Growing concern over availability of XCD (older style) and New V lenses

[TechTalk]

In service of the original topic, hopefully you have saved enough energy to scour websites searching for retailers with stock on XCD lenses and post the findings.

Sure... once in awhile. Someone may even find it helpful.

But I think it's time to relax with some music now.

 

[TechTalk]

It was asserted at the beginning of this thread that Hasselblad now requires payment from dealers in advance at the time of order. That sounds odd to me.

It's not uncommon that commercial invoices include some sort of small prompt payment discount. Sometimes a cash discount might be offered for payment at time of shipment. I expect it would be very uncommon to require "pay-first-receive-later" order terms for dealers.

Any comment or clarification on this assertion Steve?

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Again beating a dead horse? DJI is not shipping inventory - no sugarcoating of this fact ...

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Presumably you understand that (a) Hasselblad may know more than you about its business model, (b) what level of profitability it needs to survive in a niche market, and (c) its own survival is more important to it than any particular dealer. Moreover, loyalty is a two way street. There was a substantial period of time when Phase ruled the medium format digital marketplace with an iron fist and dealers were supposedly forced to make a choice to carry either Phase or Hasselblad, but Phase would not let them carry both. Later, around 2019 or 2020 or so, CI picked up Hasselblad and started very quietly to sell the X1DII and the lenses. Initially, I could not even find anything on the CI website. It seemed to me at the time that the X1D was like an illegal drug sold under the counter. [G] That's not to criticize CI. They have to do what they need to do in order to thrive.

Its ridiculous to attribute this to "their own survival" - DJI is very profitable. Its not a "last resort scenario"; its about increasing profitability and recognizing that Hasselblad has decided to starve out intentionally smaller dealers to increase margins. But to keep the supply line open and just ship two bodies while you are shipping hundreds to big shops is just massively uncool. They are free-riding on the advertising CI did, but not "paying" for it by giving them enough inventory to sell through.

They should just tell them that they'll ship preferred to B&H.

50 bodies withheld at launch despite demand = 75k profit re-directed somewhere else. A few months down the road no one cares about the initial shipment delays, its when the stuff is new that you need to get inventory. No one cares about the availability of a lens released 2-3 years ago. When its new, you should get inventory as a trusted dealer.

I'd be ***ssed as a business owner selling Hasselblad to no end if customers call in to cancel or if I heard B&H is selling bodies left and right while I am just getting two units "allocated".

That's a reason to push Fuji and passively boycott the brand. Meaning walk-in customers get a clear recommendation for Fuji. If someone wants Hasselblad - order is taken, sure. But that's it.

 

[JeRuFo]

Its ridiculous to attribute this to "their own survival" - DJI is very profitable. Its not a "last resort scenario"; its about increasing profitability and recognizing that Hasselblad has decided to starve out smaller dealers to increase margins. But to keep the supply line opem and just ship two bodies while you are shipping hundreds to big shops is just massively uncool. They are free-riding on the advertising CI did, bur not "paying" for it by giving them enough inventory to sell through.

They should just tell them that they'll ship preferred to B&H.

50 bodies withheld despite demand = 75k profit not shared.

I'd be ***ssed as a business owner selling Hasselblad to no end.

Over here it's not just small dealers, it's all dealers. Even the big ones have no inventory or just one or two in stock (maybe cancelled orders?) All dealers in my area say that they have to special order it from Hasselblad but can get it within 4 days, which leads me to believe that there is inventory either at a national importer or a European distribution center.
It might have something to do with the fact that it is a relatively low volume product and this way they can ensure the freshest product to their customers. They can also distribute the available product to where there is demand, taking some strain of their obviously too limited production.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Well it seems it comes down to allocation politics.

Meaning: You have say 300 units per month and then you decide who gets how many. CI clearly could shift 50+ units easily, but somehow they don't get enough in this "allocation game".

It seems like the rules are a mix of: politics around loyalty, market clout (e.g. if B&H DEMANDS 100 you have 200 left for NA and then everyone else gets small bits) and market priorities (US vs. EU vs. RoW) ... its most likely very opaque to many, but clearly their own shops and largest dealers have a prominent position in the allocation matrix.

IF demand severely outstrips supply the allocation almost becomes like a "gift" to every dealer as they can immediately sell through.

Eg five sought after bodies more than expected - catching, 7.5k profit "gifted" by the allocation policy. That's why it is frustrating for a dealer - they know they could make more, but can't.

 

[hcubell]

Again beating a dead horse? DJI is not shipping inventory - no sugarcoating of this fact ...

Beating a dead horse? Has there ever been a clearer case of the pot calling the kettle black. I don't think the original poster here had finished typing his post before you jumped in and responded with such intensity. It reminds me of those Western movies where the US cavalry leaps into action to come for the rescue when the wagon train is attacked by the Indians (AKA Shenzen). I can almost hear the clarion call of the bugle. Did it stop there? No. Count your posts here. Count the number in which you insulted other posters. Now, you are trying to disguise your obsession with Hasselblad and its Chinese ownership with your feigned concern for CI as the Forum sponsor. Are you a CI customer? If you care so much about CI, show them the money! Buy your camera equipment from them. I do.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Beating a dead horse? Has there ever been a clearer case of the pot calling the kettle black. I don't think the original poster here had finished typing his post before you jumped in and responded with such intensity. It reminds me of those Western movies where the US cavalry leaps into action to come for the rescue when the wagon train is attacked by the Indians (AKA Shenzen). I can almost hear the clarion call of the bugle. Did it stop there? No. Count your posts here. Count the number in which you insulted other posters. Now, you are trying to disguise your obsession with Hasselblad and its Chinese ownership with your feigned concern for CI as the Forum sponsor. Are you a CI customer? If you care so much about CI, show them the money! Buy your camera equipment from them. I do.

It doesnt make sense to buy stuff on the other side of the planet for many reasons including warranty, support cases, etc. ... I buy new from my local dealer since 2009 when new products come out and if there's an issue I can call them up and the product is there within a day. Why don't you buy your Hasselblad gear from a traditional Swedish small Hasselblad dealer? Right.

Well Team Hasselblad (TT / HC) are always there to sugarcoat realities. I think complete dismantling of service system - lead times of a month for round-trip repairs - limited availability of product except at B&H and online, PDAF debacle are fair points to raise and difficult to gloss over. You are painting this rosy picture of DJI - in the meantime they've dismantled the brand to a shopping mall over the counter camera manufacturer that's sidelining long-standing dealer relationships as they've now decided to change distribution. Its just about recognizing the nature of how they do business - the camera as such is a different topic and its w/o doubt that it is an enjoyable product for non-tech cam users.

The topic was long over and then you and TT come back in to stir it some more.

To summarize: DJI is sidelining small dealers, that's it. The market will sort it out. The camera is great. Tech cam users have an unuseable back for now and hope for a fix. Let's move on.

 

[Geoff]

Paul - please, please, give it a rest. You've made your point, many times. We get it.
Can we please move on? Thank you.

 

[iiiNelson]

Its ridiculous to attribute this to "their own survival" - DJI is very profitable. Its not a "last resort scenario"; its about increasing profitability and recognizing that Hasselblad has decided to starve out intentionally smaller dealers to increase margins. But to keep the supply line open and just ship two bodies while you are shipping hundreds to big shops is just massively uncool. They are free-riding on the advertising CI did, but not "paying" for it by giving them enough inventory to sell through.

They should just tell them that they'll ship preferred to B&H.

50 bodies withheld at launch despite demand = 75k profit re-directed somewhere else. A few months down the road no one cares about the initial shipment delays, its when the stuff is new that you need to get inventory. No one cares about the availability of a lens released 2-3 years ago. When its new, you should get inventory as a trusted dealer.

I'd be ***ssed as a business owner selling Hasselblad to no end if customers call in to cancel or if I heard B&H is selling bodies left and right while I am just getting two units "allocated".

That's a reason to push Fuji and passively boycott the brand. Meaning walk-in customers get a clear recommendation for Fuji. If someone wants Hasselblad - order is taken, sure. But that's it.

While DJI as a company may be profitable, Hasselblad may not be at this moment considering how much they purchased it for, the niche market that they occupy, the amount of money spent on R&D for new lens designs, and combined with supply chain issues to get product out.

For example I used to run the overseas division of a company I was formerly employed with. It was highly successful in terms of growth and revenue. Most of the entities within the stateside division of the company were not all that successful or profitable at the time. People lost their jobs in certain areas of the stateside divisions in spite of the overseas division having record growth and profits within 16 months of me taking over it.

The point is that DJI essentially has a monopoly on the consumer drone side and they’re competitive in the video space for products and accessories - none of that directly applies to how Hasselblad is being run as it’s a different division. DJI has a responsibility to shareholders to turn a profit first and foremost. An virtue signaling can’t ignore this reality as much as it may screw smaller dealers over.

I’m not surprised that B&H does well as they’re equipped better than most camera stores for expedited and international business. This plays a role in their success how well they’re integrated with the internet with having a functioning app with seamless integration. Adorama seems to be out of stock as well and is a larger big box store in this space. So it’s not just the small dealers that aren’t receiving constant stock. There are likely preferred dealers that receive stock based upon the amount of sales and the reputation of the company to move product quickly… or pay for large enough orders upfront which would be worth it to a DJI. Pre-payment for 20-30 cameras may not move their needle. Payment for 1000 cameras and an assortment of 3000 lenses upfront might.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Paul - please, please, give it a rest. You've made your point, many times. We get it.
Can we please move on? Thank you.

Geoff - happy to, but TT / HC need to put it to rest too. I think there was nothing more to say after the comments with Darr, but lo and behold they can't help it.

I am fine - I think everyone now has a clearer view on what's happening in the background and can buy DJI products however they wish to do it.

 

[bab]

It might not be the old rules of Supply and Demand were as when demand increases supply increases and prices decrease. The current marketing strategy of supply chain management has been just like Ferrari and Rolex to decrease the supply, eliminating many dealers, and I have a long, waiting list of paid customers, eliminating the need for the dealers or the manufacture to finance internally the sales of their products. Along with this being able to acquire the necessary parts to put these products together when you are not, the OEM manufacturer of these parts has been proven to be an issue in the supply chain today.
Far as Camera manufactures seems to me like it’s been a rough 5 to 10 years is Camera sales have struggled many times throughout that Stretch of time each brand has had difficult issues to deal with. It’s hard not to notice that the brands (not just cameras)have been on a roller coaster since Covid started and the worldwide market has grown to be saturated with new challenges, requiring a major changes in strategy.
I also have changed my buying habits to adjust to these changes when you were buying cutting edge before sooner rather than later updates would be there now it’s a gamble so you have to buy what is available and be willing to live with it as is.
Third party lens manufacturers have also changed the game, like the Apple Watch changed the watch business. I mean for 500 to 900 dollars you can get a great lens is it the best lens no but even so it does the job and if you buy previously experienced lenses it’s even cheaper.
Take the new SL3 as many have mentioned it’s a dumbed down version that most say will become better as Leica releases new firmware updates…maybe but it is what it is now and you must accept it for that.
i just had my H6D 100c in for service 5 months later a new sensor and board what lifetime will it have now a week, a year or five years who knows. If it breaks again can it be repaired? Will the parts still be available or the company still be willing to repair it or even still be in business that’s not possible to predict. But if all avenues fail and I want another I can buy used with the same challenges.
I think Sony will continue to make sensors for the next ten years but what those sensors end up in is not a sure thing, consumer photographic cameras is only a part of the use.
As for customer loyalty it’s not what it used to be and neither is any manufacturer loyalty to distributors it is the new way where it takes us is anyone’s guess.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

It was asserted at the beginning of this thread that Hasselblad now requires payment from dealers in advance at the time of order. That sounds odd to me.

It's not uncommon that commercial invoices include some sort of small prompt payment discount. Sometimes a cash discount might be offered for payment at time of shipment. I expect it would be very uncommon to require "pay-first-receive-later" order terms for dealers.

Any comment or clarification on this assertion Steve?

There's so much in this thread I have opinions about and would like to share. There are some misleading and/or inaccurate posts, also some completely accurate posts. Maybe at some point I'll clarify a few things, but I prefer not to comment on the above at this time.

Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[Bill_Evans]

Well Team Hasselblad (TT / HC) are always there to sugarcoat realities. I think complete dismantling of service system - lead times of a month for round-trip repairs - limited availability of product except at B&H and online, PDAF debacle are fair points to raise and difficult to gloss over. You are painting this rosy picture of DJI - in the meantime they've dismantled the brand to a shopping mall over the counter camera manufacturer that's sidelining long-standing dealer relationships as they've now decided to change distribution. Its just about recognizing the nature of how they do business - the camera as such is a different topic and its w/o doubt that it is an enjoyable product for non-tech cam users.

Paul you continue to view your opinion as fact while demeaning others experiences as, "sugarcoat realities". That's not in keeping with the respectful tone that makes this forum so valuable, and certainly isn't a strategy to get others to value what you have to say.

Also, I think if we want to have a respectful conversation about Hasselblad we should call them "Hasselblad" and not try to denigrate the brand by referring to them as DJI. We, at least I, don't call Rolls-Royces ... BMWs, or Jaguars ... TATAs, or Porsches, Bentleys, Lamborghinis ... Volkswagens etc.

 

[vjbelle]

Even after reading this thoroughly enjoyable thread with all of its caveats I'm going to jump in. 907X-CFV 100C will be here on Monday. A Rody 50mm HR lens will be here maybe Friday. I have a 35XL and even though it could produce banding it's very unlikely I would push it enough to produce those anomaly's. The Rody 50mm seems to be immune for banding and all of my other lenses from 72mm and beyond are too long to produce any issues. Very unlikely I would be a candidate for any of the Hasselblad lenses as the 100C is mainly for use on either my Cambo or M-Two.

Cheers....

Victor B.

 

[TechTalk]

There's so much in this thread I have opinions about and would like to share. There are some misleading and/or inaccurate posts, also some completely accurate posts. Maybe at some point I'll clarify a few things, but I prefer not to comment on the above at this time.

Steve Hendrix/CI

Thanks for your reply Steve. I understand and respect your discretion in choosing not to publicly discuss your business interactions with clients or suppliers.

 

[TechTalk]

While DJI as a company may be profitable, Hasselblad may not be at this moment considering how much they purchased it for, the niche market that they occupy, the amount of money spent on R&D for new lens designs, and combined with supply chain issues to get product out.

Thanks for sharing your input, experience, and insights. With regard to profits... Hasselblad has been profitable in recent years with the success of their new products and reinvesting an increasing and significant portion of those profits into R&D. Because Hasselblad's parent holding company is located in Luxembourg (coincidentally on a street named for a historical giant in the world of photography) their financial statements are publicly available. The financial statement for 2023 won't be publicly released until later this year, but highlights from those most recently available are summarized below...

The point is that DJI essentially has a monopoly on the consumer drone side and they’re competitive in the video space for products and accessories - none of that directly applies to how Hasselblad is being run as it’s a different division.

I may write more about this later, but Hasselblad is not a division of DJI. It's a subsidiary of a parent holding company located in Luxembourg (established by the private equity company which previously owned Hasselblad) in which DJI indirectly owns the majority shares thru a separate investment entity established in the British Virgin Islands. DJI is the ultimate parent company thru its indirect channels of investment in Hasselblad's parent holding company and its stock, but as a subsidiary rather than a division Hasselblad and DJI are separate legal and financial corporate business entities.

To some the terms 'subsidiary vs division' may sound like a distinction without a difference, but legally and financially they are distinctly different and separate in important ways. DJI acquired controlling interest in Hasselblad at the beginning of 2017 and as a result control of its executive board. They remain, however, distinct individual companies with separate product lines, finances, income, expenses, liabilities, assets, and accounting.

 

[TechTalk]

So, back to the original question, which was really directed at current and prospective owners of the Hasselblad X system. There are two issues. First, I do not believe that the continuing lack of availability of XCD lenses, particularly the newer V series XCD lenses, implies that Hasselblad's future is somehow problematic. To the contrary, I believe the X2D has proven to be wildly successful. Well beyond Hasselblad's most optimistic projections. For every X2D Hasselblad sells, there is new demand for XCD lenses. The problem is that, while Hassleblad can control the pipeline for the production of X2D bodies, because it manufactures them, it can't unilaterally control the pipeline for XCD lenses. All of the XCD lenses are made for Hasselblad by third parties. I certainly understand the frustration of those that buy into the XCD system and can't get the lenses they need on a reasonable time frame. I would feel exactly the same.

I think that's likely a realistic picture of the situation with lens production and demand cycles. New products generate spikes in demand which are sometimes difficult for a large manufacturer and perhaps more so for a low volume manufacturer like Hasselblad.

Additionally, their lens supplier manufactures other products in addition to what Hasselblad orders. This means less control over production schedules which could affect supply. Patience, it's said, is a virtue and one with its own reward — but none of us like waiting for backordered products and I've waited on many of them over the years from a lot of manufacturers.

 

[Doppler9000]

I think that's likely a realistic picture of the situation with lens production and demand cycles. New products generate spikes in demand which are sometimes difficult for a large manufacturer and perhaps more so for a low volume manufacturer like Hasselblad.

Additionally, their lens supplier manufactures other products in addition to what Hasselblad orders. This means less control over production schedules which could affect supply. Patience, it's said, is a virtue and one with its own reward — but none of us like waiting for backordered products and I've waited on many of them over the years from a lot of manufacturers.

Your ability to keep missing the point is impressive. Hasselblad is cutting supplies to retailers and selling direct to consumers. This has nothing to do with production, it is about a fundamental change in Hasselblad’s business model. Patience won’t restore the critical revenue losses this diversion caused for the retailers, will it?

 

[Paul Spinnler]

To keep it short: What counts in business is ultimate control which leads to consolidation. Intermediate HoldCos are usually for tax purposes (dividends to extract profits, loans to provide capital) and transfer pricing (intra group invoicing). Division is a managerial and financial reporting term where the scope varies business by business; and Hasselblad most certainly is a so-called "BU" business unit within DJI. When you control you call the shots, including strategy, capital allocation etc. Legally you do it by Board representation and placement of managers. In practice by picking up the phone and telling people what to do, too. Business (model) strategy is usually defined by the owner via board representation. Changing the distribution model for the whole business is a board topic ...