Nikon Rudderless?

[pixmedic]

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]

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.

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...

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

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]

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.

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...

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

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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

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

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

 

[astroNikon]

Uh-oh ...

There's a Report That Another Samsung Model Has Exploded

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

 

[chuasam]

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

 

[Piccell]

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]

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

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

 

[fmw]

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

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

no, it is not!

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

 

[Drive-By-Shooter]

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]

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.