where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
PhaseOne has joined the club: http://www.photonewstoday.com/news/phase-one-offers-unique-new-product-investment-protection-plan?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+photonewstoday%2Fdhays+%28Photo+News+Today%29
If Nikon were to start such a scheme, I really doubt that it would apply to anything short of an FX sensor.
@Monty11
I think you're spot on, at least whatever Nikon is calling their 'pro product' line, assuming Nikon were to jump in at all. I think the D300s is the only DX camera that falls into that category.
How they would do it is anyone's guess, but I would imagine they would grant so much credit to a new body for a old body that they would they sell as a refurbished/used body or just smash it to get it off the market. I have no idea.
For those who make a living with their equipment and have the pro bodies and jones for an upgrade, it would make some sense to participate in a program, whatever minor a savings it would be.
Whether it happen or not, dream on... and my best,
Mike
Skid said:
I'd be up for an offer like that, but then again I would guess that Hasselblads are much more expensive and don't have the sales volume that Nikon does. It would be like Mclarin and Ford doing the same thing in the Auto world.
Love it Skid! You hit the nail on the head! People will buy a two-four year old Hassy or other MF 25-50mp camera. No one wants a Nikon 10mp D40x. That is the main difference. They will resell the cameras and to break even, gain market share or maybe even in a few cases make money. Most of these type of programs are "loss" programs (aka loose money) geared to keep or gain market share.
Just think, when was the last time you saw a thread asking if someone should buy a used D200 or D80?
I do like the idea of doing this on Pro level lenses though!
Good topic NikoDoby.
p.s. what's up with all the battery talk - I couldn't figure our what the thread was about;)
I may be on the wrong track but you cannot trade a computer even if it is in perfect working order. But there are companies that take old computers and recycle them for all types of materials like gold contacts etc. The problem is you are luckly if they come to pick it up and you get no money for it proberly due to the cost of recycling. I do not think cameras are much different. For full size or asp-c cameras they are computers with glass these days and the cost of recycling would be high for Nikon or most other cameras unless they are designed for some parts to be remanufactured or reused so I do not think that from a Bottom line point of view a camera maker other then Hasselblad would offer a "trade in" and I wonder how lond Hessy will keep their program going.
NikoDoby said:
You should ALWAYS recycle your batteries. BestBuy has a drop off "basket" for old camera and mobile phone batteries near the entrance of their stores. Office Depot actually offers discount points every time you take back a used inkjet cartridges. You can then use the points to buy new ink or other stuff.This is how I save money on my ink cost.
have you ever looked into those infinity inking systems? I love it for our printer, although maybe you are talking about for your high quality photo printing, in which case it probably wouldn't work. But for everyday printing I swear by it.
As much as we'd all like this to happen, my guess is that it never will, at least for consumers. I doubt that Nikon would ever give up any margin that they don't have to. I do know, on the other hand, that Nikon does make extremely attractive offers to pro Canon shooters to entice them to switch brands (50% of the value of their existing Canon gear, applied toward the purchase of new Nikon gear). So, even if any kind of additional in-brand "loyalty" program were to be offered by Nikon, I would expect it to be offered to NPS members exclusively.
NikoDoby said:
Hasselblad just announced it will offer up to $12000 for your old camera system if you buy a new Hassey. What if Nikon did this for people who already own an entry level Nikon and buy a model that's higher up? How about a $150-$500 discount? Would that be enough to get people to move up the Nikon model ladder?
Certainly, when the D700 successor is launched.
Lets be honest here. Does Nikon really need a trade-in program when everyone that reads this website, and forum are willing to purchase the latest and greatest the very night of the press release. Take the D7000 for instance, I remember quite a few here pre-ordered it that very night. With such demand, Nikon would be brain-dead to offer a trade-in program, and give away margin for no reason.
Phase One on the other hand is a far more costly purchase, and trade-ins are necessary to support the photographer who can't afford new, but wants better than DSLR quality.
Why would I do a trade up on a nikon to only get 10% off. While a great Idea in theory you can get refurbished bodies or bodies on rebate for less without losing your other nikon product. If I don't get at least 25-30% off I'll just buy it new and get the warranty to go with it. Now if you could trade in an 80-200mm f2.8 for a 70-200mm vr2 and only put in $1000 or $1200 extra I would go for it...
Just a little FYI, Canon has a trade up loyalty program of sorts. They'll give you discounts on an upgraded model if you send in your old broken model - nothing fabulous, but I'd love a little discount to upgrade some of my gear.
Trade-in programs have the effect of artificially increasing the resale value of the product. This is a very conservative move and serves only to reassure people that their investment won't depreciate faster than a known rate. It is most commonly seen in "luxury" goods markets, where status is a significant portion of perceived value AND a significant portion of the original selling price.
A very similar practice is followed by high-end car makers. The styling of high-end cars evolves much more slowly than that of low-end cars. This is to ensure that a new model does not "obsolete" the styling of an older one, driving down resale value.
Let's examine why this is bad for the average consumer who does not want to buy status:
The reason a D100 is worth so little today (practically free) and such a tiny fraction of its original price is that a D100 is technologically obsolete. I think most here can agree on that. The reason we agree on that is because we value a camera's capabilities, not its status. We place a value on that D100 equal to its intrinsic worth as a camera.
If Nikon were to implement a trade-up program it MUST offer the consumer more money for said D100 than the market rate of today. If Nikon does not offer more than the current market rate they will have no takers and the program is effectively nonexistent.
Since logic dictates they offer more than current market rates that means they have artificially raised the value of said example D100 while not increasing its intrinsic worth. Therefore the entire used Nikon market becomes perverted. No longer is one simply paying for capability, one is paying for the promise of artificial value to be refunded, as it were, at the end of a product's life.
Nikon is, like me and I suspect like you, interested in making money. I pay the bills, feed the kids, and hopefully make the world a better place through the power money gives me. Nikon can not burn money over the long term any more than you or I can.
As I said above, Nikon MUST offer more than current market prices for this program to be anything other than a slide on the quarterly Power Point. If they artificially raise the value of a camera the money must come from somewhere, and it won't be them. There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
I don't know about you, but I want to pay for camera tech. I don't want to pay for status and I don't want to pay for a promise of money in the future.
You must log in to post.
