On 8/18/2012 7:35 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
Actually it's more complex than Rocket Science. The US builds it's rockets to Mil Spec but reliable launch vehicles can be much less err. finished, and the concepts are well understood, at least to those who actually paid attention in high school physics. Marketing is VooDoo. However part of Pentax's problem is and has been since the 80s who do they want to be and how do they get there.
Well, of course marketing is voodoo. Any attempt to describe in accurate terms mass psychology would have to be voodoo. At least that's what I gather from 5+ years working with company who provided technology for futures and forex trading being in contact with many so called CTA's - certified trade advisers, market analysts and what not.
However we do see that certain companies are successful and others are not. Compare Olympus and Pentax. Both were not very big or massively popular at the dawn of the digital era. However it seems to me that from marketing perspective Olympus is more prominent than Pentax. By the way, I am not claiming here that Olympus has bigger market share. I am merely expressing my mental reflex - what I think when I hear these two words? Olympus = first, Pentax - second. Olympus is more well-known than Pentax.
So it can be done. It was done more than once by various people in various markets under various circumstances. Hence, in principle, big heads at Pentax could study whatever has to be studied and endeavor to repeat these successes.
This is probably what they're doing now anyway in their own peculiar way. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
