The PR war

[BernardLanguillier]

I met a charming Belgian familly last weekend.

Their 2 teenage girls were using consumer Nikon DSLRS and the parents consumer Canon DSLRs.

I asked them why it was the case.

Their answer was “Nikon is bankrupt, that’s why we bought new Canon DSLRs”.

Intrigued, I asked them how they knew about Nikon’s bankruptcy.

Their answer “the sales person told us”.

I am starting to understand the kind of ethics Canon’s surprisingly good business results are resulting from...

Cheers,
Bernard

[NancyP]

Dumb move for family. Pick one brand, who cares which. Share lenses. The way the family did it - no lens sharing, all manual focus users get frustrated by opposite directions when they pick up family members' other brand camera.

Even if both companies were on the skids, there are enough lenses and other accessories out there to last several lifetimes. I could slap my dad's AIS lenses on a new Nikon body, should I wish to. (They also go nicely on the Canon I use, via adapter).

[Paulo Bizarro]

Well, transferring the poor ethics of a sales person to a whole company is a bit farfetched, isn't it?

In the end, your story agrees with what I keep seeing: majority of folks I know, plus tourists invading Lisbon, carry entry level DSLRs. There simply is no better value for money in photography.

[rdonson]

The likely scenario is that the sales person makes more of a commission on selling Canons. Also probable is that his boss was looking to reduce Canon inventory.

[fredjeang2]

The likely scenario is that the sales person makes more of a commission on selling Canons. Also probable is that his boss was looking to reduce Canon inventory.

Very likely.
Nikon is facing difficulties and there are concerns expressed ww. From there
To talk about bankruptcy is a complete exageration.
And even if the guy had that information and were right
1) he would not be a vendor
2) he would not share it to tourists

[BernardLanguillier]

The incident happened in Belgium where they live.

And yes, there is of course no proof that this is a Canon policy.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Two23]

The likely scenario is that the sales person makes more of a commission on selling Canons.

That was my thinking.  Likely that store wasn't even a Nikon dealer.


Kent in SD

[BernardLanguillier]

That was my thinking.  Likely that store wasn't even a Nikon dealer.

They were it seems. My friends had entered the store with the intention to buy a new Nikon camera.

Cheers,
Bernard

[tom b]

More of a camera shop survival war. How many well established camera franchises have you seen disappear over recent years. Making the most money from camera sales is most likely to be the driving factor in most camera shops today.

Cheers,

[Rob C]

Dying shops.

Well, checking stuff out in a shop and then buying online is a sure way to reduce our own choices ever further.

Not only that, but the manufacturers' policy of selling to the larger dealers at lower prices also steps up the decline. I've mentioned here before that my own local pro-dealership in Scotland went the way of the dodo when the big dealers in England were able to sell 'blads to the public at prices below what he was being charged by Hasselblad. Seems crazy to me; if you want to sell more cheaply, then surely it's up to your ability to run the business well, save on economy of scale, not by sourcing the items from the makers at preferential prices that can only kill the smaller man. That is suicidal for the manufacturer and, in the end, bad for the customer who ends up with fewer choices. Especially at the high end, anyone able to shell out several thousands for an item is not going to be dissuaded from buying by a few score pounds or dollars; the makers will still sell that item if it's available locally. Being able to walk out of a shop with the product instead of having to wait for delivery is a much finer "customer experience", as these things are now termed in compliance with the verbal bullshit that pervades contemporary corporate speech.

Rob

[NancyP]

If the item is available in the local store, I buy it and pay sales tax. Yes, it would be nice to avoid paying sales tax, but "in theory" my state requires  out-of-state purchases that were not taxed upon the sale to be reported on the state income tax. I interpret this to include individual new items worth more than $500.00 to $1,000.00, as I have no wish to report all of the subscriptions, orders of odd sizes of lens hood or cap, and miscellaneous odds and ends available at B and H but not locally. If I am going to have to pay the state eventually, why not buy the big ticket item locally and help the local shops survive? We have two camera stores in town, with a decent array of used equipment that I do buy.

[Rob C]

If the item is available in the local store, I buy it and pay sales tax. Yes, it would be nice to avoid paying sales tax, but "in theory" my state requires  out-of-state purchases that were not taxed upon the sale to be reported on the state income tax. I interpret this to include individual new items worth more than $500.00 to $1,000.00, as I have no wish to report all of the subscriptions, orders of odd sizes of lens hood or cap, and miscellaneous odds and ends available at B and H but not locally. If I am going to have to pay the state eventually, why not buy the big ticket item locally and help the local shops survive? We have two camera stores in town, with a decent array of used equipment that I do buy.

I hadn't realised that you had to account for different tax levels, buying stuff state-to-state; looks as if having separate states rather than just a "country" isn't so convenient for the average citizen. I knew there were many differences of laws (state), but had imagined taxation, other than in some exotic instances where banking and secrecy were different, allowing the equivalent of "offshore" accounts, would be more simple and convenient on a national basis. Local sales taxes were one difference of which I was aware...

Makes the European model look no less efficient, and the British one positively benign!

:-)

[DP]

Dumb move for family. Pick one brand, who cares which. Share lenses.

it does not sound a case - sounds like each is using a consumer level dSLR with super zoom each and happy ... nobody there cares about anything more complicated.

[NancyP]

Rob, this wasn't so complex in the days before online shopping, you just paid sales tax of the state in which you bought the item (at a brick and mortar store). Most states considered it a wash, a few states tried to impose additional taxes on cars bought in other (lower tax) states. Amazon used to charge tax only on in-state purchases, so if you were in a state without a distribution center, you didn't pay tax. That's why people bought cars on Amazon. State sales tax recovery is getting less complex now that Amazon charges sales tax in all states (because distribution centers are located in all states).  Given the sheer size of Amazon, I would have to guess that the individual states recapture tax on half or more of total online purchases made by residents of the state.

[DP]

That's why people bought cars on Amazon.

Amazon selling cars as in automobiles in USA ? it does not !

[Bo_Dez]

What idiot believes what a sales person tells them?

It's the last person I would listen to.

[BernardLanguillier]

What idiot believes what a sales person tells them?

It's the last person I would listen to.

I believe that a large majority of people believe what sales people tell them.

In particular in a context where there is a relationship of trust resulting from past interactions or from dealing with a store with a positive brand image.

When looking at the usage by consumers of their camera, I have a hard time identifying any objective reason why they would chose a Canon. I would argue that they have a better video AF, but looking how consumers shoot video this is hardly relevant. The better sensors found on Nikons and better APS-C zoom line up will de facto be a lot more useful.

This means that the business success of Canon in the consumer segment is mostly the result of a selling effort. I have come across this case I find a bit shocking of obvious lie about the business condition of their main competitor. I don't know what else they incentive their sales people to say to push Canon boxes. But it does obviously work.

Cheers,
Bernard

[francois]

I believe that a large majority of people believe what sales people tell them.
…

You're right. I've seen salesmen in a reputable local telling that model x of brand a is the ultimate camera that money can buy and ten minutes later telling another customer that model y of brand b is the ultimate camera.

[BernardLanguillier]

Second instance last night, this time from France.

The sales person from a major retailer in Normandie told to a person I met that Nikon was in a very difficult business situation, implying that it was better not to invest in them.

I see a pattern emerge...

Cheers,
Bernard

[Rand47]

I hadn't realised that you had to account for different tax levels, buying stuff state-to-state; looks as if having separate states rather than just a "country" isn't so convenient for the average citizen. I knew there were many differences of laws (state), but had imagined taxation, other than in some exotic instances where banking and secrecy were different, allowing the equivalent of "offshore" accounts, would be more simple and convenient on a national basis. Local sales taxes were one difference of which I was aware...

Makes the European model look no less efficient, and the British one positively benign!

:-)

Rob,

You might find this interesting.  Even though the US is headed down the scupper of cradle-to-grave socialism... just a little behind the rest of the western world, it used to be that the land of the free and home of the brave really was composed of “states” that had real differences.  The constitution even speaks to “rights” that are left to the states and not to be interfered with ... a joke today, of course.

But the interesting stuff is:  There are states that have no sales tax at all, like Oregon.  Then there are some states that do not have a “state income tax” (on top of the federal income tax) like Nevada and Texas.  These states attract retirees for obvious reasons.  And it used to be that in some states you could not buy alchohol on Sundays (charming, if nothing else).  And “within” some states there were counties that were “dry.”  In some states you cannot make a right turn at a red traffic signal, in other states you could, so you had to remember where you were.  “Back in the day” there were lots of local television and radio stations and you could guess where you were by the local accent of the news reporters.  Today, everyone sounds mostly just “American” due to the homogenization of the culture by large media conglomerates.

Honestly, I’m not sure how I feel about the US becoming “mostly the same wherever you go,” but I do miss the sense of individuality and personality that used to be there.

Rand