clue what there marketing research shows, what their profit margin is on a d3400 as opposed to a d810 or a d500, no clue what there current inventory levels are, no idea what's slated to come out next from r&d, the list goes on and on.

And yet you seem to honestly think that even though you don't have access to any of this information somehow your better qualified to suggest long term strategy to the folks that do, folks that have a pretty impressive track record for staying well in the black.

They don't seem to need advice from the internet blowhard section.  But I'm sure they'll shoot you an email if that changes.

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk


----------



## cgw (Sep 24, 2016)

_Oh please. Your looking at sales figures but your looking at them in a vacuum and so is Thom.

Neither your or Thom have the slightest clue as to what there internal numbers show and those are the ones that matter.
_
Hilarious. That's all anyone has! Nikon is a public company. They publish quarterly and annual reports. They disclose their financials. Stockholders kind of expect this. There aren't two sets of books. I'm guessing this is news to you. That's sad.


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 24, 2016)

cgw said:


> _Oh please. Your looking at sales figures but your looking at them in a vacuum and so is Thom.
> 
> Neither your or Thom have the slightest clue as to what there internal numbers show and those are the ones that matter.
> _
> Hilarious. That's all anyone has! Nikon is a public company. They publish quarterly and annual reports. They disclose their financials. Stockholders kind of expect this. There aren't two sets of books. I'm guessing this is news to you. That's sad.


They don't publish internal numbers, no company does.  The also don't ring up Canon or Pentax and say, here's what we have planned for the year.

They publish sales figures, and if you did an ounce of research you'd realize that sales of high end cameras are down for everyone, not just Nikon.

But that info is something you have to ignore because it clearly exposes your bias.  Not that your previous posts don't do that as well.

Tell you what, start your own camera manufacturing firm and do it all your way.  You and Thom can partner up and show the world how a billion dollar operation should be run.

Otherwise I'm afraid your talking out of the entirely wrong orifice.  

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk


----------



## Braineack (Sep 25, 2016)

cgw said:


> Hilarious. That's all anyone has! Nikon is a public company. They publish quarterly and annual reports. They disclose their financials. Stockholders kind of expect this. There aren't two sets of books. I'm guessing this is news to you. That's sad.



How many D3400s were sold in 2015?


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 25, 2016)

Nikon being a public stock held stock company does not have to publish specific detailed sales information.  They only have to provide documents specific to regulators and what their board approves.

Consolidated financial results ==> http://www.nikon.com/about/ir/ir_library/result/pdf/2017/17_1qf_c_e.pdf
2016/2017 forward looking ==> http://www.nikon.com/about/ir/ir_library/result/pdf/2017/17_1qf_d_e.pdf

the oddest thing I've read is how they "correlated" a 19% reduction in sales to the delay of the d500.  ==> http://www.nikon.com/about/ir/ir_library/ar/pdf/nr2016/16nikonreport_e.pdf

back in my Toyota days TUSA was able to get Toyota to use Toyota USA to do their marketing in USA, and move some design here instead of all in Japan for US marketing/design.  I think Nikon needs to shift marketing for the US to the US (if we are the largest market) instead of in Singapore as they did in the recent past.

I mention automotive because in automotive they actually release sales figure.  Plus it's easier standing outside a car manufacturer plant and actually *count* the cars coming out then a small product that fits in crates and railroad/truck cars out of sight. But I think JD Powers organized those numbers and sold some very detailed statistics to marketing/advertising companies.

What Nikon/Canon provide sometimes is shipment numbers.  But these numbers do not represent actual sales numbers.  If they move into a new market like India, they have massive shipment to that new segment to provide inventory.  But that inventory does not represent sales (it represent sales from Nikon to the distributor and from the distributor to the end retailer).  But they also may accept returns after a certain time frame.  Locally I still saw 3100s for sale even with the d3300 out.  So I consider it shelf inventory.  Real sales occur in reocurring segment distribution.

CIPA provides sales information. And they have their members which include Nikon/Canon which provide them more specific numbers ==> http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/list_e.pdf

Just go here and click on the first 2 links on the left menu - Digital cameras and Interchangeable lens then look at all that charts to the right. ==> CIPA - Camera & Imaging Products Association: Digital Cameras

I'm sure CIPA may have those specific numbers but you'll probably have to be a paid member to get those and then not release them.

But with stock holders pushing more and more sales I think companies have lost realization of what they are doing.  As they expand into new markets, thus a surge in manufacturing/distribution for stock, they forget that regular consumers probably want to own a camera for quite a while.  Mostly camera enthusiasts will own more than one modern camera.  And since most home camera owners don't really know how to use them a cell phone is actually better than their DSLRs.

With shampoo you can add "repeat" and increase sales. With cars they like Leases as it put a stop date on the car in which a new car usually is leased.  With cameras?  You sell it and the owner uses it for 5+ years .. if it doesn't end up in the closet. So Nikon brings out new models with incremental features hoping that person from a couple years ago likes the new features .... so they can post to facebook quicker (excluding their cell phone).  I just look at my facebook and I see so many "instant" postings that it really makes you understand why general camera sales are tanking ... they need a cell connection to post to FB instantly.

I did that a few weeks ago with my D750 to my iPhone.  But Quality wasn't good.  I guess that's why LR now has RAW processing on handhelds.

Until they solve that "instant" image movement expect more of the same even with Nikon's positive future earnings guesstimates that they provided in their earnings statements.


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 4, 2016)

nerwin said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > I think it's called competition.
> ...


and now you can include Samsung's washer's ....
Samsung washing machines recalled for explosion risk

talk about taking a bath .. or cleaning ...


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 7, 2016)

Uh-oh ...

There's a Report That Another Samsung Model Has Exploded

talk about a company literally going up in flames ...


----------



## chuasam (Nov 11, 2016)

Oh yeah. In old news,  Nikon let 10% of their Japanese work force go


----------



## Piccell (Nov 12, 2016)

Never tried a Nikon rudderless but their mirrorless are fun little cameras.
I am sure I'll have plenty of chances since they are going anywhere and will be around for a long time.


----------



## Drive-By-Shooter (Dec 17, 2016)

the article presented shows incredible knowledge & marketing analysis.  yes, it is hard to argue against. nikon would be wise to heed his advice. but won't; here's why.

nikon is part of a pre-war mitsubishi family of companies.  while on paper they may appear autonomous, they still meet & plan together.
regardless of industry, the pre war companies seem to stay less connected to their customers than the post-war ones.  how else could Soichiro Honda go from making piston rings to beating all the japanese car manufacturers & eventually the world's? by listening to customers while competitors did not!

i worked in a japanese co. & a US car co.  arrogance was rampant in both, even during declining times. don't know nikon's co. culture, but it appears to be showing in product strategy & declining US customer support.  "rudderless" seems appropriate and worrisome



fmw said:


> ...It is ridiculous to think that Canon knows its customers better than Nikon....


----------



## fmw (Dec 17, 2016)

Drive-By-Shooter said:


> the article presented shows incredible knowledge & marketing analysis.  yes, it is hard to argue against. nikon would be wise to heed his advice. but won't; here's why.
> 
> nikon is part of a pre-war mitsubishi family of companies.  while on paper they may appear autonomous, they still meet & plan together.
> regardless of industry, the pre war companies seem to stay less connected to their customers than the post-war ones.  how else could Soichiro Honda go from making piston rings to beating all the japanese car manufacturers & eventually the world's? by listening to customers while competitors did not!
> ...



I will leave the worry up to you and continue to make images with my Nikon gear.


----------



## Drive-By-Shooter (Jan 8, 2017)

just found this interesting camera sales chart that reveals much about trends, article not so interesting:
This Chart Shows How the Camera Market Has Changed Over the Past Decades


----------



## greybeard (Feb 15, 2017)

I love Nikon cameras and lenses.  They just seem to fit my hands and work/play flow better than others but, I worry I could be left with another orphan camera system to go with my old Minolta stuff which I felt the same way about.


----------



## nerwin (Feb 15, 2017)

greybeard said:


> I love Nikon cameras and lenses.  They just seem to fit my hands and work/play flow better than others but, I worry I could be left with an orphan camera system to go with my old Minolta stuff which I felt the same way about.



Nikon isn't going anywhere anytime soon. I wouldn't worry about it. One of problems is Nikon makes their DSLRs really well and they last for a long time. I mean heck, first generation DSLRs from Nikon are still working just as good as they were when they came out! Lenses are superb and they have legacy support, I mean heck you can literally mount Nikkor lenses from the 50s on a brand new 2017 Nikon camera without a silly adapter. I believe Nikon has some tricks up their sleeves that will turn things around rather quickly. All companies go through this at some point.


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 15, 2017)

What Nikon really needs to do is what many Japanese and other companies have done.

Create a "premium line" which would stay "Nikon"

then create 1 or 2 lower tier product line.

The first one they could use a name recognizeable though not used .. like Nikon's "Samsung" cameras.

Then possibly create a low end non-Nikon-identified, chinese throw-away made line that is totally revolutionary and contains no physical controls, it's all voice activated.  by not having buttons and switches it would lower the price tremendously.

Call that line, hmmm .. let's see...  the "TonyN" line of cameras but the voice control would do something random from what you asked for.  Then we can all continued to complain that Tony N just doesn't listen to us and doesn't understand and is a whacko.

The first tier would improve cash flow on lower priced, consumer priced friendly cameras.

The 2nd tier would create cash flow and warranty work on low end cameras that people don't expect to get much out of anything anyways.

A Win-Win-Win scenario.  Well, except for maybe the TonyN line of cameras.  They may have to drop that line sooner or later.


----------



## nerwin (Feb 15, 2017)

astroNikon said:


> What Nikon really needs to do is what many Japanese and other companies have done.
> 
> Create a "premium line" which would stay "Nikon"
> 
> ...



But Tony is chill.


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 15, 2017)

nerwin said:


> But Tony is *chill*.


dictionary .. 





> an unpleasant feeling of coldness in the atmosphere, one's surroundings, or the body.


or


> horrify or frighten (someone).



Yeah, I can see that.


----------



## Destin (Feb 15, 2017)

nerwin said:


> What doesn't struggle in Canada?



Hockey. And maple syrup.


----------



## nerwin (Feb 15, 2017)

Destin said:


> nerwin said:
> 
> 
> > What doesn't struggle in Canada?
> ...



And Tim Hortons.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 15, 2017)

Nikon used to mean their top bodies. Nikkormat used to be consumer bodies.


----------



## Overread (Feb 15, 2017)

The thing is a few years back every company was going insane with growth because the global markets were opening up; people had money and felt they had free cash to spend and a lot of consumer interest drove high end items down in price. The digital revolution also opened up cameras to a huge market who otherwise were not interested. 

So suddenly you got a massive market growth. Now ew are in time where the market is stagnating if not contracting in some areas so you see projects aiming to corner new markets; increased competition and companies downsizing. And because they are big companies a little downsize is still hundreds to thousands of peoples jobs. 

It's flawed economic thinking that companies must improve upon each years profits; indeed that model of a consumer and constant increase  in profit economic system is quickly starting to fall apart as; whilst it still works; it shows that once you get so big there isn't any more growth  - plus continued mindless growth through poor products (ergo lots of new ones cycling fast) is not only poor use of limited global resources; but also leaves you easily open to ahving your user-base poached by a  longer lasting, better quality product. 


All the big camera companies will downsize somewhat as the market settles and as mobile phones eat a chunk of one end; but unless they are miss-managed or fail to downsize, they shouldn't die off.


----------



## HaveCameraWillTravel (Feb 20, 2017)

Destin said:


> nerwin said:
> 
> 
> > What doesn't struggle in Canada?
> ...



That's why the Stanley Cup has been in the US since 1993. 


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------

