In article , Gordon Moat
writes

The interesting point about this is that Zeiss find enough of a market
to enter into new developments. They seem far less concerned about
growth in an industry, than about picking a niche and exploiting it. We
all know that every industry cannot sustain incrementally larger growth
year after year, but many commenting on internet forums only discuss
so-called "growth" industries. Probably even the best fan of film usage
would tell you that they know film is not a growth industry.

I am glad there are still choices. If we just looked at growth
companies, then we need to only buy Toyotas, since they are the top
seller now. We should also only use Microsoft products, and Dell
computers, because those are also the only growth companies in that
industry. These and many other choices could be termed going with the
market leaders. Want a digital camera, then in the US Kodak is the top
seller, while in other parts of the world Sony is the top seller; of
course that could become Samsung or Panasonic in the near future . . .
everyone probably gets these points.

Those who would dismiss the latest Zeiss endeavours will completely
miss the point that they are not making new cameras and new lenses to
dominate a market, nor to create unsustainable growth, nor to become a
market leader in photography. Zeiss make enough in revenues from other
industries that they can afford to generate a small profit from a
niche. I am certainly glad they took this path.

Probably because, AIUI, Zeiss are owned by a charitable foundation, thus
don't have the same short-term profit motive of the large stock exchange
listed companies.

David
--
David Littlewood