Jorge, I'm not sure what Government Intervention has to do with this specific discussion. I'd agree that there are corporations that have thrived or stayed the course for decades. However, it doesn't insulate them from sudden shifts in market directions which is the topic here as far as I can tell.
Great brands can fall behind by burying their head in the sand, or while playing a "wait and see" game of brinkmanship, then suddenly make the most obvious blunders. Hasselblad is an example we all are familiar with.
RE: Chart ... Mirror-less and premium fixed lens may be growing in share ... but it is just a bit bigger slice out of a quickly shrinking pie.
For "other fixed lens" to have lost 60 to 65% of sales in 4 years, while not surprising, is revealing. Traditionally, this category was profitable and helped fund the R&D for the DSLR developments ... so 2010/11 helped pay for innovations in the following few years. What will fund it now?
Canon and Nikon probably make up a vast majority of the DSLR pie, while Sony, Fuji, Olympus, Sigma never had that big a share of DSLRs, if any ... but were ahead of the Canon and Nikon in innovative smaller cameras, and now dictate the rules of engagement in the marketplace. It's a world turned upside down.
Since Sony doesn't make traditional DSLRs anymore, they can concentrate on selling as many mirror-less cameras to those willing to shell out $1.5K to $2.5K every five minutes ... then vary the products just enough to sell them more than one camera at a time. It's a sweet deal for them as long as the consumer cooperates. Despite rumors, I'm starting to wonder whether my so called technologically aging A99 will actually ever be replaced, not that it isn't just fine as is.
I guess we'll see where this all goes.
- Marc