Quote:
Originally Posted by Robstar1963
This (Olympus) is a company that was almost destroyed by the recent controversy surrounding it's business affairs
One of the things that seems to have contributed to pulling it through these desperate times is the runaway and perhaps unexpected success of the O-MD which continues to draw new users away from years of DSLR use as well as attracting hoards of upgraders and new enthusiast photographers
If such a product had not been released I suspect that many many potential buyers would never have considered Olympus products or would have given their camera products a miss in case the company folded leaving them with no product back up
There has rarely if ever been a camera product which has galvanised the interest of so many and attracted so many away from other manufacturers' products and other formats - something that is to be greatly applauded
The way that Olympus deals with valid customer issues and complaints now could make or break the future prospects of the camera division (even if this division is small in overall company terms) as they are very unlikely to be able to maintain the customer loyalty of the vast majority of these buyers if they are repeatedly seen to ignore customer concerns and complaints with regard to faulty products and components
Many have indicated that this issue with the cracked screen surround does not bother them
However others have indicated that they may never buy from Olympus again
Unfortunately this is only one of several quality issues with the OM-D and Olympus are in my opinion in danger of undermining the huge gains they have made in their growing customer base
Word of mouth these days has been replaced by forum and user group chat which will very quickly erode the reputation of any product with issues or a company that fails to 'do the right thing'
I can fully appreciate the potential cost of admitting that such issues may require a 'recall' or repairs to be authorised for anyone raising those issues but the long term 'losses' that could instead prevail are surely something to avoid and short term costs are surely more palatable than a long term and widespread loss in customer confidence and product reputation
Rob
|
My Rant ...
I don't buy into that such a small cosmetic defect, which 80+% of us would not have noticed had it not been mentioned on the forum(s), will deter a significant percentage from buying Olympus or buying Olympus again.
I don't think the crack is nearly as bad as selling premium lenses at premium pricing without hoods. Then the charge for said hoods is outrageous. I find those two 'corporate policy' statement much more telling than looking the other way on a small, barely visible to the naked eye, cosmetic crack. Other than the novelty of the crack, I think this has been blow way out of proportion. (Granted, it is important to determine if the weather-seal was compromised, but after that ... for me, it is a minuscule non-issue of no real importance.)
I do take issue with Olympus's apparent arrogance in not directly addressing this matter. I think it is based purely on profit motive, any official statement of crack recognition now makes them obligated to repair which cuts into their profit margin. Typical corporate maximize profit over people policy. But Olympus is on the ropes and maybe they feel compelled to corporately ignore the crack to forestall 1,000's of cameras flooding their repair facilities for a small cosmetic repair, in order to keep the camera division afloat. I don't know, but there are other ways address the problem, which would improve their satisfaction rating with existing and potential customers, than just ignore the problem.
But what would you expect from a company that charges $80 extra for a hood on a $900 lens.
Overall, I like the quality of Olympus, both cameras and lenses. (I have the OM-D, E-P3 and a host of Oly primes.) This type of overall corporate attitude of screw you little guy, will make me think twice about where I choose to spend my money. (Not that Oly gives-a-rat's about me, but that's okay because I give-a-rat's about me and my monies. If I determine that Panasonic or Sigma or anybody else has a better corporate policy of balancing profits and people ... then that may be where I toss my monies. Rarely do I make purchases based on only one criterium, my multi-aspect review is applied to both manufacturers and retailers.
Gary
50Thanks
