Hasselblad stoops lower

[BJL]

There were hopes that under Hasselblad's new management, the Lunar/Solar rebadging embarassments were gone, but instead they have done one worse: partnering with bling-phone specialist Vertu:
http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/129176-vertu-signature-touch-has-b-o-speakers-hasselblad-camera-6750-price-tag

[BernardLanguillier]

Yep, indeed.

Cheers,
Bernard

[bill t.]

Hasseblad has become the Eddie Bauer of photography.   If you call ahead with your endorsement request, they'll have it waiting for you at their convenient drive up window, together with a starter pack of attractive Hasselbad (tm) stickers.  Bank checks or wire transfers only, please.

[fdisilvestro]

Depressing

[Jim Pascoe]

They're just a company trying to make money.  If it helps them survive as a small niche camera manufacturer is it really so bad.

Jim

[BobShaw]

They're just a company trying to make money.  If it helps them survive as a small niche camera manufacturer is it really so bad.

Jim

+1

[BJL]

They're just a company trying to make money.  If it helps them survive as a small niche camera manufacturer is it really so bad.

Maybe it is not bad in itself, but these repeated decisions to undermine the brand name's historically great prestige strongly suggest that Hasselblad's management is not confident in its ability to make money in more "reputable" ways, so it is still a worrying sign for the future its more legitimate product lines.

[louoates]

Maybe it is not bad in itself, but these repeated decisions to undermine the brand name's historically great prestige strongly suggest that Hasselblad's management is not confident in its ability to make money in more "reputable" ways, so it is still a worrying sign for the future its more legitimate product lines.

I see nothing disreputable or illegitimate whatsoever.

[BJL]

I see nothing disreputable or illegitimate whatsoever.

Let me explain what I mean by "reputable and "legitimate" in the context of Hasselblad branding:

- the Hasselblad brand has a reputation built over many decades on the quality of its medium format photographic products, and there is no hint that the quality underlying that reputation is possessed by this phone or by those pimped NEX cameras.

- the legitimate value of the Hasselblad brand is based on the quality of those MF products, so using that name to add to the market value of these "bling" products to which Hasselblad has not make any significant design or manufacturing contribution is somewhat illegitimate.


These efforts are an upscale cousin of recent cameras branded "Kodak" and "Polaroid", where the right to use those brand names have been purchased by an unrelated company.  Actually, those are arguably worse, because it is more likely that many customers will not realize that these products have nothing to do with the original companies, and do not deserve the trust that those companies built in the past.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I think that a bone of contention here is that Hasselblad, like in the case of sheer Lunacy, is simply selling (pimping/prostituting?) its name, nothing else. There is nothing that made them legendary (reputable) that is in either Lunacy or that 1%-er's phone. Contrast that with Bang & Olufsen's involvement: they are at least supplying what they are best known for: high quality sound systems and exquisite design. What is Hasselblad supplying (other than name)? In case of Lunacy, nothing of substance. In case of the phone, apparently a lens. And lenses are not something they have ever been known for. "Their" lenses in the past were made by Zeiss, and bearing Zeiss name. Their current line of lenses is made, if I am not mistaken, by Fuji.

[Robert Roaldi]

This is only my own personal view, of course, but I have a problem with the basic concept of emotional bonding with companies, that is, forming an attachment to their "brand". We're not stakeholders, we're customers. (I use "we" in the general sense, I have never owned anything made by or branded Hasselblad.) It's just a company. Branding is a marketing fabrication set in place to try and get money from customers. I don't believe that there actually is an emotional bond there, even though some people believe one exists.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... We're not stakeholders, we're customers...

Actually, we are. We are not shareholders, true, but stakeholders we indeed are. Stakeholders defined as "persons with an interest or concern in something, esp. a business." Customers, current, past or even potential are definitely stakeholders in a business.

Branding is a marketing fabrication set in place to try and get money from customers.

That is a very cynical view of branding as a fraud. Brand is ofter defined broadly as a promise of quality. In that sense, Hasselblad is (still) a valuable brand, and we hate to see it devalued.

As for "emotions," people get attached to things in numerous ways. For some, everything is just a tool, for others, it might be an object of art or craftsmanship, a symbol of achievement, a set of ideas and principles people can identify with, etc.

[Kirk Gittings]

I think that "brand loyalty" is always a mistake. The only thing I care about is their current product and whether it is of use to me or not. I'm not tring to impress anyone with the cameras I own and don't need the latest camera to boost my ego unless it really serves my image making needs. Cameras are just a tool, an elegant hammer if you will. I want every company I deal with to always treat me as a new customer to be won over with their superior product. I'm not a loyal customer who will buy whatever is new from a company. I'm not an unconscious loyal fan.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I think that "brand loyalty" is always a mistake. The only thing I care about is their current product and whether it is of use to me or not....

Kirk, whether it is always a mistake or not depends on whether you are a maximizer or a satisfier when it comes to choice. A maximizer always wants to explore all the options out there until it finds the best one, the maximum "bang for the buck."  A satisfier will search until he finds something that is good enough to fit his criteria and then he will stop, even if there is, potentially, something better, something that exceeds his criteria. Obviously, maximizers will invest more time and energy in their search, while satisfiers will find what they needed and move on to use it.

In that sense, brand loyalty makes sense. Brand means a promise of quality (or expectation of quality from user's perspective). So, if you are searching for something, if you are a maximizer, you will start your search from scratch every time you need something, opening the search to all brands and products out there. If you are a satisfier, however, you will trust your brand will provide sufficient quality for you needs, get it and move on to use it or to more important things in your life. That is the benefit of brand loyalty. Until the brand breaches or dilutes that promise of quality, which is what we are afraid Hasselblad is doing right now.

[amolitor]

Have we forgotten that hasselblad was always an over priced toy for the elite? Sensible people used Mamiya and Bronica equipment.

The great reputation was the product of marketing on the first place.

[brianrybolt]

Just like Rolex watches.  (the company did know how to market)

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Has any one of you who think Hasselblad reputation rests on marketing only actually ever owned, used or even touched it? Let alone compared, other than specs on paper, with other brands, or even handled other brands? Armchair experts need not reply.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Have we forgotten that hasselblad was always an over priced toy for the elite? Sensible people used Mamiya and Bronica equipment.

The great reputation was the product of marketing on the first place.

Andrew, if I wouldn't know you, I would say the post above would fit a textbook definition of trolling. So, to continue in the same tone as the above post, I might say that Mercedes was always an over priced toy for the elite. Sensible people used Trabant and Wartburg instead.

[amolitor]

Possibly I am being unfair, to an extent, sure.

For any product, there's a set of circumstances in which it is indeed the best one. Hasselblad is more portable than the Mamiya equivalents (but then, there are small mountains that are) and there are probably cases where some properties of the lenses are desirable.

I stand by the assertion, though, that Hasselblad's reputation is largely a marketing chimera. Excellent, sure. In some cases the best choice, sure. Just as in some cases the Mamiya or Bronica was the best choice. In cases where money was no object, sure, get the 'blad, why not? Nobody ever got fired for buying Hasselblad, see above remarks on excellent marketing.

Am I misremembering, or is this not the device which has the amazing misfeature that attempting to mount a lens with the camera in the wrong state causes the lens to become jammed, requiring a trip to the shop?

[Justinr]

Possibly I am being unfair, to an extent, sure.

For any product, there's a set of circumstances in which it is indeed the best one. Hasselblad is more portable than the Mamiya equivalents (but then, there are small mountains that are) and there are probably cases where some properties of the lenses are desirable.

I stand by the assertion, though, that Hasselblad's reputation is largely a marketing chimera. Excellent, sure. In some cases the best choice, sure. Just as in some cases the Mamiya or Bronica was the best choice. In cases where money was no object, sure, get the 'blad, why not? Nobody ever got fired for buying Hasselblad, see above remarks on excellent marketing.

Am I misremembering, or is this not the device which has the amazing misfeature that attempting to mount a lens with the camera in the wrong state causes the lens to become jammed, requiring a trip to the shop?

HB's always produced a clarity and sharpness which my old Bronnies lacked, but the Bronnie would survive far more abuse. A fellow once claimed I'd break an anvil if given charge of one, and he was right, so Bronica's were my brand of choice. They were also cost a lot less, which helped.