Nikon statement Thailand flooding

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 12:11:16 +0100, Bruce wrote:
: Sounds very bad indeed. This factory makes all Nikon DX DSLRs:
:
: [Company statement omitted]

Seriously, how could this happen? If this were a mom-and-pop operation making
lens cozies or something, I could understand and sympathize. But for a
billion-dollar corporation, in a savagely competitive industry and with
important market share to protect, to set itself up with a single point of
failure in a critical product line is simply mind-boggling.

We've been ridiculing Olympus for the recent scandal that has hammered their
stock price. But really all they have to do is roll a few more heads, call in
competent independent auditors to sort things out, and put the issue behind
them. Evidently Nikon has no such option. This looks like management
malfeasance on a world-class scale.

Bob

Robert Coe wrote:
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 12:11:16 +0100, Bruce
wrote:
Sounds very bad indeed. This factory makes all Nikon DX DSLRs:

[Company statement omitted]

Seriously, how could this happen? If this were a mom-and-pop
operation making lens cozies or something, I could understand and
sympathize. But for a billion-dollar corporation, in a savagely
competitive industry and with important market share to protect, to
set itself up with a single point of failure in a critical product
line is simply mind-boggling.

We've been ridiculing Olympus for the recent scandal that has
hammered their stock price. But really all they have to do is roll a
few more heads, call in competent independent auditors to sort things
out, and put the issue behind them. Evidently Nikon has no such
option. This looks like management malfeasance on a world-class scale.

Bob

It's a ****ing FLOOD, Bob. F-L-O-O-D, flood. "Management malfeasance" my
ass.

Sheesh.

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 14:32:37 -0400, "Neil Harrington" wrote:
: Robert Coe wrote:
: On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 12:11:16 +0100, Bruce
: wrote:
: Sounds very bad indeed. This factory makes all Nikon DX DSLRs:
:
: [Company statement omitted]
:
: Seriously, how could this happen? If this were a mom-and-pop
: operation making lens cozies or something, I could understand and
: sympathize. But for a billion-dollar corporation, in a savagely
: competitive industry and with important market share to protect, to
: set itself up with a single point of failure in a critical product
: line is simply mind-boggling.
:
: We've been ridiculing Olympus for the recent scandal that has
: hammered their stock price. But really all they have to do is roll a
: few more heads, call in competent independent auditors to sort things
: out, and put the issue behind them. Evidently Nikon has no such
: option. This looks like management malfeasance on a world-class scale.
:
: Bob
:
: It's a ****ing FLOOD, Bob. F-L-O-O-D, flood. "Management malfeasance" my
: ass.
:
: Sheesh.

They built the one factory making one of their most profitable and competitive
product lines in a flood plain. If that doesn't fit your definition of
management malfeasance, by all means have it your way.

Bob

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 15:27:04 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 14:32:37 -0400, "Neil Harrington" wrote:
: Robert Coe wrote:
: On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 12:11:16 +0100, Bruce
: wrote:
: Sounds very bad indeed. This factory makes all Nikon DX DSLRs:
:
: [Company statement omitted]
:
: Seriously, how could this happen? If this were a mom-and-pop
: operation making lens cozies or something, I could understand and
: sympathize. But for a billion-dollar corporation, in a savagely
: competitive industry and with important market share to protect, to
: set itself up with a single point of failure in a critical product
: line is simply mind-boggling.
:
: We've been ridiculing Olympus for the recent scandal that has
: hammered their stock price. But really all they have to do is roll a
: few more heads, call in competent independent auditors to sort things
: out, and put the issue behind them. Evidently Nikon has no such
: option. This looks like management malfeasance on a world-class scale.
:
: Bob
:
: It's a ****ing FLOOD, Bob. F-L-O-O-D, flood. "Management malfeasance" my
: ass.
:
: Sheesh.

They built the one factory making one of their most profitable and competitive
product lines in a flood plain. If that doesn't fit your definition of
management malfeasance, by all means have it your way.

Bob

Like all those high rise buildings located on the San Andreas fault,
we all know a BIg one is coming.

Robert Coe wrote:

They built the one factory making one of their most profitable and competitive
product lines in a flood plain. If that doesn't fit your definition of
management malfeasance, by all means have it your way.

That's not a very clueful comment.

Disaster/Risk management is a skilled art, and Nikon
without any doubt has executive level management people
who are very careful about what the company does.

Your view is that the company should diversify the
product or product lines that *you* are interested in;
and frankly that would be an absurd tact for Nikon to
take. Product lines are concentrated for efficient
production and maximum profit.

But didn't you notice that Nikon has major production
facilities spread out in Japan, Thailand and China (at
least, and probably other locations too)? The point is
*not* to protect any given product, but rather to
protect the investment of the stockholders.

Losing a product for some period of time is acceptable.
Losing the whole company is not, and making a profit is
required. Nikon's diversification is clearly designed
to protect Nikon integrity even in the event of multiple
or wide spread disasters. Which is to say, at this
point it is very obvious that they were indeed well
prepared.

My bet is that the more junior level executives at Nikon who
were in charge of disaster planning are probably going to be
the next generation of Senior Executives, simply because they
have proven to be far sighted.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

Irwell wrote:
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 15:27:04 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 14:32:37 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:
Robert Coe wrote:
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 12:11:16 +0100, Bruce
wrote:
Sounds very bad indeed. This factory makes all Nikon DX DSLRs:

[Company statement omitted]

Seriously, how could this happen? If this were a mom-and-pop
operation making lens cozies or something, I could understand and
sympathize. But for a billion-dollar corporation, in a savagely
competitive industry and with important market share to protect, to
set itself up with a single point of failure in a critical product
line is simply mind-boggling.

We've been ridiculing Olympus for the recent scandal that has
hammered their stock price. But really all they have to do is roll
a few more heads, call in competent independent auditors to sort
things out, and put the issue behind them. Evidently Nikon has no
such option. This looks like management malfeasance on a
world-class scale.

Bob

It's a ****ing FLOOD, Bob. F-L-O-O-D, flood. "Management
malfeasance" my ass.

Sheesh.

They built the one factory making one of their most profitable and
competitive product lines in a flood plain. If that doesn't fit your
definition of management malfeasance, by all means have it your way.

Bob

Like all those high rise buildings located on the San Andreas fault,
we all know a BIg one is coming.

More management malfeasance. Where will it all end?

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 12:34:21 -0800, (Floyd L. Davidson)
wrote:
: Robert Coe wrote:
:
: They built the one factory making one of their most profitable and
: competitive product lines in a flood plain. If that doesn't fit your
: definition of management malfeasance, by all means have it your way.
:
: That's not a very clueful comment.
:
: Disaster/Risk management is a skilled art, and Nikon
: without any doubt has executive level management people
: who are very careful about what the company does.
:
: Your view is that the company should diversify the
: product or product lines that *you* are interested in;
: and frankly that would be an absurd tact for Nikon to
: take. Product lines are concentrated for efficient
: production and maximum profit.

I'm not interested in any of them. I'm a Canonian. My last Nikon was an F-2.
Various attitudes and prejudices may motivate my opinion on this subject, but
conflict of interest is not a factor.

: But didn't you notice that Nikon has major production
: facilities spread out in Japan, Thailand and China (at
: least, and probably other locations too)? The point is
: *not* to protect any given product, but rather to
: protect the investment of the stockholders.
:
: Losing a product for some period of time is acceptable.
: Losing the whole company is not, and making a profit is
: required. Nikon's diversification is clearly designed
: to protect Nikon integrity even in the event of multiple
: or wide spread disasters. Which is to say, at this
: point it is very obvious that they were indeed well
: prepared.

Unless press reports, and Nikon's own apologies, understate the gravity of the
situation, I'd say they're well prepared to lose market share to their
competitors over the next three to six months.

: My bet is that the more junior level executives at Nikon who
: were in charge of disaster planning are probably going to be
: the next generation of Senior Executives, simply because they
: have proven to be far sighted.

If you say so.

Bob