MF market and Hasselblad's position

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Anyone knowing anything about the health of MF business? Are MF manufacturers doing decent earnings?

The other question is does anyone know if Hasselblad is profitable? They have a strong position in the MF market, for sure, but is that position enough to keep the company afloat and pay for R&D?

I don't have the slightest idea, that is the reason I'm asking.

Best regards
Erik

[Graham Mitchell]

Hi,

Anyone knowing anything about the health of MF business? Are MF manufacturers doing decent earnings?

The other question is does anyone know if Hasselblad is profitable? They have a strong position in the MF market, for sure, but is that position enough to keep the company afloat and pay for R&D?

I don't have the slightest idea, that is the reason I'm asking.

Best regards
Erik

I'm going to assume you've been climbing Mt Everest over the past 2 weeks and missed the big news

Hasselblad has just been bought outright by a European private equity firm:

http://www.ventizz.de/en/pm110630.php

[design_freak]

Look for the financial results for the last few years, and you alone can answer this question. ..
Now I hope that will change, new investor - new opportunities.

[feppe]

Hasselblad and Phase One are private companies, and have very limited requirements to disclose financial data. They don't release earnings reports, so gauging the financial health and sustainability is all but impossible for anyone outside the board room - this includes employees, industry insiders, reviewers, etc.

But Leica is a public company. From their interim report:

Leica Camera AG’s third-quarter figures and nine-months results in fiscal year
2010/2011 show the best sales since the Company’s IPO in 1996
...
The increase in sales on the prior year is due to the continuing strong demand registered for
all of the Company’s product categories – sales in the Photo product group more than
doubled with the Leica M system, the professional S system and the digital Leica compact
cameras.

They don't specify how much is coming from the S system, and how much from M and compact cameras - so the above statements again tell absolutely nothing about success and profitability of their MF system. Their EBIT (Earnings Before Interest and Taxes, one measure of profitability) is also increasing very impressively, although they also say their inventories are growing (ie. they are producing more products than they sell).

So most of the claims you hear and read below are speculation, conjecture and inference. Some might have access to members of the board room, but even that doesn't guarantee accurate information, as "business is good" is a standard answer for everyone from a corner liquor store to a CEO of a Fortune 50 company, no matter what the situation actually is.

Look for the financial results for the last few years, and you alone can answer this question. ..
Now I hope that will change, new investor - new opportunities.

Hasselblad and Phase One don't need to disclose their financial results since they are private companies.

[design_freak]

Hasselblad and Phase One are private companies, and have very limited requirements to disclose financial data. They don't release earnings reports, so gauging the financial health and sustainability is all but impossible for anyone outside the board room - this includes employees, industry insiders, reviewers, etc.

But Leica is a public company. From their interim report:

They don't specify how much is coming from the S system, and how much from M and compact cameras - so the above statements again tell absolutely nothing about success and profitability of their MF system. Their EBIT (Earnings Before Interest and Taxes, one measure of profitability) is also increasing very impressively, although they also say their inventories are growing (ie. they are producing more products than they sell).

So most of the claims you hear and read below are speculation, conjecture and inference. Some might have access to members of the board room, but even that doesn't guarantee accurate information, as "business is good" is a standard answer for everyone from a corner liquor store to a CEO of a Fortune 50 company, no matter what the situation actually is.

Hasselblad and Phase One don't need to disclose their financial results since they are private companies.

Of course, they do not have, but in Scandinavia - everything is open.
if you want something badly enough, you'll get it ;-)
Just to be able to use the tools that technology provides us ...
Just this regard photographic equipment and the Internet

http://www.largestcompanies.com/

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I'm very much aware of Ventizz taking over Hasselblad, but it essentially means a change of ownership. It doesn't really say much about the health of the company or the MF business in general. Shiro is known to have invested a lot in Hasselblad, but are they selling to cash on their investment or to cut losses?

Best regards
Erik

I'm going to assume you've been climbing Mt Everest over the past 2 weeks and missed the big news

Hasselblad has just been bought outright by a European private equity firm:

http://www.ventizz.de/en/pm110630.php

[Graham Mitchell]

Hi,
I'm very much aware of Ventizz taking over Hasselblad, but it essentially means a change of ownership. It doesn't really say much about the health of the company or the MF business in general.

Now that Hasselblad is a brand owned 100% by Ventizz, the health of Ventizz is basically all that matters. They may be happy to run it at a loss for several years if necessary while they overhaul the company.

[design_freak]

Now that Hasselblad is a brand owned 100% by Ventizz, the health of Ventizz is basically all that matters. They may be happy to run it at a loss for several years if necessary while they overhaul the company.

I agree with you. Strange question. Now it does not matter. Leave it to what it was. Most importantly, in the end they can get to work.

[David Watson]

Hasselblad and Phase One are private companies, and have very limited requirements to disclose financial data. They don't release earnings reports, so gauging the financial health and sustainability is all but impossible for anyone outside the board room - this includes employees, industry insiders, reviewers, etc.

But Leica is a public company. From their interim report:

They don't specify how much is coming from the S system, and how much from M and compact cameras - so the above statements again tell absolutely nothing about success and profitability of their MF system. Their EBIT (Earnings Before Interest and Taxes, one measure of profitability) is also increasing very impressively, although they also say their inventories are growing (ie. they are producing more products than they sell).

So most of the claims you hear and read below are speculation, conjecture and inference. Some might have access to members of the board room, but even that doesn't guarantee accurate information, as "business is good" is a standard answer for everyone from a corner liquor store to a CEO of a Fortune 50 company, no matter what the situation actually is.

Hasselblad and Phase One don't need to disclose their financial results since they are private companies.

Not true!  Like all limited companies annual accounts are a matter of public record.  All you have to do is log onto the respective country's company records office and for a modest fee download reams of data about the company.  The fact that it is in Swedish or Danish or whatever may make it difficult to read the detail but it is possible to see a minus or a plus.  I have a copy of their profitable accounts to 2009 downloaded from the Swedish company records office.

[design_freak]

Not true!  Like all limited companies annual accounts are a matter of public record.  All you have to do is log onto the respective country's company records office and for a modest fee download reams of data about the company.  The fact that it is in Swedish or Danish or whatever may make it difficult to read the detail but it is possible to see a minus or a plus.  I have a copy of their profitable accounts to 2009 downloaded from the Swedish company records office.

As I wrote above...

[feppe]

Not true!  Like all limited companies annual accounts are a matter of public record.  All you have to do is log onto the respective country's company records office and for a modest fee download reams of data about the company.  The fact that it is in Swedish or Danish or whatever may make it difficult to read the detail but it is possible to see a minus or a plus.  I have a copy of their profitable accounts to 2009 downloaded from the Swedish company records office.

Yes, it's true. Private companies (limited or not) have very few requirements to disclose financial data in western countries. I do this for a living, so I know.

I'm curious just how much data is available in Sweden and Denmark. A single metric "minus or a plus" is meaningless, as there are all kinds of accounting tricks which can make that happen, not to mention one-off items, such as tax credits, liquidation of capital, etc.

[David Watson]

Yes, it's true. Private companies (limited or not) have very few requirements to disclose financial data in western countries. I do this for a living, so I know.

I'm curious just how much data is available in Sweden and Denmark. A single metric "minus or a plus" is meaningless, as there are all kinds of accounting tricks which can make that happen, not to mention one-off items, such as tax credits, liquidation of capital, etc.

Sorry that is also not entirely true.  Small limited companies have limited disclosure requirements but larger companies. like Hasselblad must have fairly full disclosure of all their relevant financial information.  I have managed and owned many businesses in the UK and I am very familiar with the UK's disclosure requirements.  I am not familiar with the requirements in Spain which may have different rules.  My inspection of Hasselblad's accounts indicate a reasonably comprehensive disclosure.  send me a message with your email address and I will send you the file.

BTW I like your images and particularly was interested in your Provencal property images.  Did you ever photograph a Bastide near Brignoles in 1992 or 1993.  We sold just such a property then and I recall that the agent instructed a Spanish photographer to do the work.

[feppe]

Sorry that is also not entirely true.  Small limited companies have limited disclosure requirements but larger companies. like Hasselblad must have fairly full disclosure of all their relevant financial information.  I have managed and owned many businesses in the UK and I am very familiar with the UK's disclosure requirements.  I am not familiar with the requirements in Spain which may have different rules.  My inspection of Hasselblad's accounts indicate a reasonably comprehensive disclosure.  send me a message with your email address and I will send you the file.

BTW I like your images and particularly was interested in your Provencal property images.  Did you ever photograph a Bastide near Brignoles in 1992 or 1993.  We sold just such a property then and I recall that the agent instructed a Spanish photographer to do the work.

I guess it's all relative. I've also managed finances for and in a private company to a (public) Fortune 50 company in Finland and Netherlands, and the differences in disclosure requirements are huge, especially when SOX comes into play. As I said I do this for a living so I'm not too interested in reading annual reports on my free time unless I get paid

I don't live in Spain - I'm a Finn living in Netherlands, but my parents live in Spain during the winters. The Spain images are not from Provencal, not sure where that is - Catalunya seems close according to Google Maps, I've only visited Barcelona briefly. Most of my photos are from around Mar Menor in Murcia.

BTW my parents are selling their apartment on Mar Menor so if anyone's interested drop me a note!

[John.Williams]

MF market and ____brand____ position is a question that cannot be answered by objective financial analysis, only speculation as the two major manufacturers are private operating companies.

So let's have a go at it...

Let's begin with a look at what is known; both Hasselblad and PhaseOne have gone all-in for medium-format - so ultimately the fate of medium-format rests completely on the sales demand for the premium level of imaging delivered by these platforms as medium-format respectively.

While the global contraction affects all companies, there are advantages and dangers to specialization; each company produces a very specific range of products for a minority slice of the overall digital photography market.

The advantage is that you do not require the economy of scale to support future development like Canon and Nikon; significant disruption of buyers in the majority market would have a dramatic impact on Canon and Nikon narrow(er) operating margins.

The danger is if sales demand falls below profitable levels, game over. We have seen the result of this during the past 36 months with brands that are no longer viable. R.I.P.

Fortunately, it appears from visible evidence that the demand for the final product of medium-format (the image) is sufficient for both Hasselblad and PhaseOne to continue to fund R&D required to develop the next generation of product that photographers want to buy because it provides value beyond the acquisition cost.

Hasselblad has a complete line of autofocus lenses needed to provide a complete professional selection with a variety of accessories to produce imagery not easily produced by any other means. The CF lens adaptor brings in decades of readily available CF lenses with modern twists; focus confirmation and lens corrections. Closed system? Are we still hearing that old tired line?

Politics aside, it appears PhaseOne is shoring up their product line to offer a seamless integration as well and moving toward the technical advantages that an integrated system can provide beyond the limitations of modular mix-n-match. That is a smart move.

Neither company appears to have resource limitations that plague financially-troubled organizations and each appear to have solid business structure via channels here in the U.S.

This is a great question, with an answer that is not a simple "nay or yay." I did not get the impression the change in ownership of Hasselblad (or Leaf a few years back) was a fire sale...

John