Mafud writes:
>Most truly poor American families will get tax refunds totaling about
$1,500
>to $3,500 in the next two months, all in one lump sum: more than 3 times
the
>average annual wage of many Eastern European countries, 10 to 15 times the
>average annual wage in most "Third World" nations.
>And like I noted, our poor *could* buy a $3,000 SLR kit with their tax
refund
>(if they wanted), but they'll probably end up buying a $1,200 big screen
TV,
>buy tires for the old jalopy, shoes for the kids and maybe even a used,
1992,
>20 foot Bassin' boat instead...
>For them you see, it's a matter of priorities and SLRs (any) simply don't
>show on their radar screens.
>*Our poor pay more, percentage wise, for food and shelter. The rest of
their
>lives are purely American and only Americans know how sweet *that* is.
Hi all,
I think our good friend Mafud makes some excellent points, here and in
earlier posts. I'm no expert at this, but I think that in the US at least,
the assumption that "buying power" correlates with income level is often a
very poor assumption. First, many of the working poor and not-so-poor work
in trades where work is temporary and seasonal, and payment is in cash
(i.e., not taxed, and not reported to the government). Second, a lot of the
working poor here in the US get the kind of annual windfall that Mafud
references -- some choose to spend it on discretionary items. Third -- and
I haven't seen this addressed yet in this continuing thread -- much of
consumer purchasing power in the US seems to be driven (over-driven?) by the
easy availability of consumer credit. Buy now, pay later. And if you can't
pay, there's never been a better or easier time for declaring bankruptcy.
IMHO, this is a major problem. Not sure if easy credit is just an American
phenomenon, or if it's persistent in parts of Europe, Asia/Pacific Rim, etc.
Seems as though you don't need much income to qualify for enough credit to
put you seriously and permanently in debt.
But the original question was, how important is the American market to a
company like Pentax? The problem for companies like Pentax is that
Americans aren't willing to go into debt for a something like a new MZ-S
system. It's just not the everybody's-got-it-so-I-must-have-it sort of
merchandise. But cell phones? New cars and trucks? Obscenely expensive
clothing and shoes? Video games and big-screen TV's? Gotta have it! Why?
Because everyone else does! Far too many of us Americans, IMHO, simply must
have the latest consumer items, and some of us ARE willing to go bankrupt to
acquire these. Pentax needs to convince Americans that taking pictures with
SLR's is cool, that everybody else is doing it, and that your kid's
self-esteem will suffer if you're not doing it too. Product placements in
movies, TV, etc.?? Endorsements from professional wrestlers?? Sad state of
affairs, I think.
Now I've got to put my soapbox back under the desk.
Bill Peifer,
Rochester, NY
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
