>>3896106>surely their latest digital cameras would be far more resource intensiveThey are, but their digital cameras provide a good return on investment. Film is now a very small niche, much smaller even than Fuji's digital camera market share. And if you're making a *new* point & shoot, you have to contend with the fact that, as
>>3896118 points out, the market is flooded with point & shoots that are perfectly usable that you can find at any second hand store for less than the cost of a roll of film.
To get any sales, it'd have to be either *insanely* cheap and shitty--which is the route that Lomo goes--or it'll have to be better than any film P&S out there, which means it'll cost more than those high-end film point & shoots cost when they were new.
Just as an example, In 1990, when it was introduced, the Yashica T4's MSRP was apparently $300. That's about $600 in 2021 money. How many people would be willing to pay $600 for a point & shoot film camera? The number is non-zero, certainly, but almost certainly NOT enough for a sustainable business model where their primary competition costs about three bucks.
