Zeiss below Terra? (7 Viewers)

[perterra]

I`m not convinced that offering cheaper models lessens the brands status, Mercedes offer a 20k A class front drive hatch, does this diminish in any way the lure of an S class or Maybach ?

Depending on the price point they are shooting for it could have an impact. Buying Chrysler certainly did Diamler no good.

 

[brocknroller]

Nikon binoculars sales profits from the fact that you don't have to take out a second mortgage to buy one (except the EDG, and even that was a good value, i.e., the EDG I, before Swaro forced Nikon to redesign it and raise its price because of increased production costs. as Mike said).

Terra sales profits because Zeiss made a good product, enough to overcome the stigma of a "Made-in-China" bin except among the highbrows.

The original Zeiss Conquests didn't exactly garner rave reviews, so they probably didn't sell that well, blue badge or not. Rarely were they discussed on BF. I think Tero had an 8x30 model for about 60 seconds. I'm sure Zeiss is doing much better sales with the Conquest HDs.

You can always fool some of the people some of the time by slapping on a prestige label (a company was selling Toyotas that looked like and were branded as Ferrari, but a court recently shut them down and recalled the cars after Ferrari filed suit)...but you can't fool all of the people all of the time, and BF members in general are pretty sharp, you're not going to get one passed them with a fancy badge. The optics will have to measure up, whatever the price point.

#http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57dzaMaouXA

 

[cycleguy]

Nikon binoculars sales profits from Nikons A status in camera's.
Terra sales profits from the A status Zeiss still has.
So, will there be a lower model in the near future? Absolutely!!
Am I pleased? :C:C

Jan

Sounds like Zeiss would fare better making cheap cameras?:eat:

CG

 

[Troubador]

funny...read Thcibah backwards...

Groan.........

Lee

 

[Troubador]

Lee,

This just sounds like a bad idea. Plenty of junk at the lower price point, why would Zeiss want to produce junk and compete with junk bins? Nikon really isn't known for their higher end binoculars, mostly known for monarchs and lesser quality bins. Zeiss is known for their higher end product.

My .02

CG

Hi CG

You make your point in a powerful way, but your argument depends on the assumption that Zeiss would produce junk.

Why would they do that? Or is it your view that you can't produce reasonably good bins at $250?

And while Zeiss is certainly known for high end stuff, that point has already been run over by a steamroller by Zeiss offering the excellent Conquest HD and the excellent value Terra ED at lower price points.

Lee

 

[Troubador]

Depending on the price point they are shooting for it could have an impact. Buying Chrysler certainly did Diamler no good.

But did people stop buying Mercedes-Benz sedans because parent Daimler owned Chrysler? Over here in Europe Mercedes has been selling the Smart city car for years (under the Smart name, admittedly) its no bigger than a shoe box but it hasn't dented sales of MB sedan at all.

And yes I absolutely agree there is a limit as to how far down the price point range Zeiss could go and still maintain the standards that they consider are the minimum to validate the Zeiss branding.

So, lets assume that if Zeiss did introduce a $250 instrument it would have a similar quality to price relationship as Terra ED, in other words it would be good value for money.

Who exactly would be insulted by its existence or put off from buying Terras, Conquests or HTs?

Newcomers to bins may well not have heard of Zeiss anyway and anybody who is going to spend Conquest HD or HT money isn't going to bother looking through anything Zeiss offers below Terra.

Lee

 

[Troubador]

Terra sales profits because Zeiss made a good product

I'm sure Zeiss is doing much better sales with the Conquest HDs.

The optics will have to measure up, whatever the price point.


Excellent points Brock and are the logic behind my OP question.

Lee

 

[Troubador]

Terra sales profits from the A status Zeiss still has.

Jan

A good point mijn vriend.

Is it also possible that future sales of Zeiss alphas will profit from people wanting to trade-in their Terras? or even 'sub-Terras' ?

Lee

 

[jan van daalen]

A good point mijn vriend.

Is it also possible that future sales of Zeiss alphas will profit from people wanting to trade-in their Terras? or even 'sub-Terras' ?

Lee

Lee,

My predictment is that the opposite will happen. Customers are not happy with this model, compare it with equels like Opticrons, Bushnells etc. and leave the brand Zeiss when they want to upgrade and move to........

Time will tell.

Jan

 

[perterra]

But did people stop buying Mercedes-Benz sedans because parent Daimler owned Chrysler? Over here in Europe Mercedes has been selling the Smart city car for years (under the Smart name, admittedly) its no bigger than a shoe box but it hasn't dented sales of MB sedan at all.

And yes I absolutely agree there is a limit as to how far down the price point range Zeiss could go and still maintain the standards that they consider are the minimum to validate the Zeiss branding.

So, lets assume that if Zeiss did introduce a $250 instrument it would have a similar quality to price relationship as Terra ED, in other words it would be good value for money.

Who exactly would be insulted by its existence or put off from buying Terras, Conquests or HTs?

Newcomers to bins may well not have heard of Zeiss anyway and anybody who is going to spend Conquest HD or HT money isn't going to bother looking through anything Zeiss offers below Terra.

Lee

But the Diamler name did nothing for Chrysler. Thats what I should have said. Wasnt really a good analogy anyway, had they changed the name of Chrysler to MB would the average Joe have said, Mercedes sure makes a crap vehicle?


If every thing went together as a quality package then there would be no problem. But if you had 5,000 of them appear on every internet forum and Amazon review with broken diopter rings then you may have a quality perception nightmare. It happened to Bushnell and people basically said, you get what you pay for. What do you expect. So the cheapening has to be very controlled to not get hung out to dry.

Imagine if the Terras had turned out like that? I dont think Zeiss would have liked having their name out on something where people say, what do you expect. And I dont think Zeiss would have gotten just a shrug either. There would be much gnashing of teeth as people said, they are washed up, never to be a power house again. Heck I heard it with the Terra.

Were Zeiss to become a publicly traded company, then you may well see $45 Zeiss binoculars in the future. After all cheap chinese labor and letting the customer be quality control is like crack cocaine to wall street. But wall street taking the reins you would lose the ability to control your own destiny. The money would flow to ever what produced the most income for the least capital. If that meant closing every mfg plant and depending on 100% out sourced, they would do it.

And from a personal perspective and a rather extreme view, I used to buy Filson moleskin and feather cloth shirts. I normally bought 2 moleskins and 4 feather cloths a year. They were what I wore for daily dress shirts. Made in America, very good quality, looked nice and the feather cloths took a good starch. Feather cloth was around $75 each and the moleskin was around $95. 4 or 5 years ago I walked in to the outdoors shop where I bought them to pick up a few more and low and behold, the label now says they are made Sri Lanka and Macau or some place like that. The price had gone to around $95 and $140, so I decline and instead by a couple of McAlister and Browning shirts at about $40 each. The guy gave me a great sales pitch, how the Filson were the same quality they had always been, but the shareholders just demanded cheaper production. So my only question to him was, what is the difference in a Browning shirt made in Mexico and a Filson made in Macau that would justify twice the price. He said the Filson name (now they are $140 and $195 and still imported). I havent bought a Filson since so I understand what Jan has been saying about off shoring.

But in this case I think Zeiss is using the Terra as a stepping stone to the brand, and as such they need to be a little exclusive. You do have to decide what performance features you are willing to give up when you are building to a price and dont suddenly want 50% of your products to be indistinguishable from your competition. There is such a thing as diluting your product line too much. With Zeiss there is a clear line when you step up the levels to higher end, though honestly it's a hard line to define between HD and HT with my eyes.

This was just a disjointed bit of rambling for me, doing some quotes this morning and sick and tired of looking at prices and part numbers for a while so I'm here. LOL

 

[Troubador]

But the Diamler name did nothing for Chrysler. Thats what I should have said. Wasnt really a good analogy anyway, had they changed the name of Chrysler to MB would the average Joe have said, Mercedes sure makes a crap vehicle?


If every thing went together as a quality package then there would be no problem. But if you had 5,000 of them appear on every internet forum and Amazon review with broken diopter rings then you may have a quality perception nightmare. It happened to Bushnell and people basically said, you get what you pay for. What do you expect. So the cheapening has to be very controlled to not get hung out to dry.

Imagine if the Terras had turned out like that? I dont think Zeiss would have liked having their name out on something where people say, what do you expect. And I dont think Zeiss would have gotten just a shrug either. There would be much gnashing of teeth as people said, they are washed up, never to be a power house again. Heck I heard it with the Terra.

Were Zeiss to become a publicly traded company, then you may well see $45 Zeiss binoculars in the future. After all cheap chinese labor and letting the customer be quality control is like crack cocaine to wall street. But wall street taking the reins you would lose the ability to control your own destiny. The money would flow to ever what produced the most income for the least capital. If that meant closing every mfg plant and depending on 100% out sourced, they would do it.

And from a personal perspective and a rather extreme view, I used to buy Filson moleskin and feather cloth shirts. I normally bought 2 moleskins and 4 feather cloths a year. They were what I wore for daily dress shirts. Made in America, very good quality, looked nice and the feather cloths took a good starch. Feather cloth was around $75 each and the moleskin was around $95. 4 or 5 years ago I walked in to the outdoors shop where I bought them to pick up a few more and low and behold, the label now says they are made Sri Lanka and Macau or some place like that. The price had gone to around $95 and $140, so I decline and instead by a couple of McAlister and Browning shirts at about $40 each. The guy gave me a great sales pitch, how the Filson were the same quality they had always been, but the shareholders just demanded cheaper production. So my only question to him was, what is the difference in a Browning shirt made in Mexico and a Filson made in Macau that would justify twice the price. He said the Filson name (now they are $140 and $195 and still imported). I havent bought a Filson since so I understand what Jan has been saying about off shoring.

But in this case I think Zeiss is using the Terra as a stepping stone to the brand, and as such they need to be a little exclusive. You do have to decide what performance features you are willing to give up when you are building to a price and dont suddenly want 50% of your products to be indistinguishable from your competition. There is such a thing as diluting your product line too much. With Zeiss there is a clear line when you step up the levels to higher end, though honestly it's a hard line to define between HD and HT with my eyes.

This was just a disjointed bit of rambling for me, doing some quotes this morning and sick and tired of looking at prices and part numbers for a while so I'm here. LOL

PT

I think we actually agree about this. The minimum quality that Zeiss must insist on achieving if they were to dip below Terra is of course the $64M question.

I suppose the simplistic way to answer this is that a sub-Terra Zeiss would have to be at least as good as the very best in the group of competitors at the $250 price point that I listed in the OP, and ideally noticeably better.

Hope your quotation-syndrome is fading and you are feeling better by now B

Lee

O

 

[Troubador]

Lee,

My predictment is that the opposite will happen. Customers are not happy with this model, compare it with equels like Opticrons, Bushnells etc. and leave the brand Zeiss when they want to upgrade and move to........

Time will tell.

Jan

Then Zeiss would have to ensure that customers were happy wouldn't they?
And if Zeiss did the job right customers would compare this model with Opticrons and Bushnells etc and say 'this is so much better, thank you Mr Zeiss.:t:

Lee

 

[Hermann]

If Zeiss start selling cheap, Chinese-made binoculars under the Zeiss brand, that will be it, as least as far as I'm concerned. The Terra already was a step in the wrong direction and a terrible sell-out of a once proud tradition.

Any further attempt to turn Zeiss into an outlet store for Chinese binoculars would make Carl Zeiss and Ernst Abbe turn in their graves. And me leave the brand for good.

Hermann

 

[perterra]

PT

I think we actually agree about this. The minimum quality that Zeiss must insist on achieving if they were to dip below Terra is of course the $64M question.

I suppose the simplistic way to answer this is that a sub-Terra Zeiss would have to be at least as good as the very best in the group of competitors at the $250 price point that I listed in the OP, and ideally noticeably better.

Hope your quotation-syndrome is fading and you are feeling better by now B

Lee

O

If you see Hermanns reply below you see kind of what I'm talking about.

(I'm working on the quote thing)



:-O

 

[jan van daalen]

If Zeiss start selling cheap, Chinese-made binoculars under the Zeiss brand, that will be it, as least as far as I'm concerned. The Terra already was a step in the wrong direction and a terrible sell-out of a once proud tradition.

Any further attempt to turn Zeiss into an outlet store for Chinese binoculars would make Carl Zeiss and Ernst Abbe turn in their graves. And me leave the brand for good.

Hermann

Still, the signals I'm getting is that they will.

But you and I are on the same page.

Jan

 

[jan van daalen]

Then Zeiss would have to ensure that customers were happy wouldn't they?
And if Zeiss did the job right customers would compare this model with Opticrons and Bushnells etc and say 'this is so much better, thank you Mr Zeiss.:t:

Lee

Lee,

Zeiss should hire you as their PR/Marketing guy.
Mike are you listening!!!!!!!
:t:

 

[Troubador]

Lee,

Zeiss should hire you as their PR/Marketing guy.
Mike are you listening!!!!!!!
:t:

Jan

Modesty forbids me from commenting 8-P.

Well, Mike if you have time from the frantic excitement of SHOT, the opinion here about a possible sub-Terra Zeiss is that:

1 - It would be risky
2 - If done at all, it would need to be done very well indeed, probably even better than Terra in cost/quality terms
3 - Some folks might draw the conclusion that too much of 'Zeiss' was being lost and far too much China being thrown into the product mix.​

Thanks to all for contributing.

Lee

 

[james holdsworth]

Jan

Modesty forbids me from commenting 8-P.

Well, Mike if you have time from the frantic excitement of SHOT, the opinion here about a possible sub-Terra Zeiss is that:

1 - It would be risky
2 - If done at all, it would need to be done very well indeed, probably even better than Terra in cost/quality terms
3 - Some folks might draw the conclusion that too much of 'Zeiss' was being lost and far too much China being thrown into the product mix.​

Thanks to all for contributing.

Lee

I agree with all you have above, Lee. Zeiss needs to work at refining the Terra brand before trying anything lesser - and I think anything lesser would be a very bad idea.

The Terra is really as low as the company should go. At the price point, it is a capable but not outstanding performer. My view would be that Zeiss should massage the Terra to be the definitive $350.00 binocular, not only better made than any competition but optically clearly better as well. Personally, I think a small uptick in price, along with better ED glass and coatings would be the way to go, not down the price / quality scale.

That said, I think Zeiss have been successful in their execution of the Terra. I use mine for really rough bushwhacking, for field surveys and two colleagues have since purchased the Terra after trying mine, discovering the price and realizing they could get a ''Zeiss.''

 

[perterra]

I agree with all you have above, Lee. Zeiss needs to work at refining the Terra brand before trying anything lesser - and I think anything lesser would be a very bad idea.

The Terra is really as low as the company should go. At the price point, it is a capable but not outstanding performer. My view would be that Zeiss should massage the Terra to be the definitive $350.00 binocular, not only better made than any competition but optically clearly better as well. Personally, I think a small uptick in price, along with better ED glass and coatings would be the way to go, not down the price / quality scale.

That said, I think Zeiss have been successful in their execution of the Terra. I use mine for really rough bushwhacking, for field surveys and two colleagues have since purchased the Terra after trying mine, discovering the price and realizing they could get a ''Zeiss.''

Short and to the point, I wish I had been able to say it as well

 

[brocknroller]

PT

I think we actually agree about this. The minimum quality that Zeiss must insist on achieving if they were to dip below Terra is of course the $64M question.

I suppose the simplistic way to answer this is that a sub-Terra Zeiss would have to be at least as good as the very best in the group of competitors at the $250 price point that I listed in the OP, and ideally noticeably better.

Hope your quotation-syndrome is fading and you are feeling better by now B

Lee

O

64 million dollar question?

Now that's hyperinflation for you! Unless it was originally a British show. like so many that were brought across the Atlantic, but on the way lost a lot of value. I wonder if the British version was also rigged?

Quiz Show

<B>