Re: Engadget take on the D4

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Robert Coe, Jan 7, 2012.

  1. Robert Coe

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Fri, 6 Jan 2012 17:03:11 -0800, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
    wrote:
    : <
    : http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/06/nikon-d4-hands-on-and-sample-images-video/

    They seem confident that the price will be $6000. Will that make it hard for
    Canon to charge the rumored price of almost $7000 for the 1DX? As of a couple
    of days ago, Canon's Web site was still absolutely silent about the price of
    the 1DX. Could it be that they've been waiting for Nikon's announcement?

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Jan 7, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Robert Coe

    RichA Guest

    On Jan 7, 10:24 am, (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:
    > Robert Coe <> wrote:
    > >On Fri, 6 Jan 2012 17:03:11 -0800, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
    > >wrote:
    > >: <
    > >:http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/06/nikon-d4-hands-on-and-sample-image....

    >
    > I'm not at all impressed by that review.
    >
    > It looks more like the output of a copywriter than of
    > anyone with knowledge of the product.
    >
    > >They seem confident that the price will be $6000. Will that make it hardfor
    > >Canon to charge the rumored price of almost $7000 for the 1DX? As of a couple
    > >of days ago, Canon's Web site was still absolutely silent about the price of
    > >the 1DX. Could it be that they've been waiting for Nikon's announcement?

    >
    > Nikon announced it at $5999.95, and has that listed atwww.nikonusa.com.


    I love it. Even at that price point, they use that cheesy old pricing
    scam of pricing something a few cents under a line ($6000) because the
    morons (sub-consciously) will think it's "cheaper."
    RichA, Jan 8, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Robert Coe

    Bruce Guest

    RichA <> wrote:
    > I love it. Even at that price point, they use that cheesy old

    pricing
    > scam of pricing something a few cents under a line ($6000) because

    the
    > morons (sub-consciously) will think it's "cheaper."



    List price $6000.

    Street price $5995.
    Bruce, Jan 8, 2012
    #3
  4. Robert Coe

    Trevor Guest

    "Eric Stevens" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >>I love it. Even at that price point, they use that cheesy old pricing
    >>scam of pricing something a few cents under a line ($6000) because the
    >>morons (sub-consciously) will think it's "cheaper."

    >
    > Originally, the real reason was to make the assistant in the store
    > give change. That way they had register the sale to open the till.
    > (Think of the name 'Cash Register'). Otherwise the assistant could
    > happily pocket the entire proceeds of the sale and nobody would be any
    > the wiser until the next stocktake.
    >
    > What the logic is in the case of a $6000 item almost certainly paid
    > for by credit card or similar entirely escapes me.



    Strange, you were already told the psychological reason, and then say the
    reason "entirely escapes" you.

    Trevor.
    Trevor, Jan 8, 2012
    #4
  5. Robert Coe

    Trevor Guest

    "Bruce" <> wrote in message
    news:-September.org...
    > RichA <> wrote:
    >> I love it. Even at that price point, they use that cheesy old

    > pricing
    >> scam of pricing something a few cents under a line ($6000) because

    > the
    >> morons (sub-consciously) will think it's "cheaper."

    >
    >
    > List price $6000.
    > Street price $5995.


    Wrong. List price $5995. Street price varies with availability, demand,
    shop, gullibilty.......
    And bound to fall over time.

    Trevor.
    Trevor, Jan 8, 2012
    #5
  6. Robert Coe

    Trevor Guest

    "Floyd L. Davidson" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >>> List price $6000.
    >>> Street price $5995.

    >>
    >>Wrong. List price $5995. Street price varies with availability, demand,
    >>shop, gullibilty.......
    >>And bound to fall over time.

    >
    > Actually the list price is $5999.95 according to Nikon.


    So not $6000! :)


    > The street price is also $5999.95, and probably won't
    > budge a penny from that for a year or so, and it will
    > move only by fractions of an inch then.


    What part of "Street price varies with availability and demand" do you
    actually disagree with then?


    > Nikon has a pretty tight reign over pricing of their
    > cameras, and you can believe that it is going to cost
    > almost exactly $5999.95 (in the US) regardless of demand
    > or availability.


    Rubbish, they can control availabilty to keep prices high, but they cannot
    prevent dealer discounting if availability exceeds demand.


    > For example, the D3S lists today by Nikon at $5199.95,
    > just as it did in late 2009 when it was released.
    > it will be replaced in a month by the D4 that has been
    > announced and will be available in 5 weeks. How much
    > has the price of a new D3S changed over the two years it
    > has been on the market? You can get one today at
    > "street price" for $5089 on eBay, but any store you walk
    > into will have it for $5199.95. Check bhphoto.com, for
    > example: $5199.95 (and out of stock).


    Right, Nikon has reduced availabilty rather than price, just as I said, and
    not "regardless of demand or availability" as you suggest.
    Their choice.


    > That's a very good indication of how much variation there
    > will be during the production lifetime of the new D4 too.


    Quite possibly if Nikon chooses not to sell many. Their choice. You get to
    choose not to buy it if you don't like it.

    Trevor.
    Trevor, Jan 8, 2012
    #6
  7. Robert Coe

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 19:04:52 +1100, "Trevor" <> wrote:


    >> Nikon has a pretty tight reign over pricing of their
    >> cameras, and you can believe that it is going to cost
    >> almost exactly $5999.95 (in the US) regardless of demand
    >> or availability.

    >
    >Rubbish, they can control availabilty to keep prices high, but they cannot
    >prevent dealer discounting if availability exceeds demand.


    True in fact, but not in practice. Nikon cannot require dealers to
    hold the price, but Nikon provides many incentives to dealers and
    these incentives can be withdrawn from non-complying dealers.

    Co-op adverting plans, for example, can be withdrawn. Dealers can get
    around Nikon's requirements by offering non-advertised trade-in
    programs, photography packages and lessons as part of the sale of a
    Nikon, and other deals for customers.

    To satisfy the pedant in me, I must point out that Nikon keeps a tight
    rein on pricing, not a reign.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Jan 8, 2012
    #7
  8. Robert Coe

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 07 Jan 2012 22:37:06 -0900, (Floyd L. Davidson)
    wrote:
    : "Trevor" <> wrote:
    : >>
    : >> List price $6000.
    : >> Street price $5995.
    : >
    : >Wrong. List price $5995. Street price varies with availability, demand,
    : >shop, gullibilty.......
    : >And bound to fall over time.
    :
    : Actually the list price is $5999.95 according to Nikon.
    :
    : The street price is also $5999.95, and probably won't
    : budge a penny from that for a year or so, and it will
    : move only by fractions of an inch then.
    :
    : Nikon has a pretty tight reign over pricing of their
    : cameras, and you can believe that it is going to cost
    : almost exactly $5999.95 (in the US) regardless of demand
    : or availability.
    :
    : For example, the D3S lists today by Nikon at $5199.95,
    : just as it did in late 2009 when it was released. Today
    : it will be replaced in a month by the D4 that has been
    : announced and will be available in 5 weeks. How much
    : has the price of a new D3S changed over the two years it
    : has been on the market? You can get one today at
    : "street price" for $5089 on eBay, but any store you walk
    : into will have it for $5199.95. Check bhphoto.com, for
    : example: $5199.95 (and out of stock).
    :
    : That's a very good indication of how much variation there
    : will be during the production lifetime of the new D4 too.

    Few, other than capitalists and their sympathizers, would call price fixing a
    good thing. But if Floyd's assertions about Nikon's pricing practice is true,
    the latter may have its good side, since it minimizes the effects of
    fluctuation of other currencies relative to the Japanese yen. At least as seen
    by the consumer, if maybe not by the dealer.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Jan 8, 2012
    #8
  9. Robert Coe

    Trevor Guest

    "Eric Stevens" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >>>>scam of pricing something a few cents under a line ($6000) because the
    >>>>morons (sub-consciously) will think it's "cheaper."
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> What the logic is in the case of a $6000 item almost certainly paid
    >>> for by credit card or similar entirely escapes me.

    >>
    >>
    >>Strange, you were already told the psychological reason, and then say the
    >>reason "entirely escapes" you.

    >
    > Do you really think that 5c off a $6000 purchase is going to be the
    > trigger for a sale?



    Nope, simply the reason for them advertising it as such. Advertsing is based
    on the "sucker born every minute" principal.

    Trevor.
    Trevor, Jan 9, 2012
    #9
  10. Robert Coe

    Trevor Guest

    "Floyd L. Davidson" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >>>>> List price $6000.
    >>>>> Street price $5995.
    >>>>
    >>>>Wrong. List price $5995. Street price varies with availability, demand,
    >>>>shop, gullibilty.......
    >>>>And bound to fall over time.
    >>>
    >>> Actually the list price is $5999.95 according to Nikon.

    >>
    >>So not $6000! :)

    >
    > So not $5995.


    If you can't get 95c off the list price you aint trying very hard!! :)


    >>> The street price is also $5999.95, and probably won't
    >>> budge a penny from that for a year or so, and it will
    >>> move only by fractions of an inch then.

    >>
    >>What part of "Street price varies with availability and demand" do you
    >>actually disagree with then?

    >
    > In this case it is not going to vary with availability
    > or demand.
    >
    > The initial demand will be high for maybe 3 or even 4 months,
    > but by next summer the demand will be less... and the availability
    > will be higher. The price won't change $10.


    Right, it will change hundreds. Just because it's not shown on the web sites
    doesn't mean ther eis NO discount available to actual buyers who ask for
    one.
    Of course if you've never asked for one you wouldn't realise that I guess.
    Personaly I've never paid full list for a camera in my life, and that's
    quite a few dozen.


    > At least if the way Nikon's top of the line models have
    > sold in the past remains the same for this model, that's
    > the way it will be.


    I'm amazed you think you have details of the actual selling price for all
    those camera's, not simply the advertised price.


    >>Rubbish, they can control availabilty to keep prices high, but they cannot
    >>prevent dealer discounting if availability exceeds demand.

    >
    > Wanna bet!


    Yep!!! Even when manufacturers could blatantly control prices by refusing to
    supply dealers who didn't comply, dealers simply gave inflated trade in
    prices, or in quite a few cases in MY personal exprerience, gave me a trade
    in price for NO trade in at all!


    > Wrong. Nikon clearly has *not* reduced availability!
    > If anything they are dumping the remaining stock!


    "Dumping the remaining stock" by offering NO discount????


    > It is widely available for prices ranging from list
    > price to all of $110 less. Is a 2% reduction in a
    > camera that is technically now "obsolete" significant?


    You must think so since you call it "dumping" :) :)
    But hey you said there was NO discount, (not 5c) then you say "won't change
    $10", now you say $110! Should be affordable soon at that rate :)


    > However, BH Photo has reduced availability! (Probably by
    > accident rather than intentionally too.)


    Probably just don't stock now it until they get an order, so as not to get
    stuck with one.


    >
    > So Nikon is in the business of making cameras they don't
    > want to sell, and will encourage me not to buy...
    >
    > That's pretty ripe!


    YOU think they don't ever need to discount even a little bit, yet could
    easily build far more IF they needed to, (and the price would come down IF
    they could sell more due to economy of scale). But maybe you think Nikon is
    happier building cheaper camera's with MUCH lower profit margins.
    The reason of course is that the flagship models are designed for pro's with
    deep pockets and it is considered that to *openly* discount them cheapens
    the brand image, so discounting always takes place under the table.

    Trevor.
    Trevor, Jan 9, 2012
    #10
  11. Robert Coe

    Trevor Guest

    "Robert Coe" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Few, other than capitalists and their sympathizers, would call price
    > fixing a
    > good thing. But if Floyd's assertions about Nikon's pricing practice is
    > true,
    > the latter may have its good side, since it minimizes the effects of
    > fluctuation of other currencies relative to the Japanese yen. At least as
    > seen
    > by the consumer, if maybe not by the dealer.


    Since all dealers know how to get around it, and manufacturers need dealers
    to sell their products, "price fixing" is only a show put on to maximize
    prices to gullible buyers.
    The manufacturers do of course control the price they sell to dealers, and
    only competition from other manufacturers keeps prices down.

    Trevor.
    Trevor, Jan 9, 2012
    #11
  12. Robert Coe

    Trevor Guest

    "Floyd L. Davidson" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Seems one of the other things Nikon does is set
    > different prices in different markets. Canadians are
    > always annoyed that Nikon effectively charges them more
    > than the difference in exchange rates would cause. And
    > sometimes the same happens in at least some European
    > markets, and Australia too.


    The difference has traditionally been huge in Australia (anything up to
    twice the price) Thankfully it is starting to drop, but still pretty
    substantial for locally sourced product in most cases.

    Trevor.
    Trevor, Jan 9, 2012
    #12
  13. Robert Coe

    Trevor Guest

    "Floyd L. Davidson" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > You don't seem to be able to logically follow a conversation, and wander
    > off with comments that have no significance to previous discussion.
    >


    I assume you are looking in the mirror when you say that!

    > There is no point is such an exchange.


    At least we agree on something then!

    Trevor.
    Trevor, Jan 9, 2012
    #13
  14. Robert Coe

    PeterN Guest

    On 1/7/2012 7:03 PM, RichA wrote:
    > On Jan 7, 10:24 am, (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:
    >> Robert Coe<> wrote:
    >>> On Fri, 6 Jan 2012 17:03:11 -0800, Savageduck<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
    >>> wrote:
    >>> :<
    >>> :http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/06/nikon-d4-hands-on-and-sample-image...

    >>
    >> I'm not at all impressed by that review.
    >>
    >> It looks more like the output of a copywriter than of
    >> anyone with knowledge of the product.
    >>
    >>> They seem confident that the price will be $6000. Will that make it hard for
    >>> Canon to charge the rumored price of almost $7000 for the 1DX? As of a couple
    >>> of days ago, Canon's Web site was still absolutely silent about the price of
    >>> the 1DX. Could it be that they've been waiting for Nikon's announcement?

    >>
    >> Nikon announced it at $5999.95, and has that listed atwww.nikonusa.com.

    >
    > I love it. Even at that price point, they use that cheesy old pricing
    > scam of pricing something a few cents under a line ($6000) because the
    > morons (sub-consciously) will think it's "cheaper."


    As usual, don't buy it. You never will anyway. Ever try actually using
    the cameras you bitch about?
    And I mean using, not just taking a few shots in a store.

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Jan 11, 2012
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. ellis_jay

    Take a slow ride....take it eeee-zy

    ellis_jay, Aug 25, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    676
    ellis_jay
    Aug 25, 2005
  2. Soapy

    Re: Doesn't Take Much To Take Over A Group

    Soapy, Aug 19, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    59
    Views:
    1,172
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?=B1?=
    Sep 13, 2004
  3. =?Utf-8?B?SmltIEhvbGxvd2F5?=

    Do I have to take 292 & 296 can I take the 4 cores instead?

    =?Utf-8?B?SmltIEhvbGxvd2F5?=, Jun 1, 2007, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    690
    John R
    Jun 2, 2007
  4. Replies:
    18
    Views:
    742
  5. Ionut Marin
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    338
    Ken Onweller \(.NET MCSD\)
    Feb 9, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page