Eryc Tramonn
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2007
- Messages
- 795
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
I hear you. But you also have to look at that statement -- $300? I really don't think RED would jeopardize their philosophy over a $300 add on. In the most basic sense, the camera system is worth a lot more than that.
And at a certain point, the camera itself can even be a loss leader (depending on the hands it falls into) -- at this juncture, it may be more important to have capable people using it and building the RED brand, and have the tool be truly beneficial to those adopters.
I'm sure there is a valid reason for the module -- whatever that may be -- and not merely an attempt to gouge owners for another $300. Why they're not commenting on it -- who knows. But for us to speculate, and offer a negative rationale on top of that, doesn't really get us anywhere. Especially in light of all the great things that RED has done to support owners.
I'm just saying, the negativity doesn't seem to fit. There's likely a legitimate reason.
And at a certain point, the camera itself can even be a loss leader (depending on the hands it falls into) -- at this juncture, it may be more important to have capable people using it and building the RED brand, and have the tool be truly beneficial to those adopters.
I'm sure there is a valid reason for the module -- whatever that may be -- and not merely an attempt to gouge owners for another $300. Why they're not commenting on it -- who knows. But for us to speculate, and offer a negative rationale on top of that, doesn't really get us anywhere. Especially in light of all the great things that RED has done to support owners.
I'm just saying, the negativity doesn't seem to fit. There's likely a legitimate reason.