I don't understand why Nikon keeps this huge mystique about announcements and information about supply. It doesn't seem to be good PR! Why don't they simply tell us what is happening and keep good faith with their loyal clients?
#1. "RE: Why is Nikon so secretive?" | In response to Reply # 0
#2. "RE: Why is Nikon so secretive?" | In response to Reply # 1ecarlino Registered since 09th Dec 2007Tue 04-Dec-07 10:58 AM
well, either Nikon knows what they're doing or they don't (always a possibility).
chances are that aside from the easrly adopter, gadget geeks, a few weeks (even a few months) doesn't make a big difference to most people.
they could be slowly rolling out initial production in an effort to identify problems before releasing the boat load.
they could also be 'working the crowd' to build the buzz and get some free marketing.
but i think they'd get the same level of anticipation and buzz if the release were more open with set dates, etc - that way they get the staged release which benefits their operations, they keep the anxiety level high, but they remove the 'unknown' factor - i just find it frustrating when they give a release date (Nov 30) but then even the dealers have no idea what's going on.
I must have bugged Lisa and Brad at Berger Brothers a half dozen times in the past month and I'm sure their phone has been ringing off the hook with people who pre-ordered (or would like to place an order) looking for information. They've been very professional and service-oriented, but there's just not a lot they have to offer because Nikon hasn't given them any info.
#4. "RE: Why is Nikon so secretive?" | In response to Reply # 0
There once was a computer company called Osborne. They made microcomputers way back before Apple and IBM. The company was doing quite well when they announced that they were comming out with a new model, the Osborne II. Seems everyone wanted the new model and didn't buy they older one, but the new one was not ready for production. Osborne went out of business due to lack of sales.
This was back before there was competition between mfrs in the micro computer business was strong. Can you imagine what might happen in todays marktplace? It's not only marketing but business survival.
Wisdom cannot be given, it must be gathered...
#6. "RE:Osborne computer myth" | In response to Reply # 4spootdad Registered since 27th Dec 2006Tue 04-Dec-07 03:18 PM
Actually, that's not quite the case: the following is from "Taking Osborne out of the Osborne Effect", here:
I teach at a business school and this story was often repeated by my students: one of them found the link and this article as part of his research. (Sadly, not in my class: I "only" teach math, statistics, and quantitative methods)
Usenet veteran Charles Eicher was "the repair geek who could fix any Osborne," he tells us, "even the factory sent me some of the machines they couldn't fix." Charles offers a caveat about the figures, but condenses the tale told by Osborne himself in Hypergrowth, the 1985 memoir co-authored with John C Dvorak:
"They had transitioned to a new model, and it was finally shipping. Sales were going well, and money was flowing back into the company after months of postponed sales (the alleged Osborne Effect). But then a VP discovered the company had $150k of fully equipped motherboards from the previous model, but no parts to build them out, no CRTs, RAM or floppy disk drives, and in worst of all, no plastic cases and bezels. The injection molding company that made the complex Osborne cases had already destroyed the molds since the product was discontinued and no further orders were expected."
"The VP pitched Osborne to build out the old models, so they could get some money out of their stock of old parts, but Osborne didn't realize what sort of expenditures would be involved. Before Osborne pulled the plug, the VP spent $2 million to build out the $150k of old parts, the biggest expense was getting the injection molding company to build new molds and start up production on cases. Osborne described this as the classic example of 'throwing good money after bad.'"
"So that was what really killed Osborne. They had made the transition to the new model, sure sales had slowed for a while, but they were starting to show a profit. Then after the transition, a rogue VP made some really bad decisions that sucked all the money out of the company, and sank it into debt at a time when it couldn't afford ANY new debt. And then when Osborne realized what happened, the company died."
From the rocking of the cradle to the rolling of the hearse, the going up was worth the coming down.
From the rocking of the cradle to the rolling of the hearse, the going up was worth the coming down
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#5. "RE: Why is Nikon so secretive?" | In response to Reply # 0
They are really in a no-win position. If they announce their plans well in advance, they'll be accused of vaporware when the inevitable glitches and delays shift the schedule. If they don't announce, they'll be accused of being secretive.
That being the case, if I were them, I'd opt for keeping things quiet until ready for public view.
And, really, that approach seems to be working out pretty well for them.
But I think you overstate the case. With respect to the D3 and the D300, they made specific announcements three months in advance about the products, the production rates of their factories and the time frame when the products would become available. The only thing they couldn't predict for certain was the level of demand.
Wethersfield, CT, USA
Connecticut High School Sports Photos
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#7. "No!" | In response to Reply # 5ArneStrasser Registered since 07th Oct 2007Tue 04-Dec-07 04:10 PM
unless you live in the usa or Japan chances are, you dont have a d3, even if you ordered it the first day. Seeing their site claiming it to be available in november makes me kind of sick.
in europe, nikon has shipped next to NO cameras and dealers can't tell you squat about the arrival of your order. That's not marketing.