Looks like Lomography (company) might be in trouble

In the UK at least, the high street does not offer a pleasant experience, in central London it's *extremely* busy, I often needed to take the back road, or walk on the road itself, dodging cars and cyclists. Only to get to a shop and find they don't have stock, or they try to sell you on accessories or extended warranties.

The retail industry needs to change urgently, or the online stores are going to completely take over.

We are in the middle of a major transition, a similar one to when supermarkets took over, and all the little bakers and grocers went under.
 
I know the management of the SF Lomography store, and we sell Lomography cameras in our shop, so I've had a pretty up close view of what's going on with the brand.

First off, the Lomography gallery stores are not franchises. They are funded, built and closely managed by Lomography. There are also small stores like ours that carry Lomography products as merchandise, but to my knowledge there are no real franchises.

I don't know how Lomo is doing as a company, but I think as far as the stores are concerned, they are taking action on a bad business decision, which was to expand in the retail market and compete not only with their other retailers (like us), but also with their own online store. They make much more profit selling a camera online than through one of their stores, so why have stores? I believe Lomography thought the stores would expand their overall market (like the Apple stores did for Apple), but it turned out not to be the case.

As a Lomography user and retailer, I have mixed feelings about the brand and their products. I fully credit Lomography with stoking excitement in film photography and introducing it to a new generation of photographers. Lomography, if nothing else, is genius at marketing and I'm REALLY glad that what they are marketing is film photography. I also agree with alienmeatsack above that their products are interesting and innovative. And they brought back 110! How cool is that?

In our shop, however, we and our customers have struggled with the quality of Lomography products (and their sister brand The Impossible Project), especially given the price. While I love the Diana Mini, we rarely recommend it anymore because they usually break within a few weeks. This is also true of the Sardina, and everyone I know with an LCA has had it break. From what we can see, the quality problem has definitely dimmed interest in Lomography cameras.

I think their business of marketing cameras as style products (like shoes) has been surprisingly successful, but they are starting to find the limits, and are perhaps losing some sales as their customers get frustrated with some products and move on to other entertainments. Closing the gallery stores is a wise business decision that will hopefully ensure that the brand continues to thrive for a long time.
 
vdonovan said:
I know the management of the SF Lomography store, and we sell Lomography cameras in our shop, so I've had a pretty up close view of what's going on with the brand.

First off, the Lomography gallery stores are not franchises. They are funded, built and closely managed by Lomography. There are also small stores like ours that carry Lomography products as merchandise, but to my knowledge there are no real franchises.

I don't know how Lomo is doing as a company, but I think as far as the stores are concerned, they are taking action on a bad business decision, which was to expand in the retail market and compete not only with their other retailers (like us), but also with their own online store. They make much more profit selling a camera online than through one of their stores, so why have stores? I believe Lomography thought the stores would expand their overall market (like the Apple stores did for Apple), but it turned out not to be the case.

As a Lomography user and retailer, I have mixed feelings about the brand and their products. I fully credit Lomography with stoking excitement in film photography and introducing it to a new generation of photographers. Lomography, if nothing else, is genius at marketing and I'm REALLY glad that what they are marketing is film photography. I also agree with alienmeatsack above that their products are interesting and innovative. And they brought back 110! How cool is that?

In our shop, however, we and our customers have struggled with the quality of Lomography products (and their sister brand The Impossible Project), especially given the price. While I love the Diana Mini, we rarely recommend it anymore because they usually break within a few weeks. This is also true of the Sardina, and everyone I know with an LCA has had it break. From what we can see, the quality problem has definitely dimmed interest in Lomography cameras.

I think their business of marketing cameras as style products (like shoes) has been surprisingly successful, but they are starting to find the limits, and are perhaps losing some sales as their customers get frustrated with some products and move on to other entertainments. Closing the gallery stores is a wise business decision that will hopefully ensure that the brand continues to thrive for a long time.
Click to expand...



Thanks for the informative post ... answers most questions for me. 🙂
 
Thanka for the perspective Vince, interesting.

vdonovan said:
I know the management of the SF Lomography store, and we sell Lomography cameras in our shop, so I've had a pretty up close view of what's going on with the brand.

First off, the Lomography gallery stores are not franchises. They are funded, built and closely managed by Lomography. There are also small stores like ours that carry Lomography products as merchandise, but to my knowledge there are no real franchises.

I don't know how Lomo is doing as a company, but I think as far as the stores are concerned, they are taking action on a bad business decision, which was to expand in the retail market and compete not only with their other retailers (like us), but also with their own online store. They make much more profit selling a camera online than through one of their stores, so why have stores? I believe Lomography thought the stores would expand their overall market (like the Apple stores did for Apple), but it turned out not to be the case.

As a Lomography user and retailer, I have mixed feelings about the brand and their products. I fully credit Lomography with stoking excitement in film photography and introducing it to a new generation of photographers. Lomography, if nothing else, is genius at marketing and I'm REALLY glad that what they are marketing is film photography. I also agree with alienmeatsack above that their products are interesting and innovative. And they brought back 110! How cool is that?

In our shop, however, we and our customers have struggled with the quality of Lomography products (and their sister brand The Impossible Project), especially given the price. While I love the Diana Mini, we rarely recommend it anymore because they usually break within a few weeks. This is also true of the Sardina, and everyone I know with an LCA has had it break. From what we can see, the quality problem has definitely dimmed interest in Lomography cameras.

I think their business of marketing cameras as style products (like shoes) has been surprisingly successful, but they are starting to find the limits, and are perhaps losing some sales as their customers get frustrated with some products and move on to other entertainments. Closing the gallery stores is a wise business decision that will hopefully ensure that the brand continues to thrive for a long time.
Click to expand...
 
vdonovan said:
In our shop, however, we and our customers have struggled with the quality of Lomography products (and their sister brand The Impossible Project), especially given the price.
Click to expand...

Not sure in what regard you meant "sister brand" but it should be clarified the two have nothing to do with one another other than occupying the same marketplace.
 
pdexposures said:
Not sure in what regard you meant "sister brand" but it should be clarified the two have nothing to do with one another other than occupying the same marketplace.
Click to expand...


I took this to be Vince's meaning.

As for Lomo ... with clever marketing you can sell things that break for a while but eventualy it does come back to bite you on the arse! 😛
 
pdexposures said:
Not sure in what regard you meant "sister brand" but it should be clarified the two have nothing to do with one another other than occupying the same marketplace.
Click to expand...

They are related in the sense that Florian Kaps was a founder of both companies:

http://www.the-impossible-project.com/shadowbox.php?id=doc&type=people


I don't know for a fact that Lomography has any ownership stake in Impossible, but my friends at Lomography and Impossible have told me that is the case. Regardless, both companies have an identical approach to the analog photography market, in that they emphasize marketing and style and de-emphasize quality.
 
jsrockit said:
Has it had a lot of issues with its items breaking?
Click to expand...

According to Vince ... yes!

In our shop, however, we and our customers have struggled with the quality of Lomography products (and their sister brand The Impossible Project), especially given the price. While I love the Diana Mini, we rarely recommend it anymore because they usually break within a few weeks. This is also true of the Sardina, and everyone I know with an LCA has had it break. From what we can see, the quality problem has definitely dimmed interest in Lomography cameras.
Click to expand...
 
Back when I was using Dianas and Holgas in the early 90s, the lightleaks, cracks, and overall ****ty quality was part of the appeal, but they were also dirt cheap. You'd routinely see them with a lot of black tape to cover light leaks. I guess once Lomography started raising the prices by 300-500%, people expected more from them.
 
I see a lot of their products available in the college and hipster areas of this city. Of course the cameras are twice the price – and a roll of B&W film is FOUR TIMES the retail price down the road at the pro photography store. No wonder the crowd that survives off of PBR and ramen noodles is moving away from film and $99+ junk cameras.
 
They sold film and cameras but absolutely no way to process and scan or print your photos. The entire business model of Lomography was built on the expectation that minilabs would continue to exist as local, accessible, and, most importantly, affordable places for people to get their film into usable formats. Until that problem is rectified, likely by creation, purchase, or association with a large mail order processor, I cannot see Lomo surviving.
 
Aristophanes said:
They sold film and cameras but absolutely no way to process and scan or print your photos. The entire business model of Lomography was built on the expectation that minilabs would continue to exist as local, accessible, and, most importantly, affordable places for people to get their film into usable formats. Until that problem is rectified, likely by creation, purchase, or association with a large mail order processor, I cannot see Lomo surviving.
Click to expand...

The lomography stores in NYC developed and scanned film. I think the stores were part of its plan to do exactly what you are saying.
 
Aristophanes said:
They sold film and cameras but absolutely no way to process and scan or print your photos. The entire business model of Lomography was built on the expectation that minilabs would continue to exist as local, accessible, and, most importantly, affordable places for people to get their film into usable formats. Until that problem is rectified, likely by creation, purchase, or association with a large mail order processor, I cannot see Lomo surviving.
Click to expand...

They have their own developing service as well.

http://shop.lomography.com/us/servi...=banner&utm_campaign=banner_permanent_lomolab
 
I've actually found lomography has good deals on film... but mostly just because local stores don't carry the "real" stuff. For instance I can buy Fomapan 100 in the Lomography three pack from the local store for less than the price of two rolls of Fuji or Kodak B/W. I'm sure if the store just carried Foma products it would be a bit cheaper still, but I can't complain really.

They also sell a three pack of 36 EXP. Kodak 100 ASA for the same price as four pack of 24EXP Fuji 200 ASA at Walmart. So that's another good deal.

Then of course they have 110 film which you're not going to find anywhere else.
 
Well, I just purchased my first film camera since 2005- a Lomo Oktomat. I am starting a new project June 21 which will be shot mostly with digital, but also with some film, hence the Lomo. I will also be using some instant print film for this project- I will be shooting a Polaroid SX-70.

It feels weird shooting film again. I just loaded the Oktomat with some Kokak 400 Gold and I am off to do a bit of street shooting with it.

My wife thinks I have lost my freaking mind.....
 
Hipstamatic and Instagram did them in. It was coold and fun and new for awhile, but like all things, the digitization of it made it obsolete. Which is funny because that was the point of the whole thing was that it was analog. But now that all those "effects" of using Holga's and Zenit's have become mainstream, it's no longer interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom