Ex Olympus CEO Mr. Woodford speaks to FT: “They told me to catch a bus to the airport”


Olympus shares dropped by 17,61% after the recent CEO dismissal (Soruce: Bloomberg).

Ex Olympus CEO Mr. Woodford has been interviewed by the Financial Times (Click here) and what you read is really giving you an idea of how bad things are ongoing at Olympus. Woodford checked the past acquisition strategy from Olympus and discovered that “large amounts of money seemed to have “disappeared” into the hands of poorly vetted outside financial advisers and investment vehicles.” and “a catalogue of calamitous errors and exceptionally poor judgment which … has resulted in the destruction of shareholder value of $1.3bn“.
And how did Olympus react? They told them to “to catch a bus to the airport“.

Editor’s note: I am not “for” nor “against” Mr Woodford. I am only reporting what he told about Olympus. And it is really not a good news!

  • Chick

    Can’t say I’m surprised by any of this.

  • 34343434343

    well that is not really news….

  • stonebat

    Glad I don’t own any Oly gear.

    • blastingmills

      I’m glad I do own Oly gear…multiple HG and SHG lenses. The prices on these amazing lenses keeps going up, even with all the doom and gloom. good luck purchasing the 14-70 f2 SHG at this point.

    • jeanpi

      I’m glad I do own Oly gear too, is more, soon acquire the much-postponed Zuiko 50-200

  • 34343434343

    In the Gyrus case, the documents show that Olympus paid $687m to a Cayman Islands-registered company, AXAM, that had been named as a financial adviser but whose ultimate owners were never ascertained by Olympus. The company disappeared from the trade register three months after receiving its final payment from Olympus, Mr Woodford said. The amount paid represented about a third of the $2.2bn acquisition price.”


    • flash

      You should not quote the FT they do not like that, I am sure you saw the warning. Copyright violations are as poor or worst then hiring a Financial advisrer from the Cayman islands.

      • Mikos

        Don’t be silly. Quoting a handful of words from an article does not constitute copyright infringement.

      • Jorge

        And doesn’t FT quote anybody in their articles? This is ridiculous.

        • flash

          They do not cut and paste entire paragraphs with out attribution or acknowledgement. They also copyright all their items. They quote sources of interviews or original data, not other news media articles. Their reporting is intellectual property.

          They also freely let us link to their stories. As such respecting their property is not to much to ask.

          • Chez Wimpy

            “They do not cut and paste entire paragraphs with out attribution or acknowledgement.”

            Hardly… the fact that the post was *in quotes* left it obvious the source was the article in question. Without getting needlessly pedantic.

            “Their reporting is intellectual property.”

            LOL. A poster quoting relevant sections for discussion purposes is well within the realm of fair use. Either that, or my post now has infringed on YOUR IP :p

            • flash

              Don’t worry what I write online here is not copyrighted (or even really intellectual) even if it was I would not pursue legal action as it is not of any financial value to me and I am very easy going now and would not consider suing for anything in which their was no intent to harm me. I cant say the same for any of the online newspapers though; as they have taken action against websites in the past and shut them down.

              “Fair use” does not cover quotes without any editorial content. It might not be fair, but those who buy ink by the barrel make the rules in this as always.

              • crumbs

                I don’t think you understand copyright law

              • dumbo

                i wonder if this applies to comments posted by the public or just websites which have taken the content and used it to make that said website´s content.

                how could the ft or any one prove that 34343434343 is anyone, as there is no login process here.

                but i can certainly understand that a website like 43rumors or engadget or any blog posts a direct quote as part of their feed. this would and should be classified as stolen content.

                certainly has made for an interesting debate

                • flash

                  Copyright is different in different countries, as the first w in www stands for world you are more or less set to the lowest common denominator.

                  For example, even contrasting Canadian law to US law you will find that the Canadian Government can copyright its own works and the US can not. The “fair use” exception mention above is US law not anywhere else, some other countries have similar exemptions but are not as broad. The US fair use while it is in the US code it is only a paragraph or two, and is decided by case law (which the exemption seems to get more narrow all the time). I do not think even that statue give any exception to the cut and paste.

                  I am by know means an expert on copyright, my knowledge was one course long before the more restrictive US Digital Millennium Copyright Act and other similar acts expanding the copyright laws were enacted.

                  I really did not mean to criticize 3434… (I acknowledge that I did unintentionally), but just to warn that cut and paste needs to be done with some care. I do feel the Financial Times is nice in letting us view its articles online with out directly charging us to view, unlike a bunch of other newspapers, so following their restrictions is not that bad http://www.ft.com/intl/servicestools/help/copyright ; which the administrator did in his quotes. How their policy follows the law in the about 200 countries in the world would be hard to tell.

    • SteveO

      Yet Olympus’ claims it was all perfectly legal. Right. What board members pockets were lined by kick backs?

      Based on what’s been brought to light so far, this board and Kikukuya (or whatever the seeming criminal in chief is called) should all be tossed out immediately and under a full criminal investigation. If not criminals, they’re utterly incompetent, but that seems too much of a stretch.

      This all raises the question of whether they’ve also been cooking the books. How much has Imaging truly lost, or has the division simply been a convenient place to hide the outgoing tide of money?

      Meanwhile, they sell cameras with 4 year old sensors at premium prices, charge a $200 premium for a body with a tilt (not even flip) LCD with a 2.4″ usable screen area, and have no model with a small built-in EVF. And they abandon they’re 4/3’s user base, leaving them without affordable fully usable up-to-date bodies for their HG lenses.

      A once proud company which by all appearances has gone bad. Love to see Olympus step down off their throne and fully rebut Woodford’s claims. Until this happens, the cloud will remain.

      • flash


        All this happen 4 years ago long before mft. You know when the Olympus sensor was state of the art. The camera division is just the tail on the dog, as far as size.

      • WT21

        Love how you weaseled in your complaint of the choice of flip screen into a larger discussion of corporate malfeasance. Priceless.

      • Gam

        Yet, in all of its seemingly “incompetent” management skills, Oly has been able to pump out camera after camera in its m43 range, in keeping with the trend along with its competition, some slick cameras that are very attractive. So what’s all the fuss?

  • Rich

    It is a great News!

    New discount is ahead for Olympus E5!!! New Olympus cameras will roll out within 6-12 month to prove the new japanese boss’ achievement!

    Photographic cameras and optics are the root of Olympus company. Even at loss, Olympus will still keep its designing and manufacturing capacity. Some Westerner managers would cut the camera making portion for the sake of share price objective in the short term, however, once cut, it would be difficult to rebuilt and to keep the same clientele and user base in the long run.

    I will predict that new cameras will come out and the discount for E5 is ahead as the company is in need for cash to finance the next round of new products.


  • henrik

    Q: How trustworthy is Mr Woodford?

    • Holuko

      well genius you don´t have to trust him.

      what he said can be checked by everyone….

    • DonTom

      More trustworthy than a Cayman Island financial advisor, for sure…….

    • OlyFan

      The man has put in 30 years in Olympus! 30 years! If the management asked him to take a hike, he really must have been onto something!
      Its a pity to see Oly stoop to such low standards (IF everything Mr.Woodford says is true ofcourse).

  • Rich

    Ex Olympus CEO Mr. Woodford should have done it the other way:

    Be more constructive to build new marketable products rather than look for troubles of the ex-boss has done. So during this British CEO’s 10 month, there was no improvement in share prices nor products market shares nor user satisfactions.

    Stupid E5 pricing strategy have made many users upset. E5 should have sold a lot of better if priced (in line with Nikon D7000 or Pentax K5) at $1250 rather than $1700, considering many of us have paid fully for the E3 already. E5 is just an E3 reworked.

    • WT21

      Do you have idea on how to actually run a company?

      He may have been under tight fiscal constraints, no cash flow, maybe even orders to lay off (as we’ve seen in their support organization). You can’t just “build new products” if the company has been p*ssing away it’s cash.

      • Anonymous


        My feeling exactly. From the start Olympus has no desire to sell many E-5s, it is priced out of many Olympus users’ reach.

        My only dslr is a e-510, the reason I bought it because it was reasonably priced at the time, and it has a few innovative features that I WANT.

        I am a potential Oly customer, yet Oly does not want to sell me a E-5 by pricing as a DREAM machine, and it is the only 4/3 camera; if I do not want a m4/3, Oly will lose a customer.

        How can Oly’s camera division be profitable if it does not want to sell products to old customers, and new customers?

  • what a mess..it really puts me off from buying an Olympus, ever

    • Anonymous said:

      “How can Oly’s camera division be profitable if it does not want to sell products to old customers, and new customers?”

      You have it partially wrong.

      Olympus has absolutely no desire to sell the E5 to any new 4/3 customers.

      The E5 was designed to make some easy money from existing 4/3 customers who had already invested in very expensive Zuiko HG and SHG lenses.

      You are right about one thing…. the E5 is nothing more than an E3 Mark II, which is why it was so cheap to produce. The fact that it has a better sensor than the E3 provides the only real upgrade path for users heavily invested in 4/3 lenses. It is probably the most profitable camera (per unit) that Olympus has produced in their history.

      Olympus also has no desire to attract “value customers” who bought those E510 two lens kits for $500. They are done with product discounting and price competition. Please note that an EP3 with two kit lenses and an EVF costs around $1400 now, making similar speced entry level DSLR kits from Canon, Nikon, Sony and Pentax look like incredible bargains.

  • flash

    As I said in the other article here “Olympus removes first non Japanese CEO after 6 months (because of cultural differences)” is it “sour grapes” or settling old scores that made him bring up transitions that happen multi-years ago? Check my posts about my changing opinion of him. Unless there was criminal evidence, on behalf of Olympus or its board members, which no one suggested, this will not have any long term negative effects on the cameras. In fact, they may just put a renewed interest in the camera division. He should of been let go IMHO, a new CEO needs to look at the future not the past.

    • WT21

      What if his “cultural differences” is that he doesn’t look the other way at kickbacks and shady deals?

  • odsagn

    Bottom line is they make a great product. I think this will be a positive in the long run assuming these types of dealings cease. And after this very public debacle i think it will.

    I’ll continue to buy Oly since all i care about is the product. Not whether they are good investors/auditors. remember while this was going on we got some great products.

  • flash

    While Olympus was the biggest looser in the Japanese market the other day it was a very bad day for the companies we love Nikon, Samsung (despite a soon to be 2 1/2 percent reduction in US tariff on its imports there), Sony and especially Canon. I read where Canon has to move production of its better printers do to the Thailand floods, as well as pictures of a flooded Nikon plant. The floods in Thailand were devastating to that country, I did not know they were that bad listening to the news (or I should say gossip channels) here. A flood is very bad in not just the property damage and initial loss of life and limb. There are significant potential long term health problems that can be associated with it. The Thai s have successively dealt with floods longer then most countries have been in existence, so I am sure they are up to the difficult work ahead coming out of this.

    Olympus was upgrade to a buy a couple of months ago on many Financial Analyst lists but because of the latest has been put on the hold list. I am sure the market is mostly over reacting that the old management is now the new management; Japanese management strength (or weakness) has been continuity of approach and objective so I do not for see the big problem that. The stock price will change when there is a new good management put in place or till good “fundamental sock valuation” is done, but other then the stock price all is good to go. Of course I see a worldwide partial recovery to the market, led by very good Asian firms, such as Olympus. The Asian companies have the production know how, access to markets and products people want and most of their products due not have the problems of over production capability such as the worldwide automotive or textile segments.

  • WT21

    Sadly, this doesn’t make me love NEX or Samsung any more than I did yesterday. I still like my Oly products, and will continue to use them. I hope for the market’s sake, that they don’t fold their camera business. They do a lot of good work.

  • > I am not “for” nor “against” Mr Woodford.

    I was “for” him. He threatened to cut off the Imagine division what IMO could have been a very strong incentive for the division to reform itself (or face the purge).

    Otherwise, as cultural differences go, what stroke me first was his age: Woodford is young, too young. In Jap culture opinion of older person always trumps that of a younger. And since Olympus is “traditional” Jap company I can imagine that it is filled with lots of old farts who would never accept orders from not only younger person, but also a foreigner.

    IMO Oly missed their chance to reinvent themselves.

  • bilgy_no1

    What would happen if Olympus sold the Imaging division to a forward thinking and entrepreneurial bunch of people? Released from politics in such a big Japanese firm, the photographic brand could surely flourish.

    • WT21

      Do you have a buyer in mind — not just “forward thinking and entrepreneurial” but also who know cameras and who have the money to pay the price Oly is asking. Can you point to known company, entrepreneur or even a leverage buyout firm? Anyone at all? As far as I can tell, only the existing, old-school players are looking to buy other companies (e.g. Richo and Pentax). I don’t know of any new money looking to get into digital cameras.

      • No, I know of some new money that would consider getting into cameras done differently (and Lytro is an example of it actually being invested). The problem is the barriers to entry. You need a clear way around them and a clear likely market. Both are troublesome. One’s costly, the other risky.

        • WT21

          Done differently, yes. But that’s not buying Oly’s camera business. The amount of money you’d have to pay for the “same old” isn’t attracting new money that I see.

          Oh, and like you, I’d love to take over the company, but I’m a bit short on funds. Do you really have any backers — bankers, angels or whatever — that are going to give you money for an old-school camera maker?

          (edit — just saw your post. Yes, old school camera co. might buy another old school one. Maybe Panny’s just waiting for the price to drop. Then again, the Brit boss got ousted, and he was the one talking about the shake-up. Perhaps the Oly board has no desire to sell the business. It’s all conjecture at this point).

          • Could I raise money for a new tech or camera company? I believe the answer to that is yes. I’ve helped do it before, I still have many of the contacts and entry points needed, etc. In the past ten years I’ve been approached twice about running a new camera company. In both cases I’ve declined because the investor had unrealistic expectations.

            Buying an existing company to kickstart something new sounds like it would give you a leg up, but unless you’re acquiring it solely for IP rights, it can turn out to be more of a burden than a help. The only reason to buy an existing company would be to turn it around. I believe that can be done with Olympus Imaging, but it’s not a short-term project, as there’s too many things to fix (see other post).

    • Let me make it personal. Let’s say they sold the Imaging Division to me (actually to investors backing me, as I come up just a wee bit short on the cash side ;~).

      The thing is, they still have the same problems:

      * Compact cameras are losing market share with declining prices
      * They have a large overhang of earlier 4/3 lenses
      * They have a large overhang of earlier m4/3 camera bodies and kits
      * They’ve lost a lot of dealer enthusiasm in the US
      * There aren’t a lot of sensor choices available to them
      * They have an E-5 but not much else in the 4/3 world
      * They’ve pissed off their 4/3 customers
      * They’re fighting against Sony, Canon, and Nikon, with Samsung and Panasonic in the mix–all far bigger camera entities than Olympus
      * Many of the subsidiaries basically hide the imaging group under their wings (e.g., you’d have to build a new global network).

      So how the heck do you turn that around? The problem is that I don’t have a good, short-term answer. I couldn’t do it in a year. I’m not sure I could turn the ship in two years. If you let me dramatically downsize the ship I could turn it in two years, but if were to do that my investors wouldn’t want to pay as much ;~).

      To answer WT21, below, the only real likely buyer for Olympus Imaging would be Panasonic. It might let them leverage resources upward (keep the best of both sides, add engineering and marketing staff, etc.). Fujifilm is a very outside possibility, but they have their own Imaging Division problems, so wouldn’t want to pay much.

      • bilgy_no1

        You’re right, it would be a hell of a job turning the Olympus camera business around. Your points are all valid, but there is also a point to the contrary: enthousiast camera business has very high entry barriers, mostly related to brand recognition. Look at Samsung’s problems, and it’s taken Sony 6+ years before becoming one of the players. At the same time, Sony shows that it is possible to break into the market.

        There are also technology barriers, and Olympus does have its share of patents in place.

        A buyer could focus effort on the PEN and XZ markets. Then introduce cool forward looking features and all. Who would invest? A large tech company perhaps, or an entrepreneur with a plan and lots of cash. In both cases think Chinese :-)

        I’m not sure about Panasonic. Maybe they need to ensure the m43 standard, but in terms of technology or brand name, they seem to be doing at least as good as Olympus.

        Anyway, it’s just a case of whoever wants to buy. Personally, I’d focus the operation on systems cameras, the higher margin stuff. And radically rethink the camera in light of the connected 21st Century. That seems hard to realise under the wings of current corporate management.

        • I actually don’t believe enthusiasts have a very high barrier to entry at all. It’s very low. The problem with enthusiasts is simple: they already have a mount commitment. So Samsung’s coming up with another mount in and of itself would stall any inroads into that type of user.

          Consider this: what if I made a body very similar to the FM3a that had a Nikon F-mount. Would it matter that the Nikon name isn’t on the body? No. Or this: what if I made what essentially was a Pen Pro with an m4/3 mount. Would it matter that Olympus isn’t the name on the body? Again, no.

          The problem for the Japanese and Korean companies is that they want to own everything. The entire ecosystem. So they start their own (Samsung). Even within a company, the ecosystem has to be different, because otherwise it might steal from the existing base (Sony, Nikon, and probably eventually Canon). The only example we have recently of a cooperative system is Panasonic/Olympus with 4/3 and m4/3. Long term, I bet that one or the other will own it outright, though. Given Olympus’ troubles, that winner is likely to be Panasonic.

          > focus on the Pen and XZ markets

          You’ve just committed the company to an initial unit volume of about 2-3 million a year, which is somewhere between one fifth and one third what Olympus is currently doing. A lot of cash goes away. A lot of employees and resources have to be lost. You wouldn’t buy that division for anything close to what it’s worth today. It would still take you several years to fix all the problems. In short, you haven’t made the job any easier.

          > not sure about Panasonic

          Panasonic bet on m4/3. They can’t change now. Thus, they’d scoop up Olympus if they had to. They very well may be helping them more than people think as it is.

      • Mr. Reeee

        It could be done, but one would have to have a very firm hand.

        Think of the shape Apple was in back in 1996. A confusing line up of products with lots of overlap and duplication and an attempt to make and market every peripheral in existence.

        Steve Jobs came in an cut away the entire peripheral business: printers, scanners, cameras, the Newton and aimless skunkworks projects like Copland, OpenDoc and who knows what else? The computer lines were simplified to only FOUR basic models with everything built-in, customization was limited to RAM, hard drive size and graphics cards on Pro models. Desktops: iMac and PowerMac. Laptops: iBook and PowerBook. That was it.

        A few months ago we counted 22 Olympus compacts, not including color variations! NINE M4/3 bodies are all being sold concurrently and how many 4/3 cameras? All that could be drastically distilled, reduced and simplified.

        3 or 4 P&S.
        2 Tough models.
        3 M4/3 models including 1 rangefinder style with built-in EVF.
        4/3? I’d be tempted to kill it off completely and rework the best of the 4/3 lens line-up with M4/3 mounts.

        There would obviously need to be a long term strategy worked out. It could be done with a massive amount of focus, will and discipline. Few corporate cultures would allow that sort of deep, top to bottom shakeup. Maybe Woodford was attempting something of this magnitude. We may never know. Olympus has some excellent technology and it’s s shame to see them treading water.

        • WT21

          Bu Mr. Reeee, Apple resurrected itself using an entirely new product category — iPods, not computers. Which gave them the platform to drive everything else. Today, Apple makes more money off iphones and iPads than computers. Oly would have to break the photography mold (as Thom was alluding to), not just adjust their range of compacts and Pens, IMO.

          • Mr. Reeee

            I’m talking about what Apple did BEFORE iPods were released in September of 2001. It took 3 or 4 years for the iPod business to really take off.

            Apple was selling every category of computer peripheral imaginable. Their computer lines were a mess with pro lines (PowerMac) and consumer (Performa) lines duplicating the other, with different model numbers for identical Macs with different sized hard drives or amounts of RAM. It was hugely inefficient and incredibly confusing even for people like me who did Mac consulting as a side line.

            Olympus is in a similar state, selling too many models with little differentiation and odd configuration. I agree with Thom, but having a simple, easy to understand lineup of cameras would also be necessary in the consumer space.

            • lnqe-M


            • Christoph

              Olympus is selling one FT camera and 3 mFT cameras. All the rest are no longer active models. Of course you can still buy them, but you can buy old Apple models, too.

              I have no idea about PS cameras, but as far as IL cameras go I don’t see how that is different from Apple. Apple, by the way, now has way more computer models.

              • Mr. Reeee

                Two “new” models, the Mac Book Air (11″ & 13″) and Mac mini, don’t add up to “way more models” in my understanding of basic math.

                It’s really hard to tell what Olympus’ intentions are concerning any of their camera formats…
                4/3 seems completely lost. I see them on display in stores. The E5 is as big as a D700 and costs almost as much. That’s about it.
                P&S I could care less about, though I do own and like one of their underwater Tough cameras.
                M4/3 is beyond comprehension with 3 “generations” (in name only) which seem to be available concurrently.

                • Christoph

                  Thought so, you’ve returned to repeating the same old criticism because your original argument didn’t work out.

                  “with different model numbers for identical Macs with different sized hard drives or amounts of RAM”

                  If you are counting these things, Apple has a lot more models than just iMac, Mac mini, Macbook Air, Macbook, Macbook Pro, Mac Pro. But I guess you were never interested in a reasonable argument anyway. Well, worth a try, but I won’t waste my time again :)

                  • Mr. Reeee

                    Initially, I was referring to the dire days of the late nineties, not today. Apple’s 300+ retail stores and online store (with build-to-order options) which are worlds away from the retail model of the time.

                    I get what you meant and was probably unclear. A strong, simple, well-defined, easily understandable product line that does not confuse potential customers is important regardless of what’s being sold.

                    If I’m forced to dig into spec sheets in an attempt to figure out minor differences, that’s a failure to communicate effectively on the part of the manufacturer.

            • WT21

              Ah yes. You are right about that. Consolidating down to the colorful iMacs (with the old fashioned tube screens)etc. Still, I’m not sure that’s all Oly needs to do, but anything sensible would help.

        • > It could be done, but one would have to have a very firm hand.

          Agree. And getting back to the original story we’re commenting on, it appears that this can’t be done by an outsider coming into Olympus. So the only possibilities are that Olympus do it themselves (and this story gives us no confidence that it will) or that Olympus sell off cameras.

          > Think of the shape Apple was in back in 1996. A confusing line up of products with lots of overlap and duplication and an attempt to make and market every peripheral in existence.

          It’s a reasonable example. But it also took several years to pull Apple out of the mess it was in, which is my point. Unlike Apple, Olympus Imaging is subsidized by a bigger business, so there’s less sense of urgency.

          > A few months ago we counted 22 Olympus compacts, not including color variations! NINE M4/3 bodies are all being sold concurrently and how many 4/3 cameras? All that could be drastically distilled, reduced and simplified.

          You need to define what business a reconfigured Olympus is before you can do that. You haven’t made that step.

          > There would obviously need to be a long term strategy worked out.

          No. There needs to be a short term focus on “what business are we in and what customer(s) do we serve?” Strategy comes later. You need a goal first.

          > It could be done with a massive amount of focus, will and discipline. Few corporate cultures would allow that sort of deep, top to bottom shakeup.

          My point exactly.

          > Maybe Woodford was attempting something of this magnitude.

          My sense from the stories we’ve seen and a little bit of inside info is that the story is much what it seems: Woodford was wielding the ax throughout the company, found some stuff that looked fishy, and was booted out before he could get to the bottom of it. There was a near 180 degree turn that happened just in the last couple of weeks internally. In business parlance, we call this “touching the third rail.” The really curious aspect of this whole thing is the sheer size of the purported problem, the fact that it triggered such a reaction three years after it happened, and what that says about other possible similar problems.

      • Bryan Brunton

        They are transitioning from the death of the 4/3 product line to the micro 4/3 line.

        They appear to be managing this transition well as they have their recent product releases (EP3, E-PL3, E-PM1, 12mm, 45mm) have all been roundly received to a huge degree of applause.

        The rapidly advancing micro 4/3 market segment has predicated that they release a series of models to keep up with the Sony and Panasonic competition.

        All of the Oly micro 4/3 models are selling well, but however good they are as cameras, with a 6 month lifetime, they can only be pushed through the supply chain so fast.

        They are a lot of companies out there that wish they had the demand problems in a new market segment that Olympus does.

        Your ridiculous chicken little attitude toward the company is really getting old.

        Find something else to whine about.

        • Your view of the facts seems a bit jaundiced with fan boy appreciation.

          “The rapidly advancing micro 4/3 market segment” — please cite statistics on its advance. And make sure they’re statistics on users buying them, not Olympus making them.

          “All of the Oly m4/3 models are selling well.” — again, statistics please. The fact that we’re still seeing E-PL1 and E-P2 models in the market at less than compact camera prices seems to belie that.

          “Lot of companies wish they had the demand problems Olympus has.” — Actually, in actual statistics, other companies have a bigger demand problem than Olympus has. Both Canon and Nikon reported substantive growth in DSLR unit volume the past year and anticipate higher this year. In US retail sales statistics we see that substantiated.

          Note that the death of the 4/3 product line happened in what, four or five years? When did Nikon or Canon’s DSLR line die? Oh, it didn’t, they’re still alive after 12 and 11 years respectively. If you don’t see something wrong with the 4/3 product line death, then you don’t see Olympus’ plight correctly.

          • Anonymous

            Your view of the facts is jaundiced with chicken little defeatism.

            You keep beating the same drum over and over.

            How many times do we have do over the fact that you don’t release new camera models every 6 months and magically manage to sell all of the old ones?

            Why can’t you understand this simple fact?

      • @Thom Hogan

        * Compact cameras are losing market share with declining prices – everyone has this problem , Olympus have actually been doing something about it with micro four thirds
        * They have a large overhang of earlier 4/3 lenses – they still retain their value an are still very much in demand
        * They have a large overhang of earlier m4/3 camera bodies and kits – yes in the USA, but hey what a great way to compete against the new Nikon offerings by selling them off at a reduced (Olympus can still mke money when they buy lenses and accessories or upgrade at a later date)
        * They’ve lost a lot of dealer enthusiasm in the US – the USA seems to be it’s own ecosystem and would need to be handled differently by Olympus
        * There aren’t a lot of sensor choices available to them – like everyone
        * They have an E-5 but not much else in the 4/3 world – true but who knows what is around the corner and alot of four third owners are comfortable slipping between four thirds and micro four thirds in every day use
        * They’ve pissed off their 4/3 customers – I would say they are no more pissed than any other camera customers maybe even less so than Nikon, Sony and Canon customers ( in that order). 4/3 rd customers have either largely moved on or adapted to E5 or micro four thirds
        * They’re fighting against Sony, Canon, and Nikon, with Samsung and Panasonic in the mix–all far bigger camera entities than Olympus – with the right leadership this isn’t a problem
        * Many of the subsidiaries basically hide the imaging group under their wings (e.g., you’d have to build a new global network).- I wouldn’t say New they are on the right path with their actions and intentions

        I don’t think Olympus needs to be “turned around” they are on the right path, I’m also pretty sure their camera division is actually more profitable than we are led to believe by there financial results as I can’t see a reason why their profits are not much higher than actually stated.

        I also think Mr Woodford has been pretty dum to go running to the FT, he’s made himself unemployable and achieved very little apart from making a quick profit for western short sellers of shares…

        • SteveO

          * “They have an E-5 but not much else in the 4/3 world – true but who knows what is around the corner and alot of four third owners are comfortable slipping between four thirds and micro four thirds in every day use.”
          Hmmm, do you know something we don’t about what’s around the corner in FT? Nothing as far as I’ve read. As for “slipping between FT and mFT”, most FT lenses are out of scale to mFT bodies and slow to focus, mFT lenses don’t go onto FT mounts. Two separate systems that might as well be by two different manufacturers in terms of sensible compatibility.

          * “They’ve pissed off their 4/3 customers – I would say they are no more pissed than any other camera customers maybe even less so than Nikon, Sony and Canon customers ( in that order). 4/3 rd customers have either largely moved on or adapted to E5 or micro four thirds.”

          I disagree. The E-xxx line was the perfect combination of size, features (IBIS, flip LCD, built-in VF, Truepic colors, very sturdy build) and price supporting their excellent 3-tiered (SG, HG, SHG) line of FT lenses. They never marketed it properly and then walked away. I like the thought of mFT (or an XZ-1) as a supplement to my E-510/E-620 and FT lenses, but not as a replacement. So, count me among those still pissed off.

          “I also think Mr Woodford has been pretty dum to go running to the FT, he’s made himself unemployable and achieved very little apart from making a quick profit for western short sellers of shares…”

          I see either a book deal in his future, or plenty of money from Olympus to shut him up. Clearly they have the money to throw around, except when it comes to a sensor that can compete with Sony.

        • > Compact cameras are losing market share with declining prices – everyone has this problem , Olympus have actually been doing something about it with micro four thirds

          No, that’s not quite correct. m4/3 will not hit the volume levels compact cameras did. And given the current fire sales on older m4/3 models, they are making less money than they do with an XZ-1 sale.

          Mirrorless cameras are middle between compact and DSLR. There was definitely a large gap there that needed filling, but the question is this: are you just a gap filler or are you a camera maker? So far, Olympus seems to be headed towards gap filler: they dropped DSLRs for the most part, haven’t fixed their compact lineup, so all they have that’s competitive is the gap filler stuff.

          > They have a large overhang of earlier 4/3 lenses – they still retain their value an are still very much in demand

          I didn’t say they didn’t retain their value. But I’m not so sure about the “in demand” thing. I’ve talked to a lot of stores, including big ones. The 4/3 lenses see some action because of the GH-2 (for video, obviously), but demand is very weak. Some dealers are living off stock bought a long, long time ago. That’s a classic sign of weak demand.

          > They have a large overhang of earlier m4/3 camera bodies and kits – yes in the USA, but hey what a great way to compete against the new Nikon offerings by selling them off at a reduced (Olympus can still mke money when they buy lenses and accessories or upgrade at a later date)

          I’ve been clear that I think Nikon is nuts for pricing the Nikon 1 models as they have, and that those prices won’t stand. But those fire sale prices on older m4/3 cameras are competing against Olympus’s new cameras, too. In my personal opinion, there’s no reason to buy an E-PL3 over an E-PL2 at the current prices. Oh, sure, you get a swivel screen and faster AF, but the cost for those two things is way out of whack at the moment.

          > They’ve lost a lot of dealer enthusiasm in the US – the USA seems to be it’s own ecosystem and would need to be handled differently by Olympus

          Agree. And Panasonic too. Especially Panasonic.

          > There aren’t a lot of sensor choices available to them – like everyone

          True. But there are choices. Aptina comes to mind. They’ve got some very efficient sensors at the moment, but few customers for large versions. As strange as it sounds, there is plenty of new sensor activity happening, most of it triggered by camera phones and video security, which have far larger volumes than the camera companies. But there are plenty of sensor companies eager for a “big visible win.”

          > They have an E-5 but not much else in the 4/3 world – true but who knows what is around the corner and alot of four third owners are comfortable slipping between four thirds and micro four thirds in every day use

          Will there be an E-6? Will there be a future E-anything? It’s not good to put your existing system customers in the position of not knowing the answer to that.

          > I don’t think Olympus needs to be “turned around” they are on the right path, I’m also pretty sure their camera division is actually more profitable than we are led to believe

          You’re an optimist ;~). The common belief among Tokyo business analysts is just the opposite: that Olympus camera division is HIDING more problems than we’re led to believe. Olympus stopped giving unit volume and other critical information that’s needed to be able to reverse engineer the results. You don’t do that unless you want to hide something.

          > I also think Mr Woodford has been pretty dum to go running to the FT, he’s made himself unemployable and achieved very little apart from making a quick profit for western short sellers of shares…

          First, from what I read in the Japanese business press, it wasn’t Western short sellers that sold shares (first of all, they’d BUY shorts, not shares, and they would have made a lot of money over that in the past few days). Some of Olympus’ bigger Japanese investors have expressed concern about this whole thing.

          Depending upon what the truth of the story turns out to be, I don’t think Woodford made himself less employable. Possibly the opposite. If he indeed did run into concealment of financial irresponsibility and tried to correct it and was fired in trying to do so, he probably increased his future hireability, though it may take a bit of time for that to play out. That he gave an interview on this to FT tells me that one of two things (or both) happened: (1) he’s pissed to the point of just spilling the beans; and (2) there’s a substantive and real issue of concealment that occurred under Olympus management prior to him. Given that the new management now is that same old management, that’s not good.

      • Zaph

        Sure, but there is lots of small things they could do *now* that would help stop the rot. Like fix the firmware on the XZ-1 and show that they can support a premium camera. Like make the Tough models, which are wonderful pieces of gear (well designed, more capable that the competitors for the “tough” aspects of the camera), actually take great photos too.

      • Thom,
        you have forgotten to mention there are a lot lot refurbished olympus camera and lens cannibalize the potential new set business. This is not see so obvious for its rival.

        • The question you need to ask is where are all those refurbished units coming from? Typically, it means a camera was returned to Olympus. They can’t sell it as new at that point. So why was the camera returned and by whom? My guess is that it is dealer push back. The dealers won’t take new models if they can’t sell the old models, so Olympus agrees to take the old ones back. This is just another variant of “inventory hang.”

  • Go FullFrame Olympus!

    I loved the 35mm Olympus OM camera line. Olympus needs to make a Mirrorless FullFrame Camera system. Olympus has the know how. Olympus has always made great lenses. 4/3 and M4/3 never interested me.

    Produce a serious professional/enthusiast camera Olympus.

    Keep the mount diameter large and the registration distance short so other lenses can be easily adapted to the system!

    • DonParrot

      Who wants full frame? It’s a niche already now and this niche will get smaller and smaller the more the technology advances. µFT is fullfilling all the promises made accompanying the introduction of FT and certainly will be one of the market-dominating formats in the future.

      Indeed, I think that smaller sensor formats like the new Nikon sensor will represent a bigger threat for µFT, in the future, than FF and APS-C-/DX that IMHO are facing extinction.

      • cL

        Who wants full frame? I do. I think Olympus could make a 4×3 aspect ratio full frame sensor and call it 4/3 Pro. It’ll make the lenses smaller than current 3xs aspect ratio FF, and can be mounted on current 4/3 bodies, which ends the “no upgrade path” problem.

        I really think this Woodford issue has turn this website into Olympus gossip column rather than 4/3 enthusiast forum…. We don’t know what’s going on in Olympus, and everything said so far (mine included) are purely speculation, therefore, take it with a grain of salt…. When Apple’s ex-CEO left Apple, he did the same thing Woodford did.

        You can argue Apple’s success is due to good product mix, but what I believe is Apple got a charismatic CEO who leads like a cult leader. I don’t like Steve Jobs per se, but I have to admit he was a very good CEO. When Maitani of Olympus died, Olympus already lost its cult leader. If you have used both OM and 4/3 (not m4/3), you’d know 4/3 line up is an upgrade from OM; an continuation of OM legacy built upon OM experience, but MAJOR upgrade in term of quality assurance and more sensible designs, but 4/3 never took off like OM did. Never underestimate the power of a good leader, as that is one of the greatest assets in a company.

        When Jobs passed away (may he RIP), I am pretty sure Apple will have to write off a big portion of goodwill on its balance sheet (amortized over several years), as part of the company asset was actually him.

        I reiterate my forecast Olympus needs an iconic launch of new line of products. OM line needs to be resurrect for the 21st century (though I wouldn’t start off with that. The order of rolling out which new product first is crucial to success).

        • WT21

          Me too. As do many others I talk to. Without solid facts, who’s to say what’s niche and what isn’t?

          • Boooo!

            I don’t want full frame. It has too much DOF. I’m not very keen on having to shoot ISO 1600 in daylight.

            • Confused

              Too much DOF?? Do you mean a really narrow DOF or are you incorrectly postulating a really large DOF for full frame. Most of your DOF comes from the lens aperture and focal length. All full frame does is allow you to make it thinner than m43, 4/3 or APS. And full frame is not the only one, Medium formats are even thinner with their DOF. Try using an f/1.anything lens on a true medium format and see.

            • As Confused says, you seem confused.

              DOF: smaller sensors have more of it, larger sensors have less of it.

              Daylight: why would you need to shoot at ISO 1600 with a larger sensor? Makes no sense at all. Quite the opposite: a larger sensor collects more photons than a smaller sensor in any given light, and that implies a larger signal to noise ratio, or more dynamic range.

              • Frederic Hew

                It would make sense if you tried to make sense of it.

                Too much DOF as in too shallow a DOF forcing one to shoot with a smaller aperture and higher ISO.

                No point in being a contrarian when you can extend the other the courtesy of trying to understand him – I understood him just fine. I don’t necessarily agree but I’m not trying to demonstrate my wit or intellectual superiority on his expense either.

              • Boooo!

                I’m not confused, I just wrote “more” instead of “too shallow”.

    • AtlDave

      Who would buy a FF Olympus?

      If you need or just plain want a FF camera you can get very nice ones from Canon, Nikon, Sony or Leica. These all have a wide range of existing lenses many of which are very high quality. The cameras, lenses and accessories are all available now. The lenses required for FF are so large there would be little to be gained by going mirrorless. I doubt a FF mirrorless camera could be significantly smaller than a Leica and autofocus would make the lenses larger.

      After having seen Olympus abandon the OM-1 and regular 43 systems (I know the E-5 is still available but it is pretty clearly the end of the line for 43) there is absolutely no way I would make a substantial investment in an Olympus FF system. If it did not sell well they would drop it leaving me with a dead-end system.

      They would also be starting from scratch when it came to lenses. It has taken a few years for m43 to develop a good range of lenses. This might be OK for consumer oriented cameras like most m43 models but a professional or serious enthusiast would want the sort of high quality, modern lenses they can get with other FF systems available before they bought a camera, not vague promises of lenses yet to come. Giving up autofocus and other modern features by using old lenses with an adapter would not be acceptable for the majority of people looking at FF.

  • MikeH

    Don’t knock the Cayman Islands. It is a great place to take a vacation. :)

    • flash

      And take photos with your m43.

  • Greed and dishonesty is pervasive these days all over the world.

    • dudeness

      Not these days, always. We’re greedy animals. It’s just, as you grow older, you lose your illusions and realize it more.

      • Dudeness…there is truth to what you are saying…but it seems in the current environment…more and more people dispose of their ethics and get caught up in the “greed and power” trip. Too many want to be in that (revolting to me) top 1%…no matter what. No matter. Especially in the US.
        Today’s NYT ..front page. All the front running politicians have shelved the Global warming debate, (calling it unproven science) while many European countries institute policies to combat man-made global warming. Why have the top politicians shelved it in the US? Because it gets in the way of their power-brokering with big business. What does it matter that humanity suffers?
        That is the mood here in the states. It is ALL about the money.
        Fracking is destroying the landscape here, and it is spreading like wildfire…why…the money is more important than planet earth and the average person’s health.
        I would like to see the pendulum swing the other way.
        Occupy Wall Street is a start.
        Olympus..like so many people, businesses and now countries is suffering because of unrestrained, unchecked GREED and DECEIT..

  • DonParrot

    First of all, the reason for sacking Mr Woodford can’t have been cultural differences. According to the linked FT article, Wooford was adavanced to the position of the CEO just two weeks ago and Oly Chairman Tsuyoshi Kikukawa was more than happy with his achiievements, so far, saying that he was extremely pleased with his leadership that had exceeded the expectations.

    So, there must have happened something extraordinary in the past two weeks, resulting in this shake-up.

    And point two: Oly Imaging wrote black figures for the first time since three (?) years, in the past quarter, the PENs are doing really well on the Asian market, with Oly recently holding 47 percent of the Japanese MILC market share and Panny (27) as well as Sony (25) following far behind. At the same time, µFT and Oly also seem to gain ground in Europe – and the new Zuiko 45 1.8 is a true winner and is sold out nearly everywhere although it was shipped in great quantities. Since several days, now, it has been the most popular lens on the German price-comparison site idealo.de

    So, I’m absolutely optimistic regarding the future of Olympus.
    I really am so tired of all this doomsayers – particularly at a point in time when the future of Oly Imaging looks brighter than ever.

  • im

    In the end it doesn’t matter too greatly,……. if needed Oly can scale down and survive and innovate within their own home market.
    Others have managed to do that quite successfully. All it means is that the complainers and those who buy oly in the west miss out

  • omolympus

    The simple fact is this:

    We don’t know all the facts! Both parties have been with the company for years. Tsuyoshi Kikukawa has been with Olympus since 1964; Michael Woodford is in the same vein – it’s all conjecture unless one is privy to the internal operations of the company. And I would suggest that doesn’t include anyone on this forum.

    Just enjoy the equipment.

    • PS

      fully agree

    • MichaelKJ

      One rarely knows ALL of the facts about any incident. The following are facts that we do know:
      1) Woodford was fired just a couple of weeks after being praised by the Board and having CEO added to his responsibilities;
      2) Woodford claims that he asked the Chairman to resign because of irregularities;
      3) Woodford told the Financial Times that “Olympus replaced KPMG as its auditor two months later at the end of its contract. In a letter to Mr Woodford seen by the FT, Mr Kikukawa said the reason had been a “substantial difference of views [on the] purchase price allocation and impairment test of Gyrus acquisition” http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/d8e5320a-f672-11e0-86dc-00144feab49a.html#axzz1axtJjnCR
      3) Investors reacted negatively to Woodford’s termination;
      4) Olympus claimed Woodford’s termination was caused by an inability to adapt to the Japanese culture despite having made him CEO two weeks earlier.

  • im

    On your bike woody, lucky as a self confessed loudmouth you don’t need a bell


  • Thank you for such an interesting information. I will surely come again.

  • flash

    I would refer to the time line and his “implied” accusations. The event took place several years ago, Olympus feet were put to the fire about it then. They later conducted a review of it. A report was written and the matter was consider closed. Later he moved up to COO (not CEO) in the last 6 or so months. He is quoted as asked people about the event and was not told anything by anyone.

    He subsequently was shown the door and in the first interview he brings the event up but says he knows of no criminal activity involving the event or any other new information about it. If there was no crime committed, just stupidity that was already acknowledged several years ago, he is only trying to hurt the chairman by inundation of complicity of a non-alleged crime. I would hope he spent

    Remember he is stating this is why he was let go, not anyone else. Others stated that he by pass upper management and made direct orders to rank and file; in some companies this will get anyone let go even a CEO. If he indeed started out asking questions about what happen years before his promotion the question is why as that was not what his job was, it is possible that someone brought him information about it (which may of been true or not) but that is not likely. To properly conduct interrogation employees about an event takes real ability, experience and significant time; with out it you will be in a lot of trouble. So he was searching for information to hang on the Board of Directors at best.

    What all this shows, is that he is immature for that position and many others. Trash talking your current or former company is not a good thing for any manager. It should only be done when their is undiscovered maleficence or criminal activity.

    The irony is he was a “Hatchet man” who got took it in the neck like he did to so many others; and may of been trying to do to the board.

    • I think you may be missing something. While the transaction that keeps getting mentioned closed, what, three years ago, it almost certainly is still reflected in the current books. If you buy a company for more than it is worth, as is the case here, you usually book the “extra” into something called Goodwill, which becomes an asset on your financials.

      One problem that Woodford or anyone else would face in getting Olympus’ financials turned around is to get them correctly stated. That very well might require the write down of Goodwill. So the matter is not exactly closed as some think it is. It lives on Olympus’ books.

      But there was more to the AXUM debate than most people are realizing. It wasn’t the first time such an accusation came about in an Olympus acquisition. What if it weren’t the last? What if Olympus were considering another acquisition (or sale, or split) and the same strange financial dealings were lurking below? Woodford would actually be doing his job (to shareholders) in challenging such an ongoing thing. So let’s not condemn him until the full story is known.

      From my viewpoint, the burden of proof is on Olympus, not Woodford. He was fired, according to Olympus, for cultural differences. Those cultural differences would have had to have occurred in the last two weeks, because that’s not what Olympus said on October 1st. Just the opposite, in fact. Likewise, AXUM has never really been explained by Olympus.

    • MichaelKJ

      Woodford was, in fact, named CEO two weeks ago. I believe the COO appointment came at the same time he was named President

      (Reuters)”Tale of Olympus’s CEO, fired after just two weeks?

      In a glowing tribute on his appointment, the Board’s Chairman said Woodford’s change initiatives had an “extremely positive effect” and Olympus praised him for showing “great sensitivity and understanding of the different cultures.”

  • flash

    Olympus is reportedly doing O.K. financially. The latest news is just corporate Peyton Place stuff, but should not effect the camera division in the end. Cameras are not that profitable compared to medical equipment, but that does not mean they should loose money making them.

    The Olympus quarter financial figures will soon be made public and we will all get a look at them; and have fun commenting about them. I also see where Samsung Corporation is into sometime of trouble in Korea with its government, (but that belongs on the mirrorless forum.)

    I expect to see the imaging division as well as the others in a better position.

    Olympus Imaging seems to be going back to what it use to do. In making good cameras for its enthusiast at a price. Their mass market folly only gets them in trouble in the end. The problems in the recent pass is the collapse of the compact camera market and their attempt to get a larger share of the DSLR with the 43th after delaying their entry into it to long. Not to mention selling “bridge” cameras and designer cameras, they went where the profit was at the time. The imaging division will be alright as long as they can sell cameras at a price that they make a profit on. At a certain point their is not any more economy of scale and they are well above that point.

    I foresee a time in two or so years when mFT will have upscale lens and bodies and have sensor that are so much better then now. At a certain point in sensor image performance their will be no more benefit, which will be achieved in a couple of years. I hope they are not priced out of my price range. Olympus and Panasonic must be making a bunch of money selling them now and will in the future. I can’t say that about their compact models even their upscale compacts as smart phones seem to be more and more popular, with people who demand not to much performance from them, most seem think HD tv is the pinnacle of image quality.

    • MichaelKJ

      What is the basis for your claim that Olympus is doing well financially?

      For the fiscal year ending March 31, 2011, operating income was down 41% and net income was down 81%.

      For the first quarter of the 2012 fiscal year (April-Jun), Oly was in the red with a net loss of 2,154 million yen (28 million dollars).

      • flash

        Quarterly report, sales; and stock price change (before this news came) compared to Sony, Cannon and Panasonic. Nikon and especially Samsung are doing much better as far as stock prices.

  • elleyy

    Mr. Woodford looks like a 10 year old CEO. He’s whining and crying like a baby! I have no regret the Japanese fired this loud mouth. check out the news below.


  • nicwalmsley

    Yeah agree that this could be more like revenge from the ex-CEO, rather than the actual reason he was sacked. Or maybe not. Does anyone know if he’s going to be interviewed by the police?

    Either way, this is not good for Olympus.

    And I agree they should streamline the product range. The future of Point and Shoot is called an iPhone 4S. The only standalone cameras that will sell in 5 years are professional or prosumer. Olympus can compete on the prosumer front. But all of the big players are about to focus on prosumer too. So the competition is about to get intense.

    Olympus will have to lift their game; marketing, managerial, and less so engineering. No more releasing a new model with a sensor that seems to be 3 years old, for example.

    I think the ultimate question is this: is Olympus management doing Olympus engineers justice?

  • Miroslav

    Parting shots. Sour grapes. Disregard.

    • No doubt it was a parting shot and there are sour grapes involved. But disregarding it is what Olympus wants investors to do, and that’s not what investors SHOULD do. We’ve barely seen the tip of the iceberg on this one. What lurks beneath the water is likely to be ugly.

      • Miroslav

        Yes, but how big is the interchangeable lens camera department compared to the whole company? We m4/3 / 4/3 gear owners are some kind of investors, but I don’t think we should be overly worried.

  • ihateidiots

    A lot of people do not know this, but kick backs etc. are common in Japan. Kick backs can be even in the form of prostitutes, just to keep things simple.

    • Ab

      Kickbacks are common accross the world. I will give you an example that I know of first hand. A billion dollar development in central Asia. Funded by the Chinese, managed by a firm from the Middle East.

      To get rapid approval, and ensure completion of the project, one opens a Corporation in the country the investment is being made. All parties who approve this project and ensure its completion are made shareholders in company.

      Project is completed, company makes money and is dissolved, all parties go home with their pockets lined. Project is finished.

  • Anonymous


    Your rumor site is the most interesting one.

    I enjoy reading the user comments section a lot. Very interesting postings. Thank you.

  • $600 million kickback? On a $1.5 billion deal? That’s some prostitute.

  • SteveO

    Olympus stock down another 22% today as details continue to come out:

  • G-M

    What an uncouth twat he is. So typical. He just basically exemplified what the Japanese said about him that he lacks the cultural understanding – the sheer words, the phrase he used “told me to catch the bus to the airport” on his way out, just shows his lack of character and epitomizes his lack of cultural understanding and respect, to the company, to the Japanese, as well as to himself! No wonder they fired him. Duh! So uncouth.

  • flash

    Olympus is in a position where they can not defend them self’s. Commenting to much on the dismissal would lead to legal actions. I do agree the the aquistions appear to be done poorly. Financial accounting does not show goodwill. It is used to determine the market value of a company and in get more equity and s though.

    Before all this broke the stock was doing quite well this year. The first quarter report was extremely positive. Much better then their mirror less competition in Panasonic and Sony. I think the anaylist belived Woodfield was responsible for a good turnaround and that is the reason they quickly lowered their recommendations from purchase to hold. He may of been good at the finances, but as far as a spokesman, or human relations he was a “Dale Carnegie dropout”. What hasn’t been establish is he a “chicken little” I think he might be.

  • Dana

    These rumor sites are unreliable. For y’all arguing about all this, you are just playing with floating bits of poo… Good gods.

    Get a life and go take pictures. What the hell is wrong with you?

  • Other popular ports of call on the cruise. The islands of the
    richest, where tourists can find and book rooms through travel portals with
    utmost convenience and ease.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website, 43rumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.