"Alan Browne"
>> Isn't that amazing that someone has the audacy of charge $87 just for a
>> cable assembly that is not even shielded?
>
> Whatever it's worth you're paying for the costs, margin, marketing expense
> and profit of everyone who touched it on the way to the store.
I work for a hardware/software manufacturer in the USA and some of our
products costs much more to manufacture, has a lot more components and it is
still cheaper for the consumer. We also have all these overhead costs. I
believe the margin component is way disproportionate. I don't believe it is
lack of economy of scale either... even if 1% of minolta and sony cameras
(that use such cable) come to buy one of these, it is still a lot.
Alan Browne - 12 Sep 2006 00:41 GMT
> "Alan Browne"
>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> either... even if 1% of minolta and sony cameras (that use such
> cable) come to buy one of these, it is still a lot.
Given the quite low volume of these cables that Minolta sold, the
"store" price is not surprising at all.
Of course the other issue is the lack of competition for such devices
which let Minolta (and now Sony) keep the price up.

Signature
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
POHB - 12 Sep 2006 08:29 GMT
> Given the quite low volume of these cables that Minolta sold, the
> "store" price is not surprising at all.
>
> Of course the other issue is the lack of competition for such devices
> which let Minolta (and now Sony) keep the price up.
If they made things like these remotes easier to hack for the hobbyist
they might open up a bigger market for their cameras and make more
money than they would ever have made selling their propriatory add-ons.
KM might have gone down that path, Sony have a track record of making
their stuff a closed shop with stuff like the Memory Stick.