Leica pricing in 2001 - Don't read if prone to fits of anger

Olsen said:
Simplyfied; you are confirming the dramatic effect of the fall of the US dollar to the Euro! Sure, there is a small percentage of increase pro anno for the seven years passed since 2001, but that's peanuts. Just enough to cover rizing materials and energy cost. Or not even that.

2,000 US$ was € 2.350 back in 2001. Today that is only € 1.350. Try to grasp the significance of that. The cost of things (metals, energy etc.) has rizen here in Europe too, - about 3% per year. To buy € 2.350 of goods in 2001-Euros you need € 2.750 today. That is 4,000 US$ in today's dollars...

Leica? They are hardly making any profit at all.
Click to expand...

Your last sentence hits the nail. No reason to be annoyed with Leica, they are not (or only marginally) beneficiaries of nominally higher USD prices for Leica gear. And even without knowing underlying details, their publicly available financials, unfortunately, tell the same story. A company, struggling to sustainably produce profits.
 
Is your camera bag ½ full or ½ empty?

Is your camera bag ½ full or ½ empty?

BNF said:
The point is not about the currency conversion and I had thought I had made that clear.. . and I've already adjusted for dollars from 2001 into 2008 before I made the claim of "anger".

In a simplified, Sunday afternoon 10 minutes of freetime post, I was trying to show that adjusted for CDI and the cost of dollars, while acknowledging the currency loss/gain, that the price rise is dramatic - more dramatic than currency flux would show and more than simple formulations on cost of living adjustments.
Click to expand...

All I know is my M6, M7 and Noctilux have all doubled in value. I don’t have a problem with that. It is very rare to own any tool that goes up in value with age. Can it not be said, Leica’s value has kept up with inflation.
 
POINT OF VIEW said:
All I know is my M6, M7 and Noctilux have all doubled in value. I don’t have a problem with that. It is very rare to own any tool that goes up in value with age. Can it not be said, Leica’s value has kept up with inflation.
Click to expand...

But this is bad for the people who would like to get a Leica, but are set back by the outrageous prices!
 
sitemistic said:
If the price is outrageous, does it really matter why? If a Noctilux costs $6,000 and I buy one, in the end, it doesn't matter to me why it cost that much.
Click to expand...

I have nothing to disagree with.

If you say the same thing about M8, then it is fine. So you seem to be liking M8 again 😀:angel:

because m8 is leica product which costs much as noctilux
 
So far the "Basic Leica" if bought second hand isn't a bad deal. I've depended on my Leicas for supporting me and the family, buying a house, boats and cars, seeing two kids through grad school, etc. My newest Leica was made in the early 1970's while others date to the 50's. Minimal money has been spent on keeping them running and earning money. I did get M4 style contacts put on them when they were otherwise in for service anyway.

My accountant complains that I have no depreciation to write off my taxes! They're reliable and still paying the bills. An M3 body bought used in 1967 for $100? Yet $100 was a fair amount of money back then, like $500 or $600 would be today. Over the long haul it was a real bargain. It's earned tens of thousands of dollars, and could likely sell for$500 or $600 on today's market.
 
Leicas have done very well, but remember, that sort of value is only there if you can find a buyer. The value to Al is different, he is looking at value as it delivers functionality which in turn allows him to create value.

B2 (;->
 
Al Kaplan said:
So far the "Basic Leica" if bought second hand isn't a bad deal. I've depended on my Leicas for supporting me and the family, buying a house, boats and cars, seeing two kids through grad school, etc. My newest Leica was made in the early 1970's while others date to the 50's...
Click to expand...
Come on, Al, you KNOW professionals don't use Leicas. Ask anyone here! Therefore, either you and I have never earned a penny with our Leicas, or we've been deceived and we've really been using Canon DSLRs all these years. As has Salgado...

Cheers,

R.
 
Thardy said:
The price really doesn't matter since I've decided buying anything Leica will just reduce my pitiful retirement nest egg that much more.
Click to expand...

Al Patterson said:
No, it just is a diversified retirement nest egg. Some of it in stocks, some in bonds, and some of it in "anything Leica". Maybe I should sell my gold and buy an MP...
Click to expand...


Let's see, I take $1,000,000 and buy a bunch of new MP's (actually 250) , 2 years later, the Leica part of my portfolio nets me about $575,000. I think Warren Buffet did the same thing last year.
 
The thing about my Leica kit that seems to drive people crazy is just how beat up they look, with dings, dents, and brassing. One body that I did buy new, an M2-R, came with a 50/2 D.R. Summicron. Leitz was unloading them and the combo was $375.00. I kept the original box, import certificate, and instruction manual. The body really looked like crap until I bought a new "skin" from Cameraleather a couple of years ago. The one time it went back to Leitz for a CLA I had M4 synch sockets and M4-P frame lines installed. No collector would want it after the modifications I'm sure!

The frame line upgrade was a waste of money. I sold my 135 Tele-Elmar after buying some Leica lenses at an estate sale for a song. The goggled 135/28 I picked up uses the 90mm frame lines, and I discovered that my newly acquired 28 was a rare first model Wetzlar black paint in like new shape. I swapped the 28 for a pristine 21/3.4 S.A. and a late model M2 body in cherry condition. I never use the 28 and 135 frames in the finder.
 
Last edited:
BNF said:
I found my copy of Shutterbug from August 2001.
Click to expand...
I have a photo of a picture I took in 2001 of a gas station advertising a gallon of gasoline for 0.99(9) cents.

The average right now is about $3.00

Thank you, Scalia, and your cascade effect.
 
Thardy said:
Let's see, I take $1,000,000 and buy a bunch of new MP's (actually 250) , 2 years later, the Leica part of my portfolio nets me about $575,000. I think Warren Buffet did the same thing last year.
Click to expand...

I hope you know I'm kidding a bit, but an MP will probably have better resale value when I retire than an M8 or Canon 5D or Nikon D3.

And, I get a few years of use out of it. I only look at the precious metals part of my portfolio once or twice a year when I need something from the safe deposit box at the bank.

I keep the State Quarters at home.
 
Gabriel M.A. said:
I have a photo of a picture I took in 2001 of a gas station advertising a gallon of gasoline for 0.99(9) cents.

The average right now is about $3.00

Thank you, Scalia, and your cascade effect.
Click to expand...

Was gas prices really that low in 2001?
 
Gabriel M.A. said:
I have a photo of a picture I took in 2001 of a gas station advertising a gallon of gasoline for 0.99(9) cents.

The average right now is about $3.00

Thank you, Scalia, and your cascade effect.
Click to expand...

3 $ a gallon (3,785 liters) equals $ 0,79 per Liter which equals NOK 4,27/Liter. Here in Norway, this very afternoon, a Liter of 95 Octane petrol costs NOK 12,66. That should be $ 8,87 per Gallon. The difference is 'taxes' (health care & lavish pension funds for all and all that stuff, you know).
 
Olsen said:
3 $ a gallon (3,785 liters) equals $ 0,79 per Liter which equals NOK 4,27/Liter. Here in Norway, this very afternoon, a Liter of 95 Octane petrol costs NOK 12,66. That should be $ 8,87 per Gallon. The difference is 'taxes' (health care & lavish pension funds for all and all that stuff, you know).
Click to expand...
Yeah, don't get me started on that. On this side of the pond, the word "taxes" is as evil as the word "communist".

There is a showdown between our incompetent governor of Minnesota and the state Legislature over a few cents a gallon for taxes which are sorely needed for road infrastructure renovation. The urgency was a slap in the face when the I-35W bridge collapsed in Minneapolis back in August, 2007.

Not even that will make him get the money. He wants to run the credit card, like all good conservatives; let the people pay later. It worked so well with the sub-prime mortgage pyramid scheme...

Anyway. My point in any case is that it's three times as much, including the exclusion of taxes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom