Make no mistake about it Barry, I am sure there are
tremendous costs implications associated with stocking
OM items and making it available, but what was the OM-
2000 anyway? I think your missing my "main" point.
Why not make gasoline cars obsolete and everything else,
while were at it. If its best for the economy?
If you don't mmarket or advertise a product, how do you
expect it to survive? Word of mouth?
Sam...
> At 10:12 AM 2/3/02 -0800, Scott G wrote:
> >>
> >Imagine the good will (and good press) that could be generated by providing
> >the engineering drawings, remaining spares stock and perhaps tooling to a
> >users-group of OM owners. Whether donated, sold at "profit," or sold at
> >"cost," it seems to me that it would be a PR win, if nothing more.
> >
>
> Following this line of reasoning take a look at the aviation industry. Many
> aircraft types are many, many years out of production. Tooling, spares etc
> etc have been bought up on occasion by "users groups" who then try to make
> parts available -- it is generally a nightmare, frequent suppliers going
> out of business cause there ain't no money in it and if they figure out how
> to make a buck the users groups scream about gouging. "Consumers" in
> general have unrealistic expectations about costs/prices etc and have NO
> idea just how expensive production can be -- they learn qucikly once they
> get into the mess.
>
> Barry H
>
>
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|