I think the reason certain digital cameras hold value is down to the repairability of them. If Nikon or Canon or any other of the major manufacturers cameras break then chances are that because of the volumes involved a part should be available.
The problem Leica has is that it's a small volume manufacturer and consequently doesn't have the resources to hold spare stock like the major Japanese companies so when those parts run out that's it.
I also think that Leica have been caught trouser down on the M8 screen issue as the cameras were always sold on the back of marketing hype 'camera for life' sales pitch and I would think that more than a few will think twice about the integrity of any future promise made by them for any future products.
Perhaps they expect buyers to start their own inventory of spares for when they can't fulfill their claims of camera longevity.
The last thing that anyone perhaps thought when buying a Leica digital R/F was that within a relatively short life span, IF it broke down and required unavailable spares it would in effect be a disposable camera.
Whilst in the short term they continue to make money, sooner or later the reputation of being a camera for photographers will be swept aside and the only people buying will be the wealthy who can afford to treat them as disposable cameras. If when that time comes there is enough wealthy buyers to sustain company survival then for the company it's all ok. For the less wealthy photographer who wants to use Leica lenses I suspect he/she may shop elsewhere and Leica will disappear as a camera manufacturer of digital R/F.
