Author Topic: Receivership  (Read 7675 times)

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Receivership
« on: April 23, 2018, 11:52:47 am »
There is stuff on FB saying that DxO is in receivership. Is there any substance to this?

Allsop

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
    • Andrew-Bede Allsop
Re: Receivership
« Reply #1 on: April 23, 2018, 12:13:52 pm »
See https://www.canonrumors.com/industry-news-dxo-labs-goes-into-receivership/
They quote in this article a note from DxO to one of their customers:

"Hello sir,

In fact, the company has recently been placed under a regime of judicial administration, the time to reorganize.

Although we can not comment on this situation, we can nevertheless assure you that the company is absolutely not in liquidation and that we are confident that our customers will not be affected by this procedure."
It is all part of the rich tapestry of life.

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: Receivership
« Reply #2 on: April 23, 2018, 01:14:12 pm »
https://www.androidpolice.com/2018/04/23/dxo-labs-facing-severe-financial-difficulties-dxomark-unaffected/

Does not make for great reading and I can find no reference to this on the DxO website. Are they still selling PL?

Bencsi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1603
Re: Receivership
« Reply #3 on: April 23, 2018, 03:04:38 pm »
The article talking about DxOMark only. As it is described there, the DxOMark and DxO Lab separated some months ago. I'm sure it was a preparation for selling the DxOMark only.
By the way, it is still working, I made a backup copy to save the actual database.  My question is rather the new camera and lens products' testing in the future. One of the main advantage by DxO is the huge quantity of camera + lens combination image data.

Let us see the effect on the PL development.

Endre
Win7/64 PC, i7-3770, 3.9GHz, 24G RAM, Intel HD-4000 GPU, 27" calibrated LG monitor 1920*1080 px res. 82 DPI

Asser

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
Re: Receivership
« Reply #4 on: April 23, 2018, 03:27:22 pm »
The article talking about DxOMark only. As it is described there, the DxOMark and DxO Lab separated some months ago. I'm sure it was a preparation for selling the DxOMark only.
By the way, it is still working, I made a backup copy to save the actual database.  My question is rather the new camera and lens products' testing in the future. One of the main advantage by DxO is the huge quantity of camera + lens combination image data.

Let us see the effect on the PL development.

Endre

I think you missread it. It is stated clearly here that "DxO Labs" is under "redressement judiciaire" since 2018-03-07: http://entreprises.lefigaro.fr/dxo-labs-92/entreprise-444777577

Here an other link for reference: https://www.taj.fr/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Cibles-en-RJ-12-mars-2018.pdf

Hopefully this does not end in a liquidation. IMHO they should kick DxO ONE and fully concentrate on software.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2018, 03:38:34 pm by Asser »

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: Receivership
« Reply #5 on: April 23, 2018, 04:06:09 pm »
If PL has been in such a position since March should it have continued selling the software? Or may be I am misunderstanding. There may be legal reasons why not, but you would think DxO would put something out and clarify exactly where they are. This second hand reporting will only grow and it will inevitably cost them sales and credibility.

Asser

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
Re: Receivership
« Reply #6 on: April 23, 2018, 04:51:24 pm »
If PL has been in such a position since March should it have continued selling the software? Or may be I am misunderstanding. There may be legal reasons why not, but you would think DxO would put something out and clarify exactly where they are. This second hand reporting will only grow and it will inevitably cost them sales and credibility.

For new customers this is surely true. For existing one like me, there is no good or cheap alternative:

- On1 (very glitchy, leaves much to be desired)
- Luminar (more of a show)
- C1 (good, but another 300€ to get in)
- Lightroom (bad results, subscription)

So would be happy about every release, which improves the tool.

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: Receivership
« Reply #7 on: April 23, 2018, 05:29:54 pm »
I have PL but also LR. It was my intention to  move over when my subscription period ends but that is now a no go. I have always found results from LR fine, it is just that DxO is sometimes better (but by  no means always in my experience). As you say ON 1 is still very flaky and Luminar is just a bad copy of Nik. C1 is the one but way too pricey.

Allsop

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
    • Andrew-Bede Allsop
Re: Receivership
« Reply #8 on: April 23, 2018, 05:54:05 pm »
If PL has been in such a position since March should it have continued selling the software? Or may be I am misunderstanding. There may be legal reasons why not, but you would think DxO would put something out and clarify exactly where they are. This second hand reporting will only grow and it will inevitably cost them sales and credibility.
You are right their customer relations is and never has been very good in my opinion. As for alternatives I think I have tried them all! Luminar seems to be all glitz, On1 is indeed "flaky", Afinity is too complicated to learn with all its different work areas you have to go thorough. At the moment I am doing quite well with Alien Skin's Exposure X which looks promising. PhtoLabs Presets are very good and to go over to Exposure X without them would be a bit of a problem but could be overcome with a bit of work.

One other problem with PhotLabs is that if your camera is not supported, as my pocket Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ90 is not, then it is no use anyway! So when I shoot with the Canon I am okay in PL but otherwise have to use something else.

Sorry for the rather ambling post!
It is all part of the rich tapestry of life.

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: Receivership
« Reply #9 on: April 23, 2018, 06:11:31 pm »
I played with Alien Skins twice, they are a very customer aware company. I liked a lot of what I saw but found that it lacked as a raw editor in the areas of highlights and shadows. If this is the end of PL then I think I'll just stick with Adobe. The subscription model does not worry me and maybe more should offer it if that is the only way to avoid the DxO type scenario!

Asser

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
Re: Receivership
« Reply #10 on: April 23, 2018, 07:12:05 pm »
If DxO is no more, I would stay with PhotoLab as long as I do not buy a new and then unsupported Canon body. Until then I would save 10€ each month for C1. Before buying C1, I would check, what has been released from Affinity in the meantime or whether On1 became usefull. C1 has the tendency to jump on the subscription only train also, which I don't like.

Bencsi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1603
Re: Receivership
« Reply #11 on: April 23, 2018, 09:29:14 pm »
Hi Asser,

Unfortunately, you are right. The DxO  Lab is in trouble. Let us see the progress of this situation.

Endre
Win7/64 PC, i7-3770, 3.9GHz, 24G RAM, Intel HD-4000 GPU, 27" calibrated LG monitor 1920*1080 px res. 82 DPI

Nick_

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 413
Re: Receivership
« Reply #12 on: April 23, 2018, 10:40:02 pm »
I got the new from DPReview: DxO Labs begins bankruptcy process in France, says customers 'will not be affected'.
I hope they’ll find an investor either to fund or acquire.
It was obvious the company didn’t have enough capital to fully develop the product and promote it.
When they released the DxO One camera I thought it was silly to divest resources that were obviously already scarce. I am afraid I was right. How well this thing sells anyway?
Nick

Pieloe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 394
Re: Receivership
« Reply #13 on: April 24, 2018, 08:19:29 am »
CanonRumors has correctly reproduced the initial information from the french forum Chasseur d'images. DPR did not understand it and therefore exaggerated.
DxO has started a bankruptcy recovery process (procédure de redressement judiciaire) that has been brought to court by suppliers.
A administrator has been appointed to spread the debt.
A forum "colleague" compares this procedure to American chapter 11.

According to the French experience, this procedure saves companies.
My feeling is that DxO will live despite a financially fragile situation.
 
https://www.chassimages.com/forum/index.php/topic,282652.msg6763209.html#msg6763209

« Last Edit: April 24, 2018, 08:24:48 am by Pieloe »

Asser

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
Re: Receivership
« Reply #14 on: April 24, 2018, 09:02:48 am »
They had a really bad business plan so far. Every € spent on DxO ONE is lost money. The pros carry their D850 into the bush, the amateurs are happy with their iPhones/Samsungs, the enthusiasts carry a small lightweight DSLR with a leightweight prime lens or a mirrorless. Trying to stick things together just to make a photo or don't have a preview and at the same time have a limitted battery in the field, is a miss conception from my point of view.

The only understandable plan for me would be to stop all hardware activities and concentrate on PhotoLab and NIK. PhotoLab should be extended by more DAM to be more on par with On1 and C1 in that field. NIK should be updated to support high DPI and not to crash with new Adobe products and sold in the range 50-100€ per seat.

At the same time it won't go without an investor. The marketing activity is too small (number of follower on Facebook stagneting), the development velocity is too slow. The public relations is too old school (no voteable feature lists, no public betas, no sneak previews). All this needs money, which seems to be missing.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2018, 09:26:17 am by Asser »

 

photography