WHATS NEXT FOR M43, after Olympus, what future is left?


If Full frame is the simple solution why Nikon is still non-profitable. Nikon has a full range of FF & APS_C cameras to choose from.
Beware of appearances.
Sony cameras are very good at marketing their successes but the fact of the matter is no one in the public knows their financial position because it’s always hidden within larger groups. In fact the camera group has been shuffled around within Sony Corp numerous times which doesn’t instil too much confidence compared to shining stars like Sony Semiconductor or Playstation.
I’m sure they’re in the black now (actually maybe not this year cos everyone’s in the red except maybe the Canon juggernaut) but the likelihood is they spent many years in the red developing their system before benefiting in their current position.
Developing a system is expensive. That’s what Nikon and Canon are going through now.
Same thing is happening in L-alliance. It’s a new system and it costs a lot of money to develop except Canikony controls something like 90% of the market. It won’t be an easy road and no guarantee of success.
If there are no simple migration path for m43 users to go to L-mount (if that is their goal), what incentive would there be for those that want to upgrade to FF go with L-mount instead of Canikony.
And for those that don’t want to migrate at all because m43 fulfills their needs, killing m43 would just kill your revenue stream in helping develop L-mount.
 

Either you did not read the article or you are trying to twist the facts again against M43.

From the 2nd half of the article, it is clear that Panasonic are facing challenges with its Full Frame system,
it is not selling well and there will be no new version of S1 and S1r.

The tiny remaining photographers market does not have space for so many manufacturers.
After Panasonic and Nikon is in trouble, Pentax, Ricoh, and maybe even Fujifilm could be in trouble.
10 years from now, maybe only Sony and Canon will remain.

But no worries, I am sure the camera bodies and lenses can last much longer than that :cool:

Some one ponders for 2021: [Panasonic selling camera division?]

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/...ling-camera-division-nikon-to-shrink-business


Maybe too early to predict anything.
Unlike Olympus, Panasonic had not relied solely on MFT by 2020.

If Panasonic Camera Division had relied 100% on MFT, then I would agree that it is doomed to an inescapable business death, some time in the near future.

Panasonic had moved into Full Frame L mount alliance in September 2018, which is its life-jacket in a stormy sea.

Forgot to mention that Panasonic has a separate Broadcast and Professional Audio Visual Division.
Panasonic makes seriously high end professional video cameras. More for business to business type of corporate customer.
Those products are not meant for retail consumers spending comparatively small sums of money.

Panasonic parent company is much bigger than Olympus parent company.
Meaning Panasonic has deeper pockets to tolerate a money-losing camera sub-division for a longer time.

Panasonic can turn this sinking ship around by persuading its GH5 fans to adopt the S5 or a future Panasonic Lumix APS-C body with L mount.

If Panasonic releases GH6 (MFT) for sale, that may be good for sales - for a short while.
But bad for company future direction as it sends all the wrong signals to the user base.
A bit like winning a small minor battle, but losing the war.

In the two most recent interviews Panasonic emphasised the S5 and L mount full frame for (say) 95% of the time.
Some passing comments was made about MFT when the interviewer insisted on bringing up the topic.
Panasonic did not wish to dwell on MFT topic. They do not wish to talk about it.


Cryptically Panasonic said market research showed there was no viable market for compact cameras. Wow! You don't say.
Like Panasonic agreeing that MFT has no future.

"compact" was MFT's biggest selling point from 2008 until it lost the size and weight contest with Sony APS-C cameras.
And now you have Sony A7c Full Frame that is smaller than Panasonic MFT bodies.
(Since Olympus is dead, we will not compare with EM1X)
 

Every one is entitled to like a particular sensor format for whatever reasons.
Those who have bought extensively into the MFT system and love MFT can continue to do so. No one is objecting.
And it is true that the MFT equipment will not suddenly fail to operate overnight because Olympus hived off Camera Division to JIP or (if) Panasonic abandons or neglects MFT later.

That is not the point.

The point is that no camera manufacturer can survive if it continues to blindly make products that very few people wish to buy.

A fact that is borne out by sales statistics and the dismal failure of Olympus Camera Division in Jun 2020.

Worldwide, Olympus MFT camera products only managed 2% market share in 2018.
Panasonic's MFT sales statistics are so low that they did not even show up as a separate distinctive category, but was included under "Others".

The world in 2020 is different from 2008.

They needed to change. In recent years, both were trying to sell products based on ancient 2008 MFT sensor format to consumers that have mostly been enticed away by the excellent APS-C and/or Full Frame products made by competitors Sony, Nikon, Canon, Fuji and even Leica.

Now that Olympus Camera Division is dead, Panasonic needs to discover how to appeal to (2020 & beyond) modern customers with the suitable cameras/lenses.

Panasonic needs to abandon their obsolete paradigms regarding MFT and take some risk to position their new Full Frame L mount products to where the future worldwide customer demand is.

Both Olympus Camera Division and Panasonic Camera Division had the luxury of doting parent companies.

We do not know the sales + financial situation in Panasonic Camera Division.

But for Olympus Camera Division, the parent company had generously absorbed crushing losses (more than US$100 Million each year for 3 years) that would have bankrupted a stand-alone company.

Eventually, the patience of Olympus parent company was taxed to the limit and it pulled the plug on the Olympus Camera Division.

Now everyone is looking at Panasonic Camera Division, to see if it can be miraculously rescued from the brink, by re-directing its emphasis on the Full Frame L mount products.
 

Last edited:
On the surface, it may look as if that M43 is not a format which consumers prefer.

But take a look at Pentax in the article below.

Pentax, after its small success in Medium format, ventured into Full Frame & APS.
Why is it also a dying brand?

Ditto for Nikon. Why is it declining as well?

And for Panasonic who ventured into Full Frame? Why is there not much headway?
Hence, the problem or solution is not sensor formats!!!!! It is innovation and
clever marketing. Sony is damn good at marketing the unique selling points of its product
(eg. 63mp, max ISO 409,000, its autofocus etc).

We need to study the real reasons why manufacturers like Sony are succeeding while others are struggling.

A 2% market share looks small, but it is really significant. The Sony 100 compact series is already at its 7th to 8th generations.
It has less than 1% market share but continue to be profitable for Sony (otherwise Sony will chop it a long time ago)



That is not the point.

The point is that no camera manufacturer can survive if it continues to blindly make products that very few people wish to buy.

A fact that is borne out by sales statistics and the dismal failure of Olympus Camera Division in Jun 2020.

But for Olympus Camera Division, the parent company had generously absorbed crushing losses (more than US$100 Million each year for 3 years) that would have bankrupted a stand-alone company.
 

One more thing. To us hobbyists, it is only a camera. 只是身外物. Don't get so worked up over it.
 

Last edited:
You just need to dig a bit deeper to get an indication of Panasonic's market share. From the most recent 2019 market share report:
Quote"
Of the 8.66 million interchangeable lens cameras shipped last year, here’s the number shipped out by each company:

Canon: 4.16 million
Nikon: 1.73 million
Sony: 1.66 million
Fujifilm: 500,000
Olympus: 330,000
Others: 280,000

Of those cameras, 3.94 million were mirrorless cameras, or about 46%. Here’s how many mirrorless cameras the top brands shipped:

Sony: 1.65 million
Canon: 940,000
Fujifilm: 500,000
Olympus: 330,000
Nikon: 280,000
Others: 240,000 "

The difference between 280000 and 240000 would be Pentax's DSLR share at around 40000.
Of the 240000 ML 'others', it comprises of Panasonic, Leica, Sigma and a handful of medium format players.
Leica's a low volume seller and Sigma has one ILC: the FF fP. Sales of their Fovean models would also be negligible.
The best estimate I've seen puts Panasonic at around 200000 units. Of those, wanna take a guess what the ratio of L-mount:m43 is?

So that puts Olympus at around 3.8% and Panasonic maybe around 2.3%.
Still not great but if we're going to analyse, start with some realistic figures.
Combined, they are more than Fujifilm's share but of course that includes a small number of L-mount Panasonic's.

Olympus, Nikon and Canon's camera divisions gets scrutiny because they report full numbers. Everyone else gets the benefit of the doubt, including the seemingly Sony success but we have no idea what capital they went through to get there. You only hear the positive marketing spin but if their camera division profits were equally successful you'd think the investors would like to hear about it. Surely the Sony marketing team wouldn't miss an opportunity like that but yet, nothing. It's hidden.
Lucky for Panasonic, it's also hidden and not up for scrutiny unlike poor Olympus. But you have to say it's not as if they weren't given a chance. They made a profit in two out of the last 12 years (2010 and 2017) but Olympus' problems also goes far beyond just their choice of m43 format. Trying to pin it all on m43 is just looking for a scapegoat.

Everyone's financial's gonna tank this current year and lucky to break even.
The silver lining is next year, there's gonna be some year-on-year growth since it can't possibly be worse than this year, right? Can it? ;P
 

If Full frame is the simple solution why Nikon is still non-profitable. Nikon has a full range of FF & APS_C cameras to choose from.

Stupid Moronic decisions.
Prioritizing the KeyMission line, dropping the DL cameras, the failed Nikon 1 line.
Also Z7/Z6 without battery grips and single card slot (which is very expensive XQD).
They failed again with the D780.
Removed the battery grip, internal flash and the rumoured IBIS.
I’m itching for a new camera. But I can’t find a suitable one from Nikon.
 

Technology progresses. Arguably it wasn't until the A7 series' mk III generation and A9's introduction before they were really on par with their DSLR counterparts.
Nikon and Canon did bide their time before their switch to FF mirrorless and I'd argue that they did do it late by maybe ~1 yr but of course hind sight is 20:20.
However even if they did start the transition a year earlier, the early days of a new system will still seem like a 'mad rush' because it takes many lenses and cameras to really make it a system so they'd need to rush lenses out.

Canon and Nikon were already FF and APS-C players for most of their digital history and arguably if cost of sensors wasn't a factor, there wouldn't even be APS-C. So naturally of course that's the route they'd pick for their new mount.
But there's no magic about FF and APS-C. Fuji chose APS-C and small MF, it's just something different but not any worse.

With Canikony occupying that commanding ~90% market share, I'd argue the remaining player really can only aim for niche markets rather than compete head on.
And this is where I think Panasonic might struggle. They're going for the same market as Canikony but without a large userbase to migrate users there. They also don't appear to have anything completely unique to their system. They make absolutely competent FF products, but so does everyone else.

I still don't buy that Olympus could have made any in-roads had they pursued FF. It'd be costly and I don't know what uniqueness they'd bring to compete with Canikony. If anything, I think it would have accelerated their death because Olympus reports full financials for their imaging division and it'd be bare for everyone to see just how much money they'd had to burn through developing another system.
They only had a simple mission, stop loosing money and the activist investor would leave them alone.
I'd argue they just didn't do enough to own their m43 niche.

I think Panasonic is heading into the same trap of trying to be a Canikony.
They should just try to own the video/hybrid niche and soak up all the remaining m43 users and cater to that niche which still occupies a good 5% or so of the market. M43 is also a mature system without all the massive costs of developing new systems.
 

Ricohflex, Sony will eventually have the upper hand as Canon and Nikon do not make image sensors unless Canon decide to pour money into R&D which is not it's forte. You well know even with adapters to use old mount lenses it's performance leave much to be desired especially sports and wildlife. Many pros have switched to Sony because they are tired of incremental improvements and nikon and canon's arrogance not listening to it's customers. Their new systems take time to market. Pros are practical and don't base their buying on sentimentality but on bread and butter concerns namely performance and delivery of photographic results. With Sony going from strength to strength the two big boys or will they continue their dominance? Remember Kodak who was the king of the hill then but with it's arrogance what is it now? Downed by it's short sighted leaders.
 

Ricohflex, Sony will eventually have the upper hand as Canon and Nikon do not make image sensors unless Canon decide to pour money into R&D which is not it's forte. You well know even with adapters to use old mount lenses it's performance leave much to be desired especially sports and wildlife. Many pros have switched to Sony because they are tired of incremental improvements and nikon and canon's arrogance not listening to it's customers. Their new systems take time to market. Pros are practical and don't base their buying on sentimentality but on bread and butter concerns namely performance and delivery of photographic results. With Sony going from strength to strength the two big boys or will they continue their dominance? Remember Kodak who was the king of the hill then but with it's arrogance what is it now? Downed by it's short sighted leaders.
Sorry, this needs to be corrected.

Canon absolutely makes their own sensors. Their current dual pixel image sensors in both APS-C and FF are competitive with Sony Semi sensors, although I'd still argue Sony Semi has the upper hand.

Sony cameras procures their image sensors from Sony Semiconductor. They are functionally a separate business entities although under the same umbrella of Sony Corp. They are different divisions and the camera business is grouped in with some of the other consumer electronics like TV's.

Nikon absolutely designs sensors but are fabless. They don't design all their sensors and some (many) are procured from Sony Semiconductor but they have sensors manufactured elsewhere in the past eg. Renases, Toshiba. The issue is Sony Semiconductor has been buying up fab facilities (eg. the Toshiba line is now Sony Semi owned) but there are still other options. Eg. images of Nikon's cameras showed up in Tower Semi's financial reports which would strongly suggest Nikon are fabbing some of their designs at Tower now.
 

(off topic comment)
From about 1998 throughout the 2000's Singapore seemed to have strongly encouraged wafer fabrication facilities.
Presuming that we carried out the plans. Am just wondering if Singapore could have caught this boom in production of photographic sensors.

Is it because the technology is so advanced that only Japan could do that; and not Singapore?
Perhaps the fundamental R&D is lacking in Singapore. Thought we got A-Star?

Fundamental Research capability is what I think China is lacking in (as compared to US).
Resulting in US now able to squeeze China by refusing to sell it the high tech chips that are needed for making various telecoms products.

Imagine if Singapore could be the world's leading and largest maker + supplier of photographic sensors.
 

(off topic comment)
From about 1998 throughout the 2000's Singapore seemed to have strongly encouraged wafer fabrication facilities.
Presuming that we carried out the plans. Am just wondering if Singapore could have caught this boom in production of photographic sensors.

Is it because the technology is so advanced that only Japan could do that; and not Singapore?
Perhaps the fundamental R&D is lacking in Singapore. Thought we got A-Star?

Fundamental Research capability is what I think China is lacking in (as compared to US).
Resulting in US now able to squeeze China by refusing to sell it the high tech chips that are needed for making various telecoms products.

Imagine if Singapore could be the world's leading and largest maker + supplier of photographic sensors.

Of course this is a pipe dream. ST (singapore technologies) wafer fab has long disappeared that was when dynamic memory was the thing, digital imaging was not mainstream.Crude imaging devices were around but no one caught on.

Singapore's rationale was that wafer fab required huge investments only a govt organisation could pull off meaning there were few competitors.Even then there were the wafer technology race..think it was 5nm thickness of silicon. Even then sg could not keep up. The koreans entered the fray and now you have samsung and hyundae. The rest is history we lost. Part of the reason is not money but specialist manpower. Silicon design were the stronghold of the americans and europeans and japanese who also made the machines that process the silicon.

In comparison Taiwan did better eg. TSMC (taiwan semiconductor manufacturing company) because many of it's engineers were educated in the US and had worked for the then leading edge silicon fab companies in US.
 

Last edited:
Nikon and Canon were slow to go AF mirrorless full frame. Their original 2 bodies each, were a bit off the mark.
But both reacted fast to make R5, R6 and Z6 II, Z7 II - if these fail, then Nikon and Canon are in trouble.
Maybe Canon and Nikon have succeeded to overcome the initial teething problems.

It is all a matter of choosing what to include in the design and giving the customers what they want.
For example, for Nikon they put in Z6 II, Z7 II - Dual Card Slots (one CFexpress and one SD).

If the 4 bodies succeed to win market share, it means they have turned the tide.

Then it is Sony's turn to worry.
The user bases of Canon and Nikon are powerful factors in camera sales.

Fuji is not full frame. Not sure if they want to remain APS-C forever. Fuji does have medium format.
Pentax is still not full frame mirrorless. It seems they do not plan to.

Panasonic L mount full frame needs to find its market niche.
Panasonic CANNOT sell its AF mirrorless full frame L mount bodies at prices close to the corresponding Leica body prices.
Because if a person wants to pay that kind of money, they will usually opt to buy the Leica and not the Panasonic.

A few of my friends have bought TL or TL2 or CL or SL or SL2.
Only 1 has bought the Panasonic S1.

In my opinion the main reason for choosing L mount is to be able to use Leica Lenses.
The top Leica lenses are terrific. You get what you pay for.

A person can buy a Panasonic S1 or S5 to use Panasonic lenses or Sigma lenses in the mean time.
Maybe the idea is to use the affordable Panasonic and Sigma lenses first.
But with a long term view to eventually get a few Leica SL lenses.
At least the option is open to future gear buying because the L mount is the same.
 

Last edited:
This is an interesting article of the M43 scene currently unfolding.

I think Panasonic is only half correct.
Panasonic G9 is a worthy alternative to Olympus EM1 Mk3. The G9 (658g) has very similar specs to the EM1 Mk3 (580g) but about 78g heavier.
So, Em1 users may move to Panasonic if JIP fail them.

I am a EM5 (414grams) user, so the G9 is too heavy for me. The EM5 has almost all the specs of the EM1.
I probably am not prepared to move to Panasonic unless Panasonic realize it. Just like it realize that its
S1 is to heavy and bulky and come up with the S5.

For Olympus Pen users, the Panasonic GX8 and GX9 are excellent rangefinders so Pen users may move to Panasonic
if they have invested in a few lenses. If they are single lens users, they may just move on to Sony 6000 series, which I think are excellent buys.

In short, if Panasonic wants to woo Olympus users, it will need to come out with
1) A lighter version of the excellent G9
2) A more updated version of its GX range finder series as the GX9 is getting a bit old.

But having said all that, I don't think JIP is going to jump in to take over Olympus, even for a song if it does not see any chance of keeping the company as a profitable going concern after the Pandemic. JIP is smart to cut off the lens manufacturing in Japan and outsource it as this is probably one of their most expensive divisions (high cost of labour in Japan). This is a burden to Nikon too. WIth the established high performance of Olympus Premium Lenses, all it takes is JIP to maintain the quality control when it is being outsourced.

So we may be seeing a lean and mean Olympus Imaging at more competitive prices after it has been streamlined. :)
 

Last edited:
Olympus moved its factory in Shenzhen in China to Dong Nai in Vietnam.
Nikon has a factory in Thailand.
Sony has a factory in Thailand.

Maybe production cost savings trumps the need for brand management.

Top of the range camera and lens products are not in the same product genre as instant noodles or sneakers (track shoes).

Brand owners have to careful not to damage/destroy their brand image that was painstakingly built up over past decades.

For example, due to brand image management reasons, Vacheron Constantin will probably not wish open a watch factory in India.
Regardless of the low labour cost savings.
Regardless of how many Swiss staff they post to India to do "QC".
Potential customers may reject assurances that the quality of a Vacheron Constantin made in India is exactly the same as one made in Switzerland.
For luxury genre products, this is a NO NO.

In my opinion, Olympus brand image suffered massive long term damage by moving camera + lens production out of Japan to China and Vietnam.
Can forgive if making SGD $200 low end compact cameras. But not for high end ILC.

There is a latest 2020 trend to move high end model camera production back to Japan.
The Canon brochures for R5 and R6 emphasise firmly "MADE IN JAPAN".
Ditto for Nikon Z6 and Z7. The proof of [Made in Japan] is visible once you tilt the screen out.

Credit : KenRockwell.com
DSC_1147-flip-lcd.jpg


Leica SL2 and the 35mm, 50mm, 75mm, 90mm F2 APO Summicron lenses are Made in Germany.
No such thing as "made in Vietnam" for top range Leica lenses.
For brand image management reasons.

Which leads us to the next thing - the price.

The labour cost of Vietnamese workers is very much lower than that of China workers - which in turn are lower cost than workers in Japan or US.

However, manufacturers make extremely high profits by charging consumers the same price as if the product was made in Japan or US.
(provided the big IF - if customers actually buy the product)
(which in the case of Olympus with a 2% world wide market share in 2018 - proves that potential customers REJECT it for various reasons)

Thus we see expensive Olympus MFT cameras and lenses made in Vietnam.
Thus we see expensive Sony cameras and lenses made in Thailand.
Thus we see (some) expensive Nikon cameras and lenses made in Thailand.

I just saw a certain brand pair of made in Vietnam sneakers costing about SGD$250. To me that is profiteering.

Manufacturers are NOT passing the production cost savings (sweat shop factories in 3rd world low labour cost countries) to consumers.
 

Last edited:
This is an interesting article of the M43 scene currently unfolding.

I think Panasonic is only half correct.
Panasonic G9 is a worthy alternative to Olympus EM1 Mk3. The G9 (658g) has very similar specs to the EM1 Mk3 (580g) but about 78g heavier.
So, Em1 users may move to Panasonic if JIP fail them.

I am a EM5 (414grams) user, so the G9 is too heavy for me. The EM5 has almost all the specs of the EM1.
I probably am not prepared to move to Panasonic unless Panasonic realize it. Just like it realize that its
S1 is to heavy and bulky and come up with the S5.

For Olympus Pen users, the Panasonic GX8 and GX9 are excellent rangefinders so Pen users may move to Panasonic
if they have invested in a few lenses. If they are single lens users, they may just move on to Sony 6000 series, which I think are excellent buys.

In short, if Panasonic wants to woo Olympus users, it will need to come out with
1) A lighter version of the excellent G9
2) A more updated version of its GX range finder series as the GX9 is getting a bit old.

But having said all that, I don't think JIP is going to jump in to take over Olympus, even for a song if it does not see any chance of keeping the company as a profitable going concern after the Pandemic. JIP is smart to cut off the lens manufacturing in Japan and outsource it as this is probably one of their most expensive divisions (high cost of labour in Japan). This is a burden to Nikon too. WIth the established high performance of Olympus Premium Lenses, all it takes is JIP to maintain the quality control when it is being outsourced.

So we may be seeing a lean and mean Olympus Imaging at more competitive prices after it has been streamlined. :)

They appear to be streamlining their product line so it will likely be leaner and meaner. But probably not cheaper since it's the higher end they're going after.
But maybe we can finally get some co-opetition with shared procurement of a higher end sensor for OMD and Panny.
 

I think times are different now as companies are now are able to control their quality quite well through the use of technology to monitor production.

My Apple iphone and ipad (made in China) is always able to last me for 4 years or more compared to my Samsung Phone and Tablet (made in Korea)
which broke down after 2 to 3 years.

Toyota Cars made in Thailand are also more reliable than American and German brands. I think it is more of a company benchmark and culture rather than the country where the factory is located.

If JIP believes in maintaining a high standard of quality, I think it still can do it in Vietnam or any outsourced partner if it want to do it. Only time will tell.

Olympus moved its factory in Shenzhen in China to Dong Nai in Vietnam.
Nikon has a factory in Thailand.
Sony has a factory in Thailand.

Maybe production cost savings trumps the need for brand management.

Top of the range camera and lens products are not in the same product genre as instant noodles or sneakers (track shoes).

Brand owners have to careful not to damage/destroy their brand image that was painstakingly built up over past decades.

For example, due to brand image management reasons, Vacheron Constantin will probably not wish open a watch factory in India.
Regardless of the low labour cost savings.
Regardless of how many Swiss staff they post to India to do "QC".
Potential customers may reject assurances that the quality of a Vacheron Constantin made in India is exactly the same as one made in Switzerland.
For luxury genre products, this is a NO NO.

In my opinion, Olympus brand image suffered massive long term damage by moving camera + lens production out of Japan to China and Vietnam.
Can forgive if making SGD $200 low end compact cameras. But not for high end ILC.

There is a latest 2020 trend to move high end model camera production back to Japan.
The Canon brochures for R5 and R6 emphasise firmly "MADE IN JAPAN".
Ditto for Nikon Z6 and Z7. The proof of [Made in Japan] is visible once you tilt the screen out.

Credit : KenRockwell.com
DSC_1147-flip-lcd.jpg


Leica SL2 and the 35mm, 50mm, 75mm, 90mm F2 APO Summicron lenses are Made in Germany.
No such thing as "made in Vietnam" for top range Leica lenses.
For brand image management reasons.

Which leads us to the next thing - the price.

The labour cost of Vietnamese workers is very much lower than that of China workers - which in turn are lower cost than workers in Japan or US.

However, manufacturers make extremely high profits by charging consumers the same price as if the product was made in Japan or US.
(provided the big IF - if customers actually buy the product)
(which in the case of Olympus with a 2% world wide market share in 2018 - proves that potential customers REJECT it for various reasons)

Thus we see expensive Olympus MFT cameras and lenses made in Vietnam.
Thus we see expensive Sony cameras and lenses made in Thailand.
Thus we see (some) expensive Nikon cameras and lenses made in Thailand.

I just saw a certain brand pair of made in Vietnam sneakers costing about SGD$250. To me that is profiteering.

Manufacturers are NOT passing the production cost savings (sweat shop factories in 3rd world low labour cost countries) to consumers.
 

Apple and Toyota are good examples. Both are highly successful.

Thailand is the motorcyle, car and truck assembly hub of South East Asia.

Toyota Motors, Isuzu, Honda Automobile, Nissan Motors, General Motors, Mitsubishi Motors, Suzuki Motors, BMW Manufacturing, Tata Motors, Ford Motor and Mazda have a presence in Thailand.

These vehicles are assembled in Thailand - Toyota HiLux, Ford Ranger, Mazda BT-50, Mitsubishi Triton, Holden Coloroado, Isuzu D-Max, Nissan Navara, Mitsubishi Pajero Sport, Ford Everest, Holden Colorado 7, Toyota Fortuner, Isuzu MU-X, Ford Fiesta, Suzuki Celerio, and Honda’s Civic, Jazz, City, CR-V, and HR-V.

But Apple is careful not to say Made in China on their phones.
The phone says [ Designed by Apple in California Assembled in China ]

Bloomberg has an article titled: { Your IPhone Is Already Made in America } You may need subscription to read.

MacDailyNews has an article tiitled [ Apple’s iPhone isn’t made in China — it’s made everywhere ]

Apple phone is unique because of Steve Jobs. Before the iPhone, the whole concept of mobile phone was clunky and not user friendly.
That is why Nokia and Blackberry died. Both were among the top market leaders at one time.

Back to JIP and Olympus. It seems JIP will be allowed to use the Olympus name for a while only.
It will cost more to rip off the Olympus name from the cameras in the warehouse and fix a new top plate showing the new name.
Watch how JIP can fulfill its promise to make "NewCo" profitable within 1 year.
When Olympus could not do it for 12 years.
And if JIP cannot do it, then will they axe the whole "NewCo" company?
 

Last edited:
Petapixel article dated 7 Oct 2020.
Quote the title
[ JIP to Ditch Olympus Name, Focus on ‘High End’ MFT Cameras: Report ]
EndQuote


The title is wrong.
It was Olympus that forbade JIP from using the "Olympus" name in the long term.
JIP could only use it for a short while.
Primarily to sell items already made with the name plate "Olympus" and kept in the warehouse.

Thus JIP was never in any position to "ditch" the Olympus name.
JIP would have loved to keep it for the next 100 years if allowed to do so.

Olympus knew that JIP may fail to make quality products. The subsequent products emanating from JIP may be low quality rip offs that live off the name recognition of OM or Zuiko. Thus there is no way Olympus can allow its name to be associated in the long term, with these embarrassing junk.

Sony knew that too. And the Vaio made by JIP are poor cousins of the original Sony Vaio. Wisely, Sony did not allow JIP to use the "Sony" name.

JIP promise to make the new company OM Digital profitable in 1 year.
I guess this means the usual pay cuts, massive layoffs, retrenchments, firings and culling the manpower costs - to boast an immediate mirage of "returning to profit".

Maybe they all misunderstood JIP when it said it will focus on "High End" MFT cameras.

JIP may be meaning to say, they will make MFT cameras for DRONES which will by their nature fly high in the sky.
Or JIP may make MFT CCTV cameras for surveillance and these will be fixed atop tall poles or high up on the walls of multi-storey buildings.
Thus the nomenclature of "High End".

If instead JIP meant making a USD$10,000 MFT camera body for consumers to buy, then they need to find buyers for this "High End" MFT camera.
When competitors are planning Z9, A9 Mark III, R1 for 2021. How to compete? Zero chance.

JIP seems to be a corporate graveyard for failed and horribly mismanaged companies/divisions.
 

Last edited: