Sony A9: Is Canon doomed ?

mystik610 wrote in post #18572735
propping up earnings in the short-term to appease shareholders is always the strategic priority for publicly traded companies..

.
I thought that some publicly traded companies have at times sacrificed some short-term profits in order to set themselves up for greater long term gains.


.

Charlie wrote in post #18572751
Maybe they dont want to compete?

It could be that their profits are good enough and they dont care to compete.

.
Right. . Which fits perfectly with what I said. . Obviously, if they do not want to compete then they are both unwilling and undetermined to compete.


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18572764
.
I thought that some publicly traded companies have at times sacrificed some short-term profits in order to set themselves up for greater long term gains.

.

Shareholders are blindly fixated to growth. It's an easier sell to shareholders when you're making those investments because it presents a growth opportunity vs the need to spend money to simply protect our market position. Same reason the likes of blackberry have the rug pulled from underneath them even when the things Apple was doing were clearly in view. But situations like this are tough and I don't envy people who have to make those big strategic decisions when there's a lot of uncertainty about the future state of things.

I work in the energy industry and we're facing something with a potential to be even more disruptive than mirrorless cameras to canon.... Renewables are coming, but the technology is not economical for business or consumers at the time. There's a prevailing thought that companies need to spend money to position themselves to capture the market when it does become profitable, but the first movers lost a ton of money because the technology hasn't really improved and commodity prices are so low that the market hasn't really materialized. And no one really knows what the future state of things will be.

The only thing we know with certainty is that we will have depleted fossil fuels if we continue to mine/drill and consume them at current rates. It is a finite resource, and we are consuming it rapdily.

The uncertaintly is what is the replacement technology, so it is hard to assess what to invest our money on. There are pros and cons for each of the potential replacements, and a big unknown is what mitigation will come to pass to overcome the cons.

So we WILL be ultimately doomed, unless we find a replacment...but which one?! Electric cars consuming electricity made with fossil fuels is NOT a solution.

The issue for digital cameras is not the question of 'doom' but merely ultimate contentment with a limited sized market, and who will survive and meet the needs of that limited market.

Phonographs were replaced largely by magnetic tape which was replaced by CDs which are now replaced by MP3 players...next decade what? The company that survives as a strong player changes with the technology when it comes along. We had the Beta vs. VHS wars, then the DVD wars and then the Bluetooth wars, the survivor moves past both wars to whatever is the newest.

The mirrorless vs. dSLR happens only to be the 'war' of the day...that question will be a moot point in the future, when something else will have displaced BOTH!

Wilt wrote in post #18572803
The only thing we know with certainty is that we will have depleted fossil fuels if we contrinue to mine/drill and consume them at current rates.

The uncertaintly is what is the replacement technology, so it is hard to assess what to invest our money on. There are pros and cons for each of the potential replacements, and a big unknown is what mitigation will come to pass to overcome the cons.

So we WILL be ultimately doomed, unless we find a replacment...but which one?!

Hehe yeah the industry knows that Wilt. The issue is that for all the social pleas that people make, as consumers, price drives their energy buying habits. So companies that do make commitments to renewables get hammered because the cost basis of renewable energy is a lot higher and in turn, we have to pass those costs onto consumers.... The problem is that consumers tend to forget their social positions on things when they see that cost, and there are never enough buyers to cover these huge capital investments.

Two Sony announcements to be made today. I think these are more of a threat to Canon than the a9 was given how broadly appealing these are:

A7III

Sigma announcing a slew of native FE versions of their Art lenses.

mystik610 wrote in post #18572906
Two Sony announcements to be made today. I think these are more of a threat to Canon than the a9 was given how broadly appealing these are:

$1900 is a whole lot more appealing to the market than $4500!

Wilt wrote in post #18572971
$1900 is a whole lot more appealing to the market than $4500!

No kidding lol

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18572766
.
Right. . Which fits perfectly with what I said. . Obviously, if they do not want to compete then they are both unwilling and undetermined to compete.


.

Wilt wrote in post #18572971
$1900 is a whole lot more appealing to the market than $4500!

Well the target market of the A9 is high end sports...so it’s actually the cheapest option compared the the D5 and 1DX2.

The A9 never was intended to be a mass market camera.

Hogloff wrote in post #18573052
Well the target market of the A9 is high end sports...so it’s actually the cheapest option compared the the D5 and 1DX2.

The A9 never was intended to be a mass market camera.

And the high end sports shooter is not the 'mass market'. Your point?

My point is you sell more units of $1900 camera than units of $4500 camera. Forget WHO the target is.
The A9 was a 'statement camera' for Sony, to show off what technology could accomplish (at a price). Kudos to them for that statement.

Soon as pre order links hit for the A7III I’m buying.

It’s all.

one heck of a camera for $2G's ..

Canons 6d2 is going to take a price drop to be an attractive option for those with tighter budgets..

Yeah

24mp back-side illuminated sensor.

15 stops dr

A9 AF system

10fps

New battery and body style.

$2k

mystik610 wrote in post #18573116
Yeah

24mp back-side illuminated sensor.

15 stops dr
A9 AF system
10fps
New battery and body style.
$2k

REally? Is the Sony, now including the A9, now needing to be in fear of doom, with only 13+ EV of DR?

Wilt wrote in post #18573172
REally? Is the Sony A9 now in fear of doom?

yes .. maybe not doom .. but certainly some sales slow downs..