Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

* * WHY does Red Equipment NOT hold its VALUE ??

George D. said:
PS - The reason I ask this, is because it continues to depress me that we paid over $25,000.oo of VERY hard earned cash for a Red-One Camera Body that today I could buy for $4,000.oo. What an incredible f***ing waste of our money. :(

Don't get me wrong. We absolutely LOVE the cameras and do not regret getting them. What we DO regret is the lose of money. It's as bad, or worse, than the money we lost off our Mutual Funds several years ago when everything crashed.
Click to expand...

One simple answer: if you're concerned, from day to day, year to year, how much your used equipment would be worth if you sold it tomorrow, you're in the wrong business.

$25k for a Red One? You should have made that back many many times over. The important question is, how much did it earn you over those four years, not what is it worth today. It's cash flow, not present value.

You should be thinking: "This is a key component of my business. How much would it cost me if I had to replace it tomorrow?"

It's the same as any cutting-edge digital system; you can reckon on it being worth half what you paid for it in 18-24 months, down to 20% after 4 years, with a tail thereafter.

This isn't rocket science :-)

Mike
 
Just to add to this falling price forum.. You have to consider that the choice of cameras from just a few years ago that give you that "film look" is much greater today than just a short time ago...
We now have many cameras that although are not the same on features that some others have ,the general look gives a lot of productions the ability to choose from many cameras that some would say look similar in general.. 5D's, BM, C300, C500, D6, and many more,,,,the list is growing.
Its not just regular depreciation but slicing the pie thiner at the same time,,
 
jimhare said:
Another thing to consider George is we are at a point unlike any in history. The industry is not like it was 5 years ago, and not even recognizable to what it was a decade or two ago.

Competitors can move much faster than they used to catching up to a good idea. When the Red 1 came out it really shook up the market.

At that time Sony was trying to get $ 1/4 million for their wares and many of us were shooting some form of DV.

Today BM has a 1080P camera for $995, you can buy an Alexa body for $30k and DaVinci is a free download if you don't need the panel.

You have gotten heavily into the Red camp, which is a truly wonderful place to be, but to suggest that Red is the only place owners are seeing a drop in asset worth simply is not the case.

Personally I feel for F23 owners who are still paying off a 10 year loan on a brick.

At least our cost of entry was so low there wasn't far to fall.

Most importantly of all, I consider all my Red gear being free since I've made a lot of dough using it. Yes, yes, that reward was for my time and talent, but having the best tools gave me the confidence to pursue and get higher quality work than I otherwise would have plus my reputation went up immediately.

Today there are many many choices for those making the leap to high end vision, and Red is still one of the best. That shows they are willing to make the tough decisions to adapt to the market rather than fade away.

The only way to stop price drops is to stop competition, but that's how Red started in the first place. :emote_happyhappy:
Click to expand...

Thanks for your response Jim, and everyone's.

It is much clearer and more obvious now what happened and what we are all up against. But, as you said, compared to the other cameras out there, the "point of entry" into the Red world was much more affordable, and has now surpassed all others in my opinion.

As far as I'm concerned, Red and Red products, are going to revolutionize the cinema industry and those of us that shoot with them are going to be on the top of the heap. That alone, makes it worth any depreciation, which, as has been said here, is inevitable in today's market of racing technology.

Thanks to every one. You're the best.

Hugs to you all,

George

.
 
George D. said:
PS - The reason I ask this, is because it continues to depress me that we paid over $25,000.oo of VERY hard earned cash for a Red-One Camera Body that today I could buy for $4,000.oo. What an incredible f***ing waste of our money. :(
Click to expand...

Why did you buy a camera and not gold if you invested in an object for static storage?
 
Think of it this way, if you need a camera, that particular one, and it costs $20,000 to buy versus, let's say, $500/day to rent... then in only 40 days of using the camera, it would probably make more sense to own it than to rent it. In other words, if you need that tool, you have to figure it's going to cost something to get ahold of it. Now if you can get it to pay for itself through the work it generates, that's even better, but at some point, it just comes down to needing that tool to get the job done. If a carpenter needs a hammer, he doesn't question how much he can resell that hammer for in two years because he's not going to be doing any work without it anyway. I know the camera is a much bigger investment, and yes, it's good business sense to have a plan for paying it off -- and with electronic goods you have a naturally short time-span to get a return on your investment -- but at some point, the fact that you need that particular tool to get the job done is a more immediate concern than the investment issue.

People have said that my house was a good investment but since I don't plan on selling it anytime soon, that's sort of moot -- I need a place to live in, and it's cheaper than renting in the long term.

I have a little E-PL3 Olympus camera that I think cost me $700 or more, and I was wondering if it was worth selling to upgrade to the E-PL5... found out that within only a year or so, that camera is only worth about $100 now. But hey, I got it to take pictures with, and I did, so I feel I got my money's worth out of it.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
Think of it this way, if you need a camera, that particular one, and it costs $20,000 to buy versus, let's say, $500/day to rent... then in only 40 days of using the camera, it would probably make more sense to own it than to rent it. In other words, if you need that tool, you have to figure it's going to cost something to get ahold of it. Now if you can get it to pay for itself through the work it generates, that's even better, but at some point, it just comes down to needing that tool to get the job done. If a carpenter needs a hammer, he doesn't question how much he can resell that hammer for in two years because he's not going to be doing any work without it anyway. I know the camera is a much bigger investment, and yes, it's good business sense to have a plan for paying it off -- and with electronic goods you have a naturally short time-span to get a return on your investment -- but at some point, the fact that you need that particular tool to get the job done is a more immediate concern than the investment issue.

People have said that my house was a good investment but since I don't plan on selling it anytime soon, that's sort of moot -- I need a place to live in, and it's cheaper than renting in the long term.

I have a little E-PL3 Olympus camera that I think cost me $700 or more, and I was wondering if it was worth selling to upgrade to the E-PL5... found out that within only a year or so, that camera is only worth about $100 now. But hey, I got it to take pictures with, and I did, so I feel I got my money's worth out of it.
Click to expand...

Right on David.

I agree 100%.

The only reason I asked the original question in the first place was out of curiosity.

In response to those requiring a quick return on their investment, that does not apply in our case. We shoot documentaries, and very specialized ones at that. And some can take many, many years to complete. If we want to do a crappy job, sure we can get them out faster. But, THAT is not our style. Striving for perfection is our style, even though in reality, it is unattainable.

The fun, the joy, and the happiness, is in the creating!

Later,

George

.
 
George D. said:
The reason I ask this, is because it continues to depress me that we paid over $25,000.oo of VERY hard earned cash for a Red-One Camera Body that today I could buy for $4,000.oo. What an incredible f***ing waste of our money. :(
.
Click to expand...

Because technology is evolving faster and faster. Just look at other technologies around you, they get cheaper faster and faster by each iteration. Companies that survive manage to do so by selling updated tech frequently holding the same price each iteration. Red came on board as the first company to bring what they brought. Because of that, their technology had it's price at the time being. You are actaully talking about five years of development with other companies jumping on board and competing during this time. Is it such a surprise that the price dropped heavily, really?

Buying expensive digital technology is ALWAYS a waste of money if doesn't bring you back tenfold, there is no such thing as sustainability. Looking at Arri who overcharge their Alexa so much I'm surprised that there are people even wanting to own them and I'm also surprised that people think that this kind of technology will hold for years to come.

This kind of expensive technology is always better to rent, always. I personally would never buy technology that isn't so cheap that it doesn't matter if I get the money back or not.
Because whenever I really need an Epic for something I will rent it, why buy it? I can buy a Blackmagic 4K camera instead for those less demanding jobs.

Stop buying equipment if you are so surprised that the prices drop, it will never get any better for you, only worse.
 
Christoffer Glans said:
Stop buying equipment if you are so surprised that the prices drop, it will never get any better for you, only worse.
Click to expand...

I think you better re-read my original question and additional comments before you put in your two cents worth.

I do NOT buy equipment for it's resale value. I buy it for what it can do for me and the industry.

Over and out.

Enough is enough!

I'm outa here.

.
 
George D. said:
Not really! The Scarlet and Epic are dropping like rocks as well.

I'll bet you that in 2-3 more years, you can buy an Epic for $5,000.oo. Wait and see. :(

.
Click to expand...

guaranteed


we have reached the pinnacle of image quality...gimmicks aside


its no longer special... and cameras will only get cheaper and cheaper...
 
Zakaree Sandberg said:
guaranteed


we have reached the pinnacle of image quality...gimmicks aside


its no longer special... and cameras will only get cheaper and cheaper...
Click to expand...

And, if Sony brings a new piece at IBC, to complement/replace F55, look for another price drop across the board, from nearly everyone. Depending...

Thank you very much

Fury
 
The market for used Red gear is a lot smaller than other tech companies, therefore there is less demand, lower prices. DSLR bodies hold their price pretty well because they are easy to use, cheaper to get into and they have photography as a second market. Red cameras are for very specific use hence less need.
 
Purchasing cameras / gear is about having clients that will pay for that gear now. When RED entered the scene in 2007 there were a lot of people that bought cameras because they thought having this new tool would bring work in as if clients would flock from everywhere just to work with the tool. What many of those folks came to realize was that wasn't the case and a camera no matter how new and cool, did not instantly make them a better photographer and or give them many more consistent clients they could count on to pay the camera bill they financed to begin with. This IMO, is where the brand started to become a very reputably "cheap" brand and it started happening in just a few months after cameras were shipping.
I have a friend who makes the majority of his living in the corporate world, interviews simple shoot, edit, out the door and onto the next. He decided to purchase the Canon C300 as an upgrade to his previous sony model which had ROI'd many, many times over for him. Of course his purchase of the C300 was a very carefully thought out one. He already had secured with a local running internet show in the area a 4-6 day a month rental on the system which was more than enough to pay for the camera note. The rest of the days of the month he would use it as owner operator with his current clients which were happy to pay him only an extra $150/day more than the previous model for the image quality bump he was providing and over just a few months the camera was completely paid off and is now going to earn him money for another 2 years without question. When he has a higher profile job he rents for the day and charges a premium on top of the camera rental as if it were his camera. Do you think he cares what the resale value of his camera is going to be in 2 years when he is ready to upgrade cameras again? Probably not. This is the kind of scenario every owner / op should examine as the right way to ROI there purchase. There was no guessing whether or not he could potentially pay it off. There was never a question because he did his homework and waited until he was sure it would not just be paid off but would be very profitable which is the whole point of investing in any gear.
 
Paul Watt said:
I guess it would be a waste of money if you bought a RED One and didn't use it to make money. But hopefully you did, and you got a discount on an Epic that made you more money, that you can upgrade to Dragon, and make more money. Also, if you had bought an Arri 435 10 years ago for $125 000, you'd be disappointed to see it's now worth around 10 grand. And a 5 year old Sony F35 new for $200 000 is now going for $12 000. All how ya look at it I guess.
Click to expand...
This is all very true. I think you could also say, "hey, the $5000 Mac I bought in 2006 is now not even worth $1000." Which is very true. As digital cameras have essentially become computers with pickups and lenses, it figures that their perceived value inevitably goes down over time, as technology advances.

Some stuff holds its values for decades, particularly lights and lenses (and in the case of sound, microphones). I know of some digital audio recorders that cost $15,000 ten years ago, and it's hard to get $5000 for them today. Times change.
 
F35 kits can be had for under $8500 now. F900 kits are $1200. I think RED equipment is holding up quite well. In fact, I think it's rather admirable as to how RED is handling the whole obsolescence thing... Trade-in a RED One body for original purchase price. Allowing us to upgrade sensors, first in the RED One, now in the EPIC/ Scarlet. Trade in Scarlet toward EPIC, etc.. wow.

I think I own every model of Nikon DSLR body. Couldn't even give away most of them these days. Same with most every other consumer/ prosumer camera or camcorder I have. Not worth the box they're sitting in. Actually I've purged most of my stash this past year. Not getting much of anything for this stuff, but it's better than throwing it in a dumpster...
 
Zakaree Sandberg said:
guaranteed


we have reached the pinnacle of image quality...gimmicks aside


its no longer special... and cameras will only get cheaper and cheaper...
Click to expand...

I disagree about the pinnacle of image quality and I find it profoundly weird when people say that over and over, every generation.

Open your eyes and look around at the world you're in. Can your camera replicate precisely what you see? We've still got quite a ways to go before we hit that pinnacle.

Of course everyone should agree that cameras will get cheaper and cheaper. But don't fret. There will always be a new bit of tech running at top dollar. And chances are, as you're on this forum, you'll probably want to own a bit of whatever that is too. I know I will.
 
Rob Anderson said:
Open your eyes and look around at the world you're in. Can your camera replicate precisely what you see? We've still got quite a ways to go before we hit that pinnacle.
Click to expand...

But we can now shoot digital that does not look like shit, in fact we can shoot digital that looks as good as colour film did already in the sixties, or as black and white did decades earlier. Thats quite a treshold. Why not shut the eyes to the real world and open them to the world of cinema?
 
George D. said:
I think you better re-read my original question and additional comments before you put in your two cents worth.

I do NOT buy equipment for it's resale value. I buy it for what it can do for me and the industry.

Over and out.

Enough is enough!

I'm outa here.

.
Click to expand...

No need to be dramatic about it, you are angry because the things you bought doesn't hold the valute you'd like. Even though you don't buy it for the resale value your argument is still just about that, why the price of your equipment is so low now. It doesn't seem to matter to you that of all the digital imagery technologies out there, the original Red One still holds the fort compared to them, it's one of the best technological investments you've made. Do you really think that the much more expensive Alexa will hold better? Only fullHD and big as hell? People who bought that will indeed feel screwed over when 4K cameras with better DR and image quality for something like 3000 USD rolls out during the coming years. The Blackmagic 4K production camera might be close to the quality of that camera and coming iterations of it will definetely be. So, does your opinion on Arri equipment still stand?

And of course, even though you don't buy equipment for resale value, why do you still have to own it? You can still make your stuff with rented equipment and if you have so much work to do with it, then your camera should have been paid back a thousandfold during the last five years, right?

My super computer from 2005 which was one of the most expensive investments I've ever done is useless today, or at least it's value is less then my Iphone. Don't ever make the mistake of thinking a digital investment will hold for years, the only thing that might hold value is property and real estate or purely mechanical equipment with proper maintenance.
 
The cameras might devalue, but my 5K stock I've been gattering trough almost 2 years certainly didn't and with 4K coming in strengh, it might actually RAISE its value. This is a first for every single camera I owned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top